alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Case No. 8,623.

#### LYLES v. ALEXANDRIA.

[1 Cranch, C. C. 473.] 1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

Nov. Term, 1807.

Pleading — Defective Declaration.

A declaration against “the common council of Alexandria,” for work and labor done for “the mayor and commonalty,” must show how the new corporation is liable for the debts of the old.

E. J. Lee, for plaintiff.

Mr. Taylor, for defendant.

This was an action of assumpsit for work and labor done by the plaintiff for the town of Alexandria, under its old charter of 1770. when its corporate name was “The Mayor and Commonalty of the Town of Alexandria.” and this suit was brought against the corporation under its new charter of 1804. by the corporate name of “The Common Council of Alexandria.” The declaration stated the work was done for the mayor and commonalty, Ac., but did not aver that the new corporation, (the common council, Ac.) was liable for the debts of the old. nor refer to the new charter by which it was so made liable.

And for this cause THE COURT (DUCK-ETT, Circuit Judge, absent), arrested the judgment.
### THE OFFICE OF



### THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT ATTORNEY McLENNAN COUNTY, TEXAS

219 North 6th Street, Suite 200 Waco, Texas 76701
Phone - (254) 757

- 5084

Fax - (254) 757

- 5021

Sterling Harmon Abelino “Abel” Reyna

Assistant Criminal District Attorney Criminal District Attorney

March 30, 2015

Court of Criminal Appeals Attention: Mr. Abel Acosta, Clerk

P.O. Box 12308 Austin, Texas 78711

VIA EFILING

RE: ALBERT LESLIE LOVE, JR. ; CCA NO. AP -77,024

To the Hono rab le Court:

In response to the Court ’ s letter of March 20, 2015, the State ’ s Attorney will appear for oral argument in the

above- refere nced case on April 15, 2015.

The State has not requested oral argument in this ca u se , and therefore is not designating specific p oints of error for argument. The Sta t e w ill appear to argue those points which may be designated by Appell an t and approved by the Court.

Sincere ly,

Sterling Harmon, Chief Appellat e Assistant District Attorney McLennan County Criminal Distric t Att orney ’ s Office

C c: Mr. Ariel Payan 

### AP-77,024

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS
Transmitted 3/30/2015 1:21:48 PM Accepted 3/30/2015 1:31:04 PM

ABEL ACOSTA
CLERK
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

EASTERN DIVISION 

Michael L. Roberts, 

Petitioner, 

Case No. 2: 12-cv-371 

Judge Watson 

Magistrate Judge King 

v. 

Norm Robinson, Warden, 

Respondent. 

OPINION AND ORDER 

On December 27, 2012, the Magistrate Judge recommended 

Respondent's motion to dismiss, ECF No. 15, be granted, reasoning that 

Petitioner's claim three is unexhausted and time-barred and that Petitioner's 

claims one, two, and four raise only state law claims that are not cognizable in 

federal habeas corpus. Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 34. This matter 

is now before the Court on Petitioner's objections to that recommendation, ECF 

No. 38, which the Court will consider de novo. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b); Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 72(b). 

In his objections, Petitioner again argues that he fairly presented his claims 

to the state courts by filing state habeas corpus actions, and that the statute of 

limitations was thereby tolled. Petitioner also argues that the statute of limitations 

relating to his challenge to his guilty plea (claim three) did not begin to run until 

the trial court imposed a sentence in connection with Petitioner's violation of the 

terms of his community control. Alternatively, Petitioner contends that the statute 

Case: 2:12-cv-00371-MHW-NMK Doc #: 39 Filed: 02/06/13 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
of limitations did not begin to run until he was returned to prison. Petitioner also 

argues that his initial judgment was a "legal nullity" that can be attacked at any 

time. He complains that it would be futile to require him to pursue a delayed 

direct appeal. Moreover, Petitioner argues that the Magistrate Judge failed to 

consider his pro se status. He contends that, because he acted with diligence 

and in good faith and is actually innocent, this Court should consider the merits of 

his claims. Finallly, Petitioner objects to the Magistrate Judge's conclusion that, 

aside from claim three, his claims present issues of state law that fail to provide a 

basis for habeas corpus relief. 

