alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
<meta name="pdf:PDFVersion" content="1.2">
<meta name="xmp:CreatorTool" content="Acrobat Capture Server 2.0">
<meta name="pdf:hasXFA" content="false">
<meta name="access_permission:modify_annotations" content="true">
<meta name="dc:creator" content="capture">
<meta name="dcterms:created" content="1998-06-02T23:21:47Z">
<meta name="dcterms:modified" content="1998-06-02T23:21:48Z">
<meta name="dc:format" content="application/pdf; version=1.2">
<meta name="pdf:docinfo:creator_tool" content="Acrobat Capture Server 2.0">
<meta name="access_permission:fill_in_form" content="true">
<meta name="pdf:docinfo:modified" content="1998-06-02T23:21:48Z">
<meta name="pdf:hasCollection" content="false">
<meta name="pdf:encrypted" content="false">
<meta name="Content-Length" content="46101">
<meta name="pdf:hasMarkedContent" content="false">
<meta name="Content-Type" content="application/pdf">
<meta name="access_permission:can_print_faithful" content="true">
<meta name="pdf:docinfo:creator" content="capture">
<meta name="pdf:producer" content="Acrobat PDFWriter 3.02 for Windows NT">
<meta name="access_permission:extract_for_accessibility" content="true">
<meta name="access_permission:assemble_document" content="true">
<meta name="xmpTPg:NPages" content="1">
<meta name="pdf:hasXMP" content="false">
<meta name="access_permission:extract_content" content="true">
<meta name="access_permission:can_print" content="true">
<meta name="X-TIKA:Parsed-By" content="org.apache.tika.parser.DefaultParser">
<meta name="X-TIKA:Parsed-By" content="org.apache.tika.parser.pdf.PDFParser">
<meta name="access_permission:can_modify" content="true">
<meta name="pdf:docinfo:producer" content="Acrobat PDFWriter 3.02 for Windows NT">
<meta name="pdf:docinfo:created" content="1998-06-02T23:21:47Z">
<title></title>
</head>
<body><div class="page"><p></p>
<p>OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 
</p>
<p>AUSTIN </p>
<p></p>
</div>
</body></html>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-6924

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

EUGENE NESBITT,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, Senior District

Judge. (CA-04-1582-WMN)

Submitted: November 22, 2005 Decided: December 5, 2005

Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Eugene Nesbitt, Appellant Pro Se. Paul M. Tiao, OFFICE OF THE

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Eugene Nesbitt seeks to appeal from the district court’s

order denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255

(2000). The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or

judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue

absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional

right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this

standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that

the district court’s assessment of his constitutional claims is

debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural rulings by

the district court are also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v.

Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S.

473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001).

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Nesbitt

has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a

certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are

adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument

would not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
#### FLORIDA STATE HOSPITAL, Petitioner, v. Thelma BRYANT and Florida Department of Commerce, Industrial Relations Commission, Respondents.

No. 42623.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Oct. 16, 1972.

Certiorari denied.

ROBERTS, C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
Transaction Summary

The U.S. Department of the Treasury agreed to make a loan of $6,768,749 to Caribbean Sun 

Airlines, Inc. (the Company). Treasury originally agreed to make a loan of up to $15 million to 

the Company, and on December 7, 2020, Treasury decreased the maximum loan amount to 

$6,768,749. The Company is a passenger air carrier with approximately 173 U.S. employees in 

March 2020.

Treasury made the loan pursuant to section 4003(b)(1) of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and

Economic Security (CARES) Act. The loan is secured by aircraft, engines, and rotable spare

parts. The loan has an interest rate equal to LIBOR plus 3.5% and matures on November 5,

2025. Treasury funded the full loan amount of $6,768,749 on December 7, 2020. The loan 

proceeds will be used to provide liquidity to continue the Company’s operations. The

transaction agreement includes covenants by the Company to comply with certain restrictions on

employee compensation, stock repurchases, dividends, and reductions in employment levels, as

required by the CARES Act. The loan constitutes senior indebtedness of the Company, and

Treasury will receive 3% payment-in-kind annual interest on the loan in accordance with section

4003(d) of the CARES Act.
```
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 222 (Tuesday, November 18, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 61584]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-30270]

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Thrift Supervision
[AC-34: OTS No. 1515]

Ninth Ward Savings Bank, FSB, Wilmington, DE; Approval of 
Conversion Application

    Notice is hereby given that on November 10, 1997, the Director, 
Corporate Activities, Office of Thrift Supervision, or her designee, 
acting pursuant to delegated authority, approved the application of 
Ninth Ward Savings Bank, FSB, Wilmington, Delaware, 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, NW, Washington, DC 20552, and the Northeast Regional 
Office, Office of Thrift Supervision, 10 Exchange Place, 18th Floor, 
Jersey City, New Jersey 07302.

    Dated: November 13, 1997.

    By the Office of Thrift Supervision.
Nadine Y. Washington,
Corporate Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-30270 Filed 11-17-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6720-01-M
```
ERA2 Reallocation Quarter 2 ‐ Voluntary Reallocation to Designated Entities

Transferring Entity 

(Transferor)

Receiving Entity 

(Transferee) State Amount to be Reallocated 

State of Alabama City Of Huntsville Alabama $4,580,332.72 

State of Alabama Jefferson County Alabama $25,000,000.00 

State of Arizona Pima County Arizona $15,000,000.00 

State of Arizona City of Phoenix Arizona $7,000,000.00 

State of Arizona Pinal County Arizona $28,000,000.00 

State of Arizona Pima County Arizona $10,000,000.00 

City of Aurora State of Colorado Colorado $5,419,047.18 

City and County of 

Denver State of Colorado Colorado $5,727,758.83 

Cherokee County Gwinnett County Georgia $1,571,641.00 

State of Georgia Henry County Georgia $15,000,000.00 

State of Hawaii Hawaii County Hawaii $15,000,000.00 

State of Idaho Ada County Idaho $10,000,000.00 

Commonwealth of 

Kentucky

Lexington-Fayette 

Urban County Kentucky $15,757,841.65 

Commonwealth of 

Kentucky

Louisville/Jefferson 

County Kentucky $38,248,756.91 

Genesee County State of Michigan Michigan $309,186.57 

City of Henderson