alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

DWAYNE HENRY, )

)

Petitioner, )

) Civil Action No. 05-349 Erie

v. )

)

WARDEN, FCI MCKEAN, )

)

Respondent. )

MEMORANDUM ORDER

This habeas corpus action was received by the Clerk of Court on November 22,

2005, 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. 28], filed on

November 16, 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. Petitioner filed objections on

November 29, 2006 [Doc. No. 29]. After de novo review of the petition and documents

in the case, together with the Report and Recommendation and objections thereto, the

following order is entered:

AND NOW, this 30th day of November, 2006; 

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

Corpus is DENIED. 

The Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 28] of Magistrate Judge Baxter, filed

on November 16, 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 1:05-cv-00349-SJM-SPB Document 30 Filed 11/30/06 Page 1 of 1
#### Joseph LaRUSSA, Appellant, v. Joseph VETRO, Charles Harold Vetro, a minor, and Allstate Insurance Company, Appellees.

No. 70-264.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Oct. 9, 1970.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 31, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

WALDEN, McCAIN and REED, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>

                                                                     Exhibit 3.1


                              Amendment to By-Laws
                           Adopted February 20, 2001

     WHEREAS, Article XI of the Bylaws of the Company permit the Bylaws to be
amended by a vote of a majority of the Board at any regular or special meeting
of the Board; and

     WHEREAS, the Board deems it to be in the best interests of the Company and
its stockholders to amend the Bylaws to permit the Annual Meeting of
Stockholders to be held on such date and at such time as may be fixed from time
to time by the Board.

     NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Article I, Section 1 of the Bylaws of
the Company is hereby amended and restated in full as follows:

"Section 1.  Annual Meetings.
 ---------------------------

     The annual meeting of the stockholders of the Corporation shall be held on
such date and at such time as may be fixed from time to time by the Board of
Directors.  Not less than ten nor more than 90 days' written notice stating the
place, day and hour of each annual meeting shall be given in the manner provided
in Section 1 of Article IX hereof.  The business to be transacted at the annual
meetings shall include the election of directors, consideration and action upon
the reports of officers and directors, and any other business within the power
of the Corporation.  All annual meetings shall be general meetings at which any
business may be considered without being specified as a purpose in the notice
unless otherwise required by law."
Docket No: FAA - 2015 - 0249 Dir ID: 2014 - NM - 174 -AD
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3730 

To amend the Small Business Investment Act of 1958 to increase the amount 

that may be invested in small business investment companies. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 1, 2024 

Mr. YOUNG (for himself, Ms. DUCKWORTH, and Mr. RISCH) introduced the 

following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 

Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend the Small Business Investment Act of 1958 to 

increase the amount that may be invested in small business investment companies. 

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 ‘‘Investing in Main 

5 Street Act of 2024’’. 

6 SEC. 2. INVESTMENT IN SMALL BUSINESS INVESTMENT 

7 COMPANIES. 

8 Section 302(b) of the Small Business Investment Act 

9 of 1958 (15 U.S.C. 682(b)) is amended— 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3730 IS

1 (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘5 percent’’ 

2 and inserting ‘‘15 percent’’; and 

3 (2) in paragraph (2), by striking ‘‘5 percent’’ 

4 and inserting ‘‘15 percent’’. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
Process Description ‐ Sanitized
254 La. 829

#### Edless MANUEL v. LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY.

No. 50074.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 6, 1969.

In re: Liberty Mutual Insurance Company applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Parish of St. Landry. 225 So.2d 151.

It is ordered that the writ of review issue; that the Court of Appeal send up the record in duplicate of the case; and that counsel for plaintiff and defendant be notified.
---

Exhibit 13.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Rouge Resources Ltd. on
Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended January 31, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the
undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby
certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to her 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.

Date: July 22, 2008

/s/ Linda Smith
Linda Smith, President and
Chief Executive Officer. Rouge Resources Ltd.

---
Connecticut & Tennessee Fund Pedestrian Safety

DOTs Use Highway Safety Improvement Program Funding to Provide 

Exemplary Focus on Pedestrian Safety

Sponsoring Agency: Connecticut and Tennessee Departments of Transportation (CTDOT and TDOT)

Implementation Date: 2015 and on-going 

CDOT URL: https://ct.gov/dot/cwp/view.asp?a=3199&q=526424

TDOT URL: https://www.tn.gov/tdot/strategic-transportation-investments/project-safety-office.html 

Summary 

Both States are using the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) to target pedestrian safety projects. 

TDOT will use at least 10 percent of its HSIP funding to counter an increasing number of serious and fatal 

crashes involving pedestrians. CTDOT has taken a more programmatic approach, but has easily surpassed 

a 10-percent threshold in recent years by updating every crosswalk on its State highway system with high 

visibility crosswalk markings and warning signs. 