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), this Court has conducted a de novo 

review. For the reasons already detailed in the Magistrate Judge's Report and 

Recommendation, Petitioner's objections, ECF No. 38, are OVERRULED. The 

Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED and AFFIRMED. Respondent's 

motion to dismiss, ECF No. 15, is GRANTED. This action is hereby 

DISMISSED. 

The Clerk is DIRECTED to enter FINAL JUDGMENT. 

~ldJ4 iCHAELH:ATsoN 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case No. 2:12-cv-371 Page 2 of 2 

Case: 2:12-cv-00371-MHW-NMK Doc #: 39 Filed: 02/06/13 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. §1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report of The Valspar Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended April 25, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, William L. Mansfield, Chief Executive Officer of the Company and I, Lori A. Walker, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



1.         The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Act of 1934; and



2.         The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





/s/ William L. MansfieldWilliam L. MansfieldChairman and Chief Executive OfficerJune 4, 2008






/s/ Lori A. WalkerLori A. WalkerSenior Vice President(Chief Financial Officer)June 4, 2008








---
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsUncertainty in Inverted Pendulum Thrust MeasurementsAn uncertainty analysis of a common configuration of electric propulsion thrust stand is presented. The analysis applies to inverted pendulum thrust stands operating in a null-coil configuration with in-situ calibration. Several sources of bias and precision uncertainty are discussed, propagated, and combined to form conservative estimates of the relative and absolute thrust uncertainties. A case study of the NASA Glenn Research Center Vacuum Facility 6 thrust stand is presented. For the thruster investigated, the uncertainty was estimated to be ±6.9 mN over the entire span of thrust. This uncertainty represents a maximum instrument bias introduced by the thrust stand. The paper does not address repeatability of actual thrust measurements, as this is generally beyond the influence of the thrust stand and can be dependent on a large number of factors.Document ID20180006103Acquisition SourceGlenn Research CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsMackey, Jonathan A.*(NASA Glenn Research Center Cleveland, OH, United States)*Haag, Thomas W.*(NASA Glenn Research Center Cleveland, OH, United States)*Kamhawi, Hani*(NASA Glenn Research Center Cleveland, OH, United States)*Hall, Scott J.*(Vantage Partners, LLC Brook Park, OH, United States)*Peterson, Peter Y.*(Vantage Partners, LLC Brook Park, OH, United States)*Date AcquiredOctober 4, 2018Publication DateAugust 1, 2018Subject CategorySpacecraft Propulsion And PowerReport/Patent NumberE-19563GRC-E-DAA-TN59050NASA/TM-2018-219952Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NNC12BA01BWBS: WBS 729200.06.03.05.05.01Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightPublic Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType20180006103.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsIDRelationTitle20180005578See AlsoUncertainty in Inverted Pendulum Thrust Measurementsvisibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
No. 42033.

#### Protests 811393-G, etc., of T. D. Downing Co. et al. (Boston, etc.).

Opinion by

First Division.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
// Wayback Machine hacksvar __wbhack = new function(){  var prefix;  var orig_document = {    createElementNS: document.createElementNS  };  this.init = function(_prefix) {    this.checkCookiesNumber();    prefix = _prefix;    document.createElementNS = function(ns,name) {      if (ns.indexOf(prefix)==0) {	ns = ns.substring(prefix.length).replace(/\/?[0-9]+\//, '');      }      return orig_document.createElementNS.call(this, ns, name);    };  };  this.createCookie = function(name,value,days) {    if (days) {        var date = new Date();        date.setTime(date.getTime()+(days*24*60*60*1000));        var expires = "; expires="+date.toGMTString();    }    else var expires = "";    document.cookie = name+"="+value+expires+"; path=/";  };  this.eraseCookie = function(name) {    this.createCookie(name, "", -1);  };  this.checkCookiesNumber = function() {    var cookies = document.cookie.split(";");    if(cookies.length > 40) {        for(var i=0; i<cookies.length; i++) {            var name = cookies[i].split("=")[0].trim();            this.eraseCookie(name);        }    }  };  // save JSON object for our use - some target pages redefine JSON with their  // own version that may not be compatible with (now) standard JSON.  this.JSON = JSON;};
No. 43137.

