alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
n ORIGINAL 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 

OP 22-0749 

JORDAN AHENAKEW, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

JAMES SALMONSEN, Warden, 

Montana State Prison, 

Respondent. 

FILED 

JAN 1 7 2023 

BOVVerl Greenwood 

Clerk of St:creme Court 

State or Montana 

ORDER 

Self-represented Petitioner Jordan Ahenakew has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas 

Corpus, explaining that the charge of escape should be dismissed because he did not leave 

the county and he turned himself into authorities. He states that he "didn't intentionally 

walk away" and that he "was going through a lot of stress dealing with child protective 

services . . . ." Ahenakew maintains that he wanted to get his kids back and that the prerelease center was not treating him well. He contends that the pre-release center interfered 

with his treatment program and mandatory visits with his kids. Ahenakew adds that he 

wants to continue his treatment plan and to be with his children. 

Ahenakew does not provide documents concerning any legal proceeding. As a 

petitioner, he has the burden to provide this Court with supporting documentation 

concerning illegal restraint or incarceration in the Montana State Prison. In re Hart, 178 

Mont. 235, 249-50, 583 P.2d 411, 419 (1978). It is not clear whether Ahenakew's 

probation was revoked in a court or if he has been charged with escape. 

Available electronic records indicate that in February 2020, the Hill County District 

Court continued Ahenakew's deferred imposition of sentence for 2015 criminal mischief 

and theft convictions. At that time, the court recognized the need for treatment for 

Ahenakew's addiction and placement in a treatment facility. On March 15, 2021, the court 

revoked Ahenakew's sentence for violating his terms and conditions of the original 2018 

01/17/2023

Case Number: OP 22-0749
Judgment. The court imposed a three-year sentence to the Department of Corrections and 

recommended placement in the Great Falls Pre-release Center. The court noted that this 

was his second revocation and that he "has struggled with reporting to his Probation 

Officer." 

This Court cannot provide Ahenakew with any relief. Ahenakew has not 

demonstrated illegal incarceration. Section 46-22-101(1), MCA. He is further constrained 

here because he cannot challenge a sentence upon revocation through this remedy of habeas 

corpus. Section 46-22-101(2), MCA. Concerning his claims giving rise to the escape 

charge, he should have the opportunity to inform counsel about his situation if he were to 

face charges in a District Court. Therefore, 

IT IS ORDERED that Ahenakew's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED 

and DISMISSED. 

The Clerk of the Supreme Court will provide a copy to counsel of record and to 

Jordan Ahenakew personally. 

DATED this / day of January, 2023. 

,./.(e--/. 

Chief Justice 

/ 

94 Pi 0UL 

Justices 

2
III 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. CON. RES. 86 

Directing the Architect of the Capitol to establish a temporary exhibit in 

the rotunda of the Capitol to honor the memory of the members of 

the United States Armed Forces who have lost their lives in Operation 

Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 5, 2006 

Mr. LAUTENBERG (for himself, Mrs. CLINTON, Mr. BINGAMAN, Mr. KERRY, 

Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. JOHNSON, Mrs. BOXER, Mr. MENENDEZ, Ms. 

LANDRIEU, and Mrs. FEINSTEIN) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Directing the Architect of the Capitol to establish a temporary exhibit in the rotunda of the Capitol to honor 

the memory of the members of the United States Armed 

Forces who have lost their lives in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. 

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 

2 concurring), 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
2 

•SCON 86 IS

1 SECTION 1. EXHIBIT IN ROTUNDA OF THE CAPITOL IN 

2 HONOR OF MEMBERS OF ARMED FORCES 

3 KILLED IN IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN. 

4 (a) ESTABLISHMENT OF TEMPORARY EXHIBIT.— 

5 During the period beginning on May 29, 2006, and ending 

6 on July 4, 2006, the Architect of the Capitol shall display 

7 in the rotunda of the Capitol an exhibit to honor the mem8 ory of the members of the United States Armed Forces 

9 who have lost their lives in— 

10 (1) Operation Iraqi Freedom; and 

11 (2) Operation Enduring Freedom. 

12 (b) FORM OF EXHIBIT.—The exhibit displayed under 

13 this section shall be in such form and contain such mate14 rial as the Architect may select, so long as— 

15 (1) the exhibit displays the name, photograph, 

16 and biographical information with respect to each in17 dividual member of the United States Armed Forces 

18 who has lost his or her life in the Operations re19 ferred to in subsection (a); and 

20 (2) the exhibit provides— 

21 (A) an opportunity for visitors to write 

22 messages of support and sympathy to the fami23 lies of the individuals represented in the exhibit; 

24 and 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
3 

•SCON 86 IS

1 (B) a means to ensure that those messages 

2 are transmitted to the families. 

Æ 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
(Reap. Dec. 8362)

#### James H. Rhodes *&*Co. et al. *v.*United States

Entry No. 26529, etc.

