alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT UNITED STATES OF AM ER IC A, Plaintiff - Appe lle e , v. DAR YL KEITH M A R SHALL, De fe nda

nt - Appe lla

nt. No. 14-50426

D.C . No. 3:07-c r-01821-B EN M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Southe rn Distric t of C a lifornia R oge r T. B e nite z , Distric t Judge , Pre s iding Subm itte d April 22, 2015 ** B e fore : GOODW IN, B YB EE, a nd C HR ISTEN, C irc uit Judge s. Dary l Ke i th M arsha ll a

ppe a ls from the distric t

c o urt’ s judgm e nt a

nd c ha lle nge s the re voc a tion of supe rvise d re le a se . W e have jurisdic t ion unde r 28 U.S.C . § 1291, a

nd we a ffirm . 

# F IL ED APR 24 2015 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without ora l a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a )(2).M arsha ll c onte n ds tha t the distric t c ourt e rre d by fa iling to provide

him with an opportunity to be he ard re ga rding whe the r his viola

tion wa rrante d re voc ation of his supe rvise d re le a se . C ontra ry to M arsha ll’ s c o nte ntion, thede n ia l of the right of a lloc ution is not a

“ struc tura l e rror” wa

rranting a utom atic re v e rsa l. Se e Boardman v . Este lle , 957 F.2d 1523, 1530 (9th C ir. 1992). R athe r, we re vie w for pla in e rror, se e U nite d State

s v . W ak nine , 543 F.3d 546, 551 (9th C i r. 2008), a nd find none . The re c ord re fle c ts tha

t , in light of his m

ultipleprior viola

tions, thedistric t c ourt re je c te d M arsha ll’ s re que st to be pla c e d ba c k on supe rvise d re le a se . Ac c ordingly , M arsha ll ha s not shown a re a s ona ble proba bility that, but for thea lle g e d e rror, the distric t c o urt would ha

ve de te rm ine d tha

t re voc ation wa s unwa

rran te d . Se e Unite d State s v . Domingue

z Be nite z , 542 U.S. 74, 81-82 (2004). AFFIRM E D.

1 4 - 5 0 4 2 6 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

DOUGLAS W. JONES-BEY, )

)

Petitioner, )

) Civil Action No. 04-153 Erie

v. )

)

JAMES SHERMAN, Warden, )

)

Respondent. )

MEMORANDUM ORDER

This habeas corpus action was received by the Clerk of Court on June 3, 2004,

and was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Susan Paradise Baxter for report

and recommendation in accordance with the Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1),

and Rules 72.1.3 and 72.1.4 of the Local Rules for Magistrates. 

The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 6], filed on

February 23, 2006, recommended that Petitioner’s Petition be denied. The parties

were allowed ten (10) days from the date of service to file objections. Service was

made on Petitioner by certified mail and on Respondent. No objections were filed. 

After de novo review of the petition and documents in the case, together with the

Report and Recommendation, the following order is entered:

AND NOW, this 14th day of March, 2006;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas

Corpus [Doc. No. 2] is DENIED. 

The Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 6] of Magistrate Judge Baxter, filed

on February 23, 2006, is adopted as the opinion of the Court.

 s/ Sean J. McLaughlin

United States District Judge

cm: All parties of record

Susan Paradise Baxter, U.S. Magistrate Judge

Case 1:04-cv-00153-SJM-SPB Document 7 Filed 03/14/06 Page 1 of 1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

MIDDLE DISTRICT 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, 

 Respondent 

 v. 

KEVIN NATHANIEL WILLIAMS, 

 Petitioner 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 335 MAL 2016 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 27th day of September, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of 

Appeal is DENIED. 

Justice Mundy did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.
#### Harold S. KEMP, Petitioner, v. Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Director, Division of Corrections, Respondent.

No. 70-170.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

April 7, 1970.