#### Protests 862478-G, etc., of Baby Dress Imports, Inc., et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

On the authority of *Lamborn*v. *United States*(27 C. C. P. A. 46, C. A. D. 60) the protests were dismissed.
Exhibit 15.2

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We
hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements Nos. 333-165065, 333-165566, 333-169272, 333-171231, 333-172069, 333-178664, 333-188517,
333-192806, 333-201386, 333-208634, and 333-221808 on FormS-8 of our report dated 14 March 2016 (which includes an explanatory paragraph regarding retrospective adjustments to the 2015 consolidated financial statement disclosures on segment information) relating
to the financial statements, which appears in Anheuser-Bush InBev SA/NVs Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended 31 December 2017.

PwC Bedrijfsrevisoren BCVBA

Represented by



|                         
|-------------------------
|/s/ Koen Hens            
|Koen Hens Bedrijfsrevisor

Sint-Stevens-Woluwe, Belgium

19 March 2018
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 96-20041

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

CARLOS LUIS PACHECO-MALDONADO,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. CR-H-95-99-2

- - - - - - - - - -

November 7, 1996

Before SMITH, DUHÉ, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Carlos Luis Pacheco-Maldonado was convicted for conspiracy

to possess with intent to distribute cocaine and possession with

intent to distribute cocaine and has appealed. Pacheco contends:

(1) that the district court erred in refusing to adjust his

offense level because of Pacheco’s minor role in the offense;

(2) that the district court erred in refusing to implement the

safety valve provisions of U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(4); and (3) that
No. 96-20041

- 2 -

the district court erred in overruling his motion for a new trial

and for an evidentiary hearing based upon the Government’s

alleged failure to disclose evidence of a plea agreement with a

coconspirator, Jose Mata. The district court refused to adjust

Pacheco’s offense level because it chose to believe the testimony

of Mata and to disbelieve Pacheco’s unsworn statement regarding

Pacheco’s role in the conspiracy. The district court’s findings

were not clearly erroneous. See United States v. Rodriguez, 60

F.3d 193, 195 n.1 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 116 S. Ct. 542

(1995); United States v. Zuniga, 18 F.3d 1254, 1261 (5th Cir.),

cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 214 (1994). The district court credited

Mata’s testimony that his guilty plea was unconditionally

entered. This finding was not clearly erroneous and the district

court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to hold a hearing. 

See United States v. Aguiar, 610 F.2d 1296, 1305 (5th Cir.),

cert. denied, 449 U.S. 827 (1980). The judgment is 

AFFIRMED.
No. 54295.

#### Endo Products, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 144035-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Cole, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise in question consists of sheep gall or ox gall the same in all material respects as the substance passed upon in *G. D. Searle & Co.*v. *United States*(21 Cust. Ct. 112, C. D. 1138). The claim for free entry under paragraph 1669 was therefore sustained.
June 28, 1944

No. 6039.

#### International *Products Corp. (William H. Masson, Inc.)*v. *United States.*

Entered at Baltimore, Md. Reap. Dec. 5998. Motion by defendant.
#### Jason Donnell WILLIAMS, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. T. HANSEN, MCSP Coordinator Correctional Counselor II, Defendant—Appellee.

No. 04-17443.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 1, 2005.*

Decided Aug. 15, 2005.

Jason Donnell Williams, San Diego, CA, pro se.

Before: O’SCANNLAIN, CALLAHAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Jason Donnell Williams, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court’s judgment dismissing for failure to state a claim his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging defendant failed adequately to process his administrative grievance. We review de novo dismissals under the screening provisions of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, *Resnick v. Hayes,*213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000). We affirm.

The district court properly concluded that Williams’s complaint, which alleges that defendant Hansen obstructed the filing of his prison grievance by denying the grievance as untimely, failed to state a constitutional claim. *See Mann v. Adams,*855 F.2d 639, 640 (9th Cir.1988) (order) (“[tjhere is no legitimate claim of entitlement to a grievance procedure”); *see also Ramirez v. Galaza,*334 F.3d 850, 860 (9th Cir.2003) (“inmates lack a separate constitutional entitlement to a specific prison grievance procedure”).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the *808courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v.
JAIRO HERNANDEZ, AKA Joker,

Defendant

- Appellant. No. 20

- 17328

D.C. No. 3:14

- cr

- 00120

- EMC

- 6

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Edward M. Chen, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted December 8, 2021 San Francisco, California

Before: GRABER and COLLINS, Circuit Judges, and CHOE

- GROVES, * * Judge.
Jairo Hernandez appeals from the district court’s judgment denying his 28

U.S.C. § 2255 habeas motion. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.
Reviewing de novo, see United States v. Zuno

- Arce , 3 39 F.3d 886, 888 (9th Cir.
2003) , we affirm.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The Honorable Jennifer Choe

- Groves, Judge for the United States Court of International Trade, sitting by designation. 