(Decided December 1, 1954)

*John D. Rode*for the plaintiff.

*Warren E. Burger,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Mollison, Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule “A,” hereto attached and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> *555IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, subject to the approval of the Court, that the issues in the appeals to reappraisement listed herein are the same in all material respects as the issues in the ease of *United States*v. *Schroeder & Tremayne, Inc., et al.,*Suit 4783 and that the record in said case maybe incorporated herein.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED, that the entered values of the merchandise involved in the cases listed herein are equal to the price at the time of exportation of such merchandise to the United States, at -which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of the Country from which exported in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, and that the foreign value of such or similar merchandise was no higher.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that these cases may be deemed submitted on the foregoing stipulation.

On the agreed facts I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such values were the entered values.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
(Reap. Dec. 9328)

#### Inter-Maritime Forwarding Co., Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 740644, etc.

(Decided February 24, 1959)

*Tompkins & Tompkins*for the plaintiff.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Lawrence, Judge:

The appeals for a reappraisement enumerated in schedule “A,” attached to and made part of tbe decision herein, present tbe question of tbe proper value for appraisement purposes of certain floor polishers which are identified on tbe invoices accompanying tbe entries covered by said appeals with tbe letter “A” and initials “HG” of Examiner H. Golub.

By stipulation of the parties, it has been agreed that when the items of merchandise, marked and initialed as aforesaid, were exported from England, such or similar merchandise was not freely offered for sale for home consumption to all purchasers in tbe principal markets of England, nor was it freely offered for sale to all purchasers in tbe principal markets of England for exportation to tbe United States, nor was it freely offered for sale in tbe principal market of tbe United States to all purchasers. It was further stipulated and agreed tbat tbe cost of production of said floor polishers was £7.13.8 each, net packed, British sterling.

Upon tbe agreed facts of record, I find and bold tbat cost of production, as that value is defined in section 402(f) of tbe Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. § 1402(f)), is the proper basis of value for tbe floor polishers *508in issue and that said value is £7.13.8 each, net packed, British sterling.

As to any other merchandise, the appeals are dismissed.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
|    |                                                                               |
|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 1. | I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of EverBank Financial Corp; |

|    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; |

|                                              |
|----------------------------------------------|
|                                              |
| /s/ Steven J. Fischer                        |
|                                         |
| Steven J. Fischer                            |
| Chief Financial Officer                      |
| (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) |
| Date: April 13, 2017                         |
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

United States of America

v. 2:12-cr-187-3

Aaron Josue Acuna-Duenas 

ORDER

There being no objections, the court hereby adopts the Report

and Recommendation of the magistrate judge (Doc. 78) that the

defendant’s guilty plea be accepted. The court accepts the

defendant’s plea of guilty to Count 1 of the indictment, and he is

hereby adjudged guilty on that count. The court will defer the

decision of whether to accept the plea agreement until the

sentencing hearing.

Date: June 18, 2013 s\James L. Graham 

 James L. Graham

 United States District Judge

Case: 2:12-cr-00187-JLG-TPK Doc #: 84 Filed: 06/18/13 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: <pageID>
Share Knowledge ~ Save a Life

ZERO FATALITIES

SOFA ALERT

PLEASE POST IMMEDIATELY

March 7, 2023 - A Conductor was fatally injured while riding

the leading end of a shoving movement over a passive 

crossing within an industrial plant and colliding with a dump 

truck which drove in front of the movement.

June 26, 2023 – A Conductor trainee who was riding the 

leading end of a shoving movement was fatally injured after 

falling into the path of the movement.

Take Away

While these recent cases have not yet been analyzed, the SOFA 

Working Group is concerned by the two fatalities that already have 

occurred during 2023 and reminds all employees to remain 

vigilant during switching operations and to ensure shove moves are 

done in a safe and proper manner. Last, but not least, remember to 

always hold a job briefing whenever the job or situation changes. 

As a cross-industry collaboration for over 20 years, the SOFA Working Group has identified the Possible 

Contributing Factors for more than 210 switching operations fatalities since 1992. The SOFA Working Group 

reports its finding and emerging data trends with the goal of zero fatalities in the railroad industry.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 9311 

To address the plea agreements for certain individuals detained at 

Guantanamo, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

AUGUST 6, 2024 

Mr. LAWLER (for himself, Ms. TENNEY, Mr. GARBARINO, Mr. D’ESPOSITO, 

Ms. STEFANIK, Mr. FITZPATRICK, and Mr. KEAN of New Jersey) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed 

Services 

A BILL 

To address the plea agreements for certain individuals 

detained at Guantanamo, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Justice for 9/11 Act’’. 