Highlights

In 2015, TDOT added a vulnerable users’ 

emphasis area in the Tennessee Strategic 

Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) to focus on 

reducing fatalities and serious injuries involving 

pedestrians. To this end, TDOT has dedicated 

a percentage of its HSIP funds consistent with 

its pedestrian fatality rate (approximately 

11 percent) to implement pedestrian safety 

countermeasures. This Pedestrian Road 

Safety Initiative included the identification 

of pedestrian high crash intersections and 

corridors Statewide. Future project selection 

for pedestrian safety projects will also include 

equity, existing infrastructure supply, and 

anticipated infrastructure demand. Where 

applicable, pedestrian safety countermeasures 

will be also included in all traditional HSIP 

funded projects even though projects may 

have been selected to address motorist safety. 

CTDOT has used an agency-wide approach to address pedestrian safety including policy, planning, and 

engineering/design. While policy and planning support comes from the Department’s Complete Streets 

Policy, the SHSP, and the Statewide pedestrian plan, engineering and design efforts are largely funded as 

initiatives through HSIP including:

• Replacing school warning signs Statewide with high reflective yellow-green signs to enhance visibility. 

• Replacing, enhancing, or installing warning signs at all marked crosswalks on State routes. 

• Restriping every crosswalk on the State highway system with high-visibility markings.

FHWA-SA-18-055

Image Source: Toole Design

New Crosswalk Markings and Pedestrian Refuge Island
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 21-3372

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Damien Lashaun Nelson

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant

 ____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the District of Minnesota

 ____________

 Submitted: April 18, 2022

Filed: April 27, 2022

[Unpublished]

____________

Before COLLOTON, ERICKSON, and KOBES, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

Damien Lashaun Nelson appeals after he pleaded guilty to conspiracy and

firearm offenses, and the district court1

 imposed an aggregate prison sentence to run

1The Honorable Ann D. Montgomery, United States District Judge for the

District of Minnesota.
partially consecutively to an undischarged state sentence. On appeal, Nelson

challenges as substantively unreasonable the district court’s decision to impose the

sentence partially consecutively to his undischarged state sentence. 

After careful review of the record and the parties’ arguments on appeal, this

court finds no abuse of discretion. See United States v. Nelson, 982 F.3d 1141, 1146

(8th Cir. 2020) (standard of review). The record reflects that the district court

considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, the record, Nelson’s mental health issues,

and Nelson’s request to run his federal sentence concurrently; and exercised its

discretion to order that the sentence run partially consecutively. See United States

v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461-62 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (abuse of discretion

occurs when court fails to consider relevant factor, gives significant weight to

improper or irrelevant factor, or commits clear error of judgment in weighing

appropriate factors); United States v. McDonald, 521 F.3d 975, 980 (8th Cir. 2008)

(district court has “wide discretion” to order sentence to be served consecutively to

undischarged sentence); see also United States v. Long, 870 F.3d 792, 799 (8th Cir.

2017) (district court may rely more heavily on some factors than others) (citation

omitted); United States v. Hall, 825 F.3d 373, 376 (8th Cir. 2016) (no abuse of

discretion where district court considered § 3553(a) factors and recognized its

discretion to run sentences concurrently but declined to do so).

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed.

______________________________

-2-
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                           1,082
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      683
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (56)
<INVENTORY>                                         72
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 2,113
<PP&E>                                          10,404
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (5,731)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   6,824
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,567
<BONDS>                                          1,740
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               16
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            26
<OTHER-SE>                                       2,475
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     6,824
<SALES>                                          9,214
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 9,214
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    8,948
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (969)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 362
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    902
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                713
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       713
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.27
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.31
        

</TABLE>
Archived - 

For 

Research 

and 

Historical 

Purposes 

Only
Archived - 

For 

Research 

and 

Historical 

Purposes 

Only
Archived - 

For 

Research 

and 

Historical 

Purposes 

Only
Archived - 

For 

Research 

and 

Historical 

Purposes 

Only
Archived - 

For 

Research 

and 

Historical 

Purposes 

Only
Archived - 

For 

Research 

and 

Historical 

Purposes 

Ol
Archived - 

For 

Research 

and 

Historical 

Purposes 

Only
Archived - 

For 

Research 

and 

Historical 

Purposes 

Only
av-V-”'~V uhzwmmg ’ V ,j}}

9‘/»“ V. .

i L -4h‘AAI~u . :=. 

# InventoryExpertService A division ofthe American Chemical Society Phone: 800-631-1884, 614-447-3870 Fax: 614-447-3747 E-maii: answers@cas.org Web: www.cas.orglproductslolher-cas-produotslcIienl-services/‘ 

# INVENTORY EXPERT SERVICE REPORT

IES Order Number: 383384 

### Registry Number: CA Index Name:

Please printthe above CA Index Name on the appropriate page ofyourPMN. Ifthis box is checked, CA5 has made correction(s) marked in red to your IES order. Piease make the same corrections to yourPMN before submitting itto the EPA. 