# FILED

JAN 6 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 20

- 17328

The district court permissibly concluded that Hernandez procedurally

defaulted the challenge to his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) by failing to raise
that challenge on direct appeal. See Bousley v. United States , 523 U.S. 614, 621
(1998). Contrary to Hernandez’s contention, his claim that his sentence is invalid
in light of United States v. Davis , 139 S. Ct. 2319 (2019), goes to the merits of his

conviction and sentence rather than to the court’s subject m atter jurisdiction. See

United States v. Cotton , 535 U.S. 625, 630

– 31 (200 2 ) (“[T]he objection that the

indictment does not charge a crime against the United States goes only to the
merits of the case.” (citation omitted)); c f. United States v. Goodall , 1 5 F.4th 987
,
994

– 97 (9th Cir. 2021) (holding that the appeal waiver contained in defendant’s
plea agreement barred his claim that his § 924(c) sentence was invalid in light of

Davis ). Accordingly, the claim is subject to the usual procedural default rule. See
United States v. Ratigan , 351 F

. 3d 957, 962

– 63 (9th Cir. 2003). Hernandez does
not challenge the district court’s conclusion that he failed to demonstrate the

necessary cause a nd prejudice or actual innocence to excuse his procedural default.
See Bousley , 523 U.S. at 62 2

.
AFFIRMED.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 14 (Tuesday, January 23, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 2920]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-897]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration <greek-i>10783]


Nebraska Disaster <greek-i>NE-00011

AGENCY: Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This is a Notice of the Presidential declaration of a major 
disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of Nebraska (FEMA-
1674-DR), dated 01/07/2007.
    Incident: Severe Winter Storms.
    Incident Period: 12/19/2006 through 01/01/2007.
    Effective Date: 01/07/2007.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 03/08/2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Processing And Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., 
Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of 
the President's major disaster declaration on 01/07/2007, Private Non-
Profit organizations that provide essential services of a governmental 
nature may file disaster loan applications at the address listed above 
or other locally announced locations.
    The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected 
by the disaster:

Primary Counties:
    Adams, Antelope, Blaine, Boone, Brown, Buffalo, Cedar, Chase, 
Cheyenne, Clay, Custer, Dawson, Dixon, Dundy, Fillmore, Franklin, 
Frontier, Furnas, Garden, Garfield, Gosper, Greeley, Hall, Hamilton, 
Harlan, Hayes, Hitchcock, Holt, Howard, Kearney, Keith, Keya Paha, 
Kimball, Knox, Lincoln, Logan, Loup, Madison, Merrick, Morrill, Nance, 
Nuckolls, Perkins, Phelps, Pierce, Platte, Polk, Red Willow, Rock, 
Seward, Sherman, Stanton, Valley, Wayne, Webster, Wheeler York

    The Interest Rates are:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other (Including Non-Profit Organizations) With Credit             5.250
 Available Elsewhere..........................................
Businesses And Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit             4.000
 Available Elsewhere..........................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 10783.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

James E. Rivera,
Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.
[FR Doc. E7-897 Filed 1-22-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
### Laboratory study of aquifer properties and well design for an Artificial-Recharge site

By: A.I. JohnsonR.P. MostonS.F. Versaw

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/wsp1615H

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
# C_2016419EN.01004501.xml

| 14.11.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 419/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.11.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 419/45

---

Order of the General Court of 16 September 2016 — Aston Martin Lagonda v EUIPO (Representation of a grille on the front of a car)

(Case T-73/15) (1)

1

((European Union trade mark - Withdrawal of the application for registration - No need to adjudicate))

(2016/C 419/59)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Aston Martin Lagonda Ltd (Gaydon, United Kingdom) (represented by: D. Farnsworth, Solicitor)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: H. O’Neill, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 December 2014 (Case R 1796/2014-2) relating to the applicant’s Community trade mark application

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.

| 2. | Aston Martin Lagonda Ltd shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Aston Martin Lagonda Ltd shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

---

(1)  OJ C 118, 13.4.2015.

1

---