5 SEC. 2. TRIAL AND POST-TRIAL MATTERS RELATING TO 

6 CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS DETAINED AT GUAN7 TANAMO. 

8 (a) PLEA AGREEMENTS AND JUDGMENTS.—Notwith9 standing the provisions of section 949h of title 10, United 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 9311 IH

1 States Code, any plea agreement entered into by Khalid 

2 Shaikh Mohammad, Walid Muhammad Salih Mubarak 

3 Bin ‘Attash, or Mustafa Ahmed Adam al Hawsawi for ac4 tions involving the terrorist attack on September 11, 

5 2001, and its related judgment, shall not preclude the trial 

6 of such individual under chapter 47A of such title or any 

7 other provision of law for that terrorist attack. 

8 (b) SENTENCING.—Notwithstanding any other provi9 sion of law, in any trial of Khalid Shaikh Mohammad, 

10 Walid Muhammad Salih Mubarak Bin ‘Attash, or Mustafa 

11 Ahmed Adam al Hawsawi under chapter 47A of title 10, 

12 United States Code, or any other provision of law for the 

13 terrorist attack of September 11, 2001, a sentence of 

14 death shall be available. 

15 (c) CONDITIONS OF CONFINEMENT; TRANSFER.— 

16 Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in the case 

17 of any sentence imposed on Khalid Shaikh Mohammad, 

18 Walid Muhammad Salih Mubarak Bin ‘Attash, or Mustafa 

19 Ahmed Adam al Hawsawi, such individual— 

20 (1) shall be— 

21 (A) held at United States Naval Station, 

22 Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in solitary confine23 ment; 

24 (B) provided no contact with foreign na25 tionals; and 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 9311 IH

1 (C) provided no psychological treatment 

2 except that specifically authorized by medical 

3 authorities at United States Naval Station, 

4 Guantanamo Bay; and 

5 (2) shall not be transferred to the continental 

6 United States or any other country. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

855 

CA 15-01911 

PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., CENTRA, NEMOYER, TROUTMAN, AND SCUDDER, JJ. 

 

PORTFOLIO RECOVERY ASSOCIATES, LLC, AS PURCHASER 

OF GE CAPITAL RETAIL BANK, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, 

V ORDER

SHELLY FIUMANO, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

 

DAVID M. KAPLAN, PENFIELD, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

FORSTER & GARBUS, LLP, COMMACK (VALERIE E. WATTS OF COUNSEL), FOR

PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Ontario County

(Frederick G. Reed, A.J.), entered August 5, 2015. The order denied

the motion of defendant for summary judgment. 

Now, upon the stipulation of discontinuance signed by the

attorneys for the parties on July 1, 2016, and filed in the Ontario

County Clerk’s Office on July 19, 2016,

It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed 

without costs upon stipulation.

Entered: October 7, 2016 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
(Reap. Dec. 9325)

#### Finwood Industries, Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 8295, etc.

(Decided February 24, 1959)

*Siegel, Mandell & Davidson*for the plaintiff.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Mollison, Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement enumerated in the attached schedule were submitted for decision by counsel for the parties upon a stipulation reading as follows:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the respective parties hereto that the merchandise involved in the Appeals to Reappraisement enumerated on the schedule attached hereto and made a part hereof consists of plywood exported from Finland in the years 1955 and 1956 and that the merchandise is properly dutiable on the basis of the foreign market value as defined in Section 402(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the market value or the price at the time of exportation of such merchandise to the United States at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country from which exported in the usual wholesale quantity and in the ordinary course of trade for home consumption including costs of containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other costs, charges and expenses incident to placing the merchandise ready for shipment to the United States was the appraised unit values less 4% packed.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that there was no higher export value for merchandise such or similar to the merchandise herein at the time of exportation thereof and that the stipulation is limited to the invoices where the merchandise was advanced in value and appraised on the basis of the home market value; that with respect to invoices embraced in such appeals where appraisement was made on the basis of the entered invoice unit values said appeals are herewith abandoned with respect to such invoices.

On the agreed facts, as to the merchandise which was advanced in value by the appraiser, I find that foreign value, as defined in section 402(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, is the proper basis of value for the merchandise, and that the said value, in each instance, was the appraised unit value, less 4 per centum, packed. As to the merchandise which was appraised on the basis of the entered unit *505values, the appeals having been abandoned, are, to that extent, dismissed.