### CA8 ~ 25400|entangy River Road - P.O. Box 3343 - Columbus, OH 43210-0334 - USA
No. D-2232.

#### In re Disbarment of Adams.

David Michael Adams, of Charleston, S. C., is suspended from the practice of law in this Court, and a rule will issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 209 (Wednesday, October 29, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 56237]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-28631]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Thrift Supervision
[AC-27: OTS Nos. H-2020 and 06646]


Lexington First Federal, M.H.C., Lexington, Tennessee; Approval 
of Convention Application

    Notice is hereby given that on October 21, 1997, the Director, 
Corporate Activities, Office of Thrift Supervision, or her designee, 
acting pursuant to delegated authority, approved the application of 
Lexington First Federal, M.H.C. Lexington, Tennessee, to convert to the 
stock form of organization. Copies of the application are available for 
inspection at the Dissemination Branch, Office of Thrift Supervision, 
1700 G Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20552, and the Central Regional 
Office, Office of Thrift Supervision, 200 West Madison Street, Suite 
1300, Chicago, Illinois 60606.

    Dated: October 24, 1997.

Nadine Y. Washington,
Corporate Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-28631 Filed 10-28-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6720-01-M
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk May 26, 2010

p0519 

# Order

May 26, 2010

141000

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 141000 COA: 295481 Macomb CC: 2 004-002096-FH JULIE CHRISTINE LAEL BAUMER, Defendant-Appellee.

________________ _______________ __________/

By order of May 12, 2010, this Court gr anted immediate consideration and a stay of trial court proceedings. On orde r of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the April 12, 2010 order of the Court of Appeals is consider ed, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presente d should be reviewed by this Court. The stay of trial court proceed ings is DISSOLVED.
Exhibit 13.1




Certificate of CEO 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 Annual Report on Form 20-F of Grupo Casa Saba S.A.B. de C.V. (the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Gabriel Saba D’jamus, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Alejandro Sadurni Gomez, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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.




By: /s/ Gabriel Saba D’jamus


Name: Gabriel Saba D’jamus


Title:   Chief Executive Officer


Date:   June 30, 2011





By: /s/ Alejandro Sadurni Gomez


Name: Alejandro Sadurni Gomez


Title:   Chief Financial Officer


Date:   June 30, 2011








This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to § 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 §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 the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
September27, 2011
Mr. DeVaney and Mr. Swanson, 3Ll
Uintah County and Vemal Cityhave reviewed the proposals given by SeaPort Airlines and Great Lakes Airlines. SeaPottAirlines only offers a 9 passenger, single engine airplane in their proposal and Great Lakes offers a twin engine, 19 passenger airplane. Because ofstatutory requirements in the EAS Program, Vemal is guaranteed to receive air service with two-pilot, twin-engine aircraft. Vernal is also guaranteed service with at least a IS-passenger aircraft. SeaPort failed to meet these EAS requirements. Therefore, we recommend that Great Lakes Airlines be awarded the contractfor Essential Airline Service. Great Lakes Airlines has failed to providereliable and dependable service in the past. However, having recently met with them, we havebeen assured that their service will improve

. We will re-evaluate this service intwo years. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Should youhave any further questions about this matter, please contactmyoffice. Regards, Kelly Harvey VemalRegional Airport Manager (435)219-0156 kjfam92@yahoo.com
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION 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 annual report of Cygne Designs, Inc. (the  Company) on Form 10-K/A for the period ending January 31, 2007 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Roy E. Green, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 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 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.



By:

/s/    ROY E. GREENRoy E. GreenSenior Vice President-Chief Financial OfficerMay 31, 2007
EXHIBIT 32  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SS. 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 AccelPath, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended December 31, 2014, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer of the Company do hereby certify, to their best knowledge and belief, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 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.   Date: February 23, 2015 /s/ Gilbert Steedley Gilbert Steedley Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer
259 La. 66

#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Herbert J. WILLIAMS v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary.

No. 51527.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 23, 1971.

In re: Herbert J. Williams applying for writ of certiorari and habeas corpus.

Application denied. The showing made does not warrant the exercise of our supervisory jurisdiction.
February 1, 2002 

 HSA-10/B-74B 

Mr. Richard Moore 

Technical Sales 

Valley Rubber, L.L.C. 

3899 Highway 31 North 

Falkville, Alabama 35622 

Dear Mr. Moore: 

In your January 23 letter to Mr. Richard Powers of my staff you requested 

acceptance of a new version of your recycled rubber blockout for w-beam guardrail 

that was formally accepted by Mr. Frederick G. Wright’s letter to you dated 

November 28, 2000. Whereas the original acceptance was for a rectangular block 

intended for use with a steel post, the new design is intended for use with 180-mm 

(7-inch) diameter round wood posts. 

Your new block is essentially rectangular with a front face of 144 mm (5.7 in), a 

depth of 200 mm (7.9 in), and a back face having a concave surface with a radius of 

89 mm (3.5 in). The overall length of the block remains at 356 mm (14 in). The 

sidewalls are 27-mm (1.1-in) thick, the front wall is 17-mm (0.7-in) thick, and the 

back wall is 19-mm (0.75-in) thick. Assuming the material composition remains the 

same as in the rectangular blocks that were originally tested and accepted, the new 

block may also be considered acceptable for use with 180-mm (7-inch) diameter 

round wood posts supporting w-beam guardrail. 

 Sincerely yours, 

 (original signed by Michael L. Halladay) 

 Michael L. Halladay 

 Acting Project Manager, Safety