Habeas corpus denied.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 12.1

                                 Computation of
                       Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                      Year Ended December 31,
(amounts in thousands)                                  2002         2001         2000        1999        1998
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                                  <C>          <C>          <C>         <C>         <C>
(Loss) income before income taxes and
extraordinary gain                                   $(147,866)   $(140,369)   $  62,353   $  22,522   $   6,544
Equity in losses of equity-method investees              3,405        1,962          385          --          --
                                                     ---------    ---------    ---------   ---------   ---------
(Loss) income before equity in losses of
equity-method investees and before income taxes
and extraordinary gain                                (144,461)    (138,407)      62,738      22,522       6,544
                                                     ---------    ---------    ---------   ---------   ---------
Plus fixed charges:
     Interest expense                                    7,254       17,966        6,384          35         143
     Amortization of costs related to indebtedness       1,095        2,647        1,088          --          --
     Estimated interest factor in rent expense/(1)/        576          734          428         345         252
                                                     ---------    ---------    ---------   ---------   ---------
Total Fixed Charges                                      8,925       21,347        7,900         380         395
                                                     ---------    ---------    ---------   ---------   ---------
Adjusted earnings (loss)                              (135,536)    (117,060)      70,638      22,902       6,939

Fixed charges                                            8,925       21,347        7,900         380         395

Deficiency in earnings to cover fixed charges        $(153,386)   $(159,754)   $      --   $      --   $      --

Ratio of earnings to fixed charges                           *            *          8.9        60.3        17.6
</TABLE>

----------

* Calculation not meaningful as ratio is less then 1. Refer to "Deficiency in
earnings to cover fixed charges" calculation.
(1) The interest factor in rent expense is estimated as one-third of rental
expense.
No. 99-1693.

#### Witzel et al. *v.*Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded for further consideration in light of *Gitlitz*v. *Commissioner, ante,*p. 206.
<PAGE>

                                                                      Exhibit 32

                    Certification of CEO and CFO Pursuant to
                             18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
                             as Adopted Pursuant to
                  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of GenTek Inc. (the
"Company") for the six months ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Richard R. Russell,
as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Matthew R. Friel, as Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
'SS' 1350, as adopted pursuant to 'SS' 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that, to the best of his knowledge:

     (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange 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/ Richard R. Russell
------------------------------------
Richard R. Russell
Chief Executive Officer
August 14, 2003


/s/ Matthew R. Friel
------------------------------------
Matthew R. Friel
Chief Financial Officer
August 14, 2003


This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to 'SS' 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
'SS' 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to GenTek Inc. and will be retained by GenTek Inc. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

 

SPENCER MILL, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

NATIONWIDE PROPERTY AND 

CASUALTY INSURANCE CO., 

 Defendant. 

 No. 4:23-CV-00905 

 (Chief Judge Brann) 

 

 

ORDER 

NOVEMBER 26, 2024 

In accordance with the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, IT IS HEREBY 

ORDERED that: 

1. Plaintiff Spencer Mill’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 21) is 

GRANTED IN PART (as to Nationwide’s Duty to Defend) and DENIED 

IN PART (as to Nationwide’s Duty to Indemnify); 

2. Defendant Nationwide’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 15) is 

DENIED; and 

3. A telephonic status conference with counsel of record will be scheduled by 

separate Order. 

BY THE COURT: 

s/ Matthew W. Brann 

Matthew W. Brann 

Chief United States District Judge 

Case 4:23-cv-00905-MWB Document 35 Filed 11/26/24 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>
                                              
<ARTICLE>                                          5
<CIK>                                              0000944697
<NAME>                            Smith Barney Principal PLUS Futures Fund L.P.
                                                                                
<S>                                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                      12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                  DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                     JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                       DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                                              12,186,981
<SECURITIES>                                                        22,654,433
<RECEIVABLES>                                                          367,126
<ALLOWANCES>                                                                 0
<INVENTORY>                                                                  0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                    35,208,540
<PP&E>                                                                       0
<DEPRECIATION>                                                               0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                      35,208,540
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                                  934,134
<BONDS>                                                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                        0
<PREFERRED>                                                                  0
<COMMON>                                                                     0
<OTHER-SE>                                                          34,274,406
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                        35,208,540
<SALES>                                                                      0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                     3,868,575
<CGS>                                                                        0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                                0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                       899,933
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                             0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                           0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                      2,968,642
<INCOME-TAX>                                                                 0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                         0
<DISCONTINUED>                                                               0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                              0
<CHANGES>                                                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                                                         2,968,642
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                           109.40
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                                0
        

</TABLE>
IN THE SUPRE 

# N AT STATE OF MONTANA PR 20-00
IN RE THE MOTION OF BYRON E.GRUBER FOR ADMISSION TO THE BAR OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 

# FILED SEP 1 5 2020 Bowen Greenw000 Clerk of Supreme Couri StatEepRAEPE
Byron E.Gruber has filed a motion for admission to the Bar ofthe State ofMontana pursuant to Rule V ofthe Rules for Admission,Admission on Motion. TheBar Admissions Administrator ofthe State Bar ofMontana has informed the Court that the Commission on Character and Fitness has certified that Gruber has provided the necessary documentation and has satisfied the requirements prerequisite to admission on motion under Rule V. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that upon payment of any application fees and completion of any other processing requirements as set forth by the Bar Admissions Administrator, Byron E. Gruber may be sworn in to the practice of law in the State of Montana. Arrangements for swearing in may be made by contacting the office ofthe Clerk ofthe Montana Supreme Court. The Clerk is directed to provide copies of this order to Petitioner and to the State Bar ofMontana. DATED this 16'

- aay ofSeptember,2020. ChiefJustice
a 09/15/2020
Case Number: PR 20-0005L.411 ,0 1 . Z
;1 n /1 4 Justices
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

THOMAS LEE BROWN, JR., :

:

Petitioner :

:

v. : CIVIL NO. 4:CV-13-1495

:

SUPT. DANIEL BURNS, : (Judge Brann)

:

Respondent :

ORDER

November 18, 2015

In accordance with the accompanying Memorandum, IT IS

HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1. Brown’s habeas corpus petition is DENIED. 

2. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.

3. Based on the Court’s conclusion herein, there is no basis

for the issuance of a certificate of appealability.

BY THE COURT:

 s/ Matthew W. Brann 

Matthew W. Brann

United States District Judge

1

Case 4:13-cv-01495-MWB-JVW Document 27 Filed 11/18/15 Page 1 of 1
Opinion issued April 25, 2017

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-17-00239-CR

———————————

IN RE DEVIN PAUL COLE, Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator, Devin Paul Cole, has filed a complaint seeking to compel the 

respondent Harris County District Clerk to forward his pro se pre-trial habeas corpus 

application, seeking release on bond, to the trial court in the underlying proceeding.

1

 

 

1 The underlying case is The State of Texas v. Devin Paul Cole, Cause No. 1527907, 

338th District Court, Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Ramona Franklin

presiding.
2

We construe relator’s complaint as a petition for a writ of mandamus, but dismiss it 

for want of jurisdiction.

This Court’s mandamus jurisdiction is limited to: (1) issuance of writs of 

mandamus against a district court judge or county court judge in this Court’s district,

and (2) issuance of writs of mandamus necessary to enforce our appellate 

jurisdiction. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 22.221(a)–(b) (West 2004). Because 

relator’s petition is directed at the district clerk, not the trial judge, and does not 

indicate that issuance of a writ is necessary to enforce our appellate jurisdiction, we 

lack jurisdiction to issue the writ. See id. at § 22.221(a), (b)(1).

Accordingly, we dismiss the petition for writ of mandamus for want of 

jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Higley, and Massengale.

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 190 (Wednesday, October 1, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 51499]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-25979]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

[Docket 37554]


Notice of Order Adjusting the Standard Foreign Fare Level Index

    Section 41509(e) of Title 49 of the United States Code requires 
that the Department, as successor to the Civil Aeronautics Board, 
establish a Standard Foreign Fare Level (SFFL) by adjusting the SFFL 
base periodically by percentage changes in actual operating costs per 
available seat-mile (ASM). Order 80-2-69 established the first interim 
SFFL, and Order 97-7-32 established the currently effective two-month 
SFFL applicable through September 30, 1997.
    In establishing the SFFL for the two-month period beginning October 
1, 1997, we have projected non-fuel costs based on the year ended June 
30, 1997 data, and have determined fuel prices on the basis of the 
latest available experienced monthly fuel cost levels as reported to 
the Department.
    By Order 97-9-32 fares may be increased by the following adjustment 
factors over the October 1979 level:

Atlantic--1.3355
Latin America--1.3927
Pacific--1.4779

    For further information contact: Keith A. Shangraw (202) 366-2439.

    By the Department of Transportation: Dated September 25, 1997.
Patrick V. Murphy,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs.
[FR Doc. 97-25979 Filed 9-30-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-62-P
NUMBER 13-16-00248-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

 

BURLINGTON RESOURCES OIL 

& GAS COMPANY, LP, Appellant,

v.

TEXAS CRUDE ENERGY, LLC

AND AMBER HARVEST, LLC, Appellees.

On appeal from the 156th District Court

of Live Oak County, Texas.

ORDER 

Before Justices Benavides, Perkes and Longoria

Order Per Curiam

Burlinton Resources Oil & Gas Company, LP filed a petition for permissive 

interlocutory appeal on May 3, 2016. See TEX. R. APP. P. 28.3. The Court, having 

examined and fully considered the petition, is of the opinion that the petition should be 
2

granted. Accordingly, we GRANT permission to appeal. A notice of appeal is deemed 

to have been filed on this date. See TEX. R. APP. P. 28.3(k). The appeal will be 

governed by the rules for accelerated appeals. Id.; see TEX. R. APP. P. 28.1 (“The 

deadlines and procedures for filing the record and briefs in an accelerated appeal are 

provided in Rules 35.1 and 38.6.”). 

We direct the Clerk of this Court to file a copy of this order with the trial court clerk. 

See TEX. R. APP. P. 28.3(k). 

It is so ORDERED.

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the

11th day of May, 2016.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1


                        FORM OF SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

        In connection with the accompanying Form 10-Q of N2H2, Inc. for the
quarterly period ended June 30, 2002, I, Howard P. Welt, President & Chief
Executive Officer of N2H2, Inc., hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

        (1) such Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2002 fully
complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and

        (2) the information contained in such Form 10-Q for the quarterly period
ended June 30, 2002 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of N2H2, Inc.

  8/13/02                                /s/ Howard P. Welt
-----------------------                 ----------------------------------
Date                                    Howard P. Welt
                                        President & CEO
| INTEGRITY MUTUALFUNDS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES | Exhibit 31.2 |
|----------------------------------------------|--------------|

CERTIFICATION 

I, Heather Ackerman, certify that: 

1.            I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of IntegrityMutual Funds, Inc.; 

2.            Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain anyuntrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this annualreport; 

3.            Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and otherfinancial information included in this annual report, fairlypresent in all material respects the financial condition, resultsof operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for,the periods presented in this annual report; 

4.            I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosurecontrols and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 

a)            designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly duringthe period in which this annual report is being prepared; 

b)           evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this annual report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisannual report based on such evaluation; and 

c)            disclosed in this annual report any change in the registrant'sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred duringthe registrant's most recent fiscal year (the registrant's fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant's internal control over financialreporting; and 

5.            I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internalcontrol over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditorsand the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (orpersons performing the equivalent functions): 

a)            all significant deficiencies in the design or operation ofinternal controls which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial data and have identified for the registrant's auditorsany material weaknesses in internal controls; and 

b)           any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant'sinternal controls.

  
| Date:  March 27, 2006 | By /s/ Heather Ackerman |
|----------------------------|-------------------------|
|                       | Heather Ackerman        |
|                       | Chief Financial Officer |