Judgment will issue accordingly.
UNITED STATES SECURITY AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549 __________  FORM 10-K/A (Amendment No. 1) __________  (MARK ONE)  ☒ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(D) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934  For the fiscal year ended September 30, 2018  or  ☐TRANSITION REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(D) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934  For the transition period from _________
to _________  Commission File Number: 333-170315    AngioSoma, Inc. (Exact name of registrant as specified in its
charter)  Nevada
    
    27-3480481(State or other jurisdiction of Incorporation or organization)
    
    (I.R.S. Employer Identification Number)2500 Wilcrest Drive, 3rd FloorHouston, TX
    
    77042(Address of principal executive offices)
    
    (Zip code)  Registrant’s telephone number, including
area code: 832-781-8521  Securities registered pursuant to Section
12(g) of the Act:  Title of Each Class
    
    Name of Each Exchange on which RegisteredCommon stock, $0.001 par value
    
    OTC Markets    EXPLANATORY NOTE



This Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-K/A (this “Amendment”)
amends our Annual Reports on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2018, originally filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (“SEC”) on January 3, 2019 (the “Original Report”). We are filing this Amendment to delete a
Risk Factor that wrongfully states “We were a shell company until we acquired the intellectual property assets, resulting
in certain limitations on the ability of our stockholders to use the Rule 144 safe harbor under the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended, for resales of our common stock.”



On the first day of January 2012, the Company
commenced operations as a publicly traded company and participant in a successful oil and gas drilling project in Calcasieu Parish,
Louisiana. The oil and gas property was in operation when the Company acquired AngioSoma, Inc. June 3, 2016.



Because these changes do not include changes
to the financial statements included in the Original Report, we are not filing a new consent of our auditors with this Amendment.
In connection with the filing of this Amendment and pursuant to the requirements of Rule 12b-15 under the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended, we are including with this Amendment new certifications of our principal executive officer and principal financial
officer.



Except as described above, no other changes
have been made to the Original Report. The Original Report continues to speak as of the date of the Original Report, and we have
not updated the disclosures contained therein to reflect any events that have occurred at a date subsequent to the filing of the
Original Report. Material events may have occurred subsequent to the filing of the Original Report that are not reflected in this
Amendment.
AO 450 (Rev. 5/85) Judgment in a Civil Case

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

Eastern Division 

TIMOTHY SCOTT McCANE,

Plaintiff,

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE

v.

CASE NO. C2-12-067

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL JUDGE EDMUND A. SARGUS, JR.

SECURITY, MAGISTRATE JUDGE ELIZABETH P. DEAVERS

Defendant.

Jury Verdict. This action came before the Court for a trial by jury. The issues have

been tried and the jury has rendered its verdict.

Decision by Court. A decision has been rendered by the Court without a hearing or trial.

Pursuant to the ORDER filed October 16, 2012, JUDGMENT is hereby entered in

favor of the Defendant. This case is DISMISSED.

Date: October 16, 2012 JOHN P. HEHMAN, CLERK

/S/ Andy F. Quisumbing 

(By) Andy F. Quisumbing

 Courtroom Deputy Clerk

Case: 2:12-cv-00067-EAS-EPD Doc #: 25 Filed: 10/16/12 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: <pageID>
No. 58173.

protests 152681-K, etc. (New York).

#### The Austin Motor Co., Ltd. (England), et al. *v.*United States,

*529Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain items of the merchandise consist of speedometers and parts thereof similar in all material respects to the merchandise the subject of *Industrial Operations, Inc.*v. *United States*(30 Cust. Ct. 82, C. D. 1500), except that the speedometers and parts thereof in the cited case were designed and intended for use as parts of motorcycles whereas those at bar are intended for use as parts of automobiles, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
No. 48654.

#### Protests 683027-G, etc., of Heinsheimer Bros., Inc., et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

The testimony showed that certain of the items consist of harvest hats similar to those involved in *Caradine*v. *United States*(9 Cust. Ct. 69, C. D. 664). The protests were therefore sustained as to these items.
Amendment to Agreement in the Event of a Change in Control--Henry R. Wolfe


 Exhibit 10.7 
 August 11, 2008 
 Henry R. Wolfe, Ph.D. 
 c/o
Genaera Corporation 
 5110 Campus Drive 
 Plymouth Meeting, PA
19462 
  

	 	Re:	Amendment to Agreement in the Event of a Change of Control of Genaera Corporation  

 Dear Hank: 
 The Change of Control Agreement dated March 3, 2008, as amended by letter agreement dated
May 8, 2008, is hereby amended to add Paragraph 5(a)(i) to read as follows: 
 (i) If a Change of Control occurs, (a) all of your
outstanding unvested options to purchase, or awards to acquire, securities of Genaera Corporation shall vest as of the date of the Change of Control; and (b) all of your outstanding options to purchase, or awards to acquire, securities of
Genaera Corporation shall remain exercisable for the original term of such option to purchase, or award to acquire, securities of Genaera Corporation.
 Except as amended above, all other terms and conditions of your employment shall remain in full force and effect. 
 Please
indicate your acceptance of this amendment by your signature below and return to Human Resources by August 15, 2008. 
 Sincerely, 
  

	
	 /s/ John L. Armstrong, Jr.

	John L. Armstrong, Jr.
	President and Chief Executive Officer

  

			
	Accepted:	 	 /s/ Henry R. Wolfe

		
	Date:	 	August 13, 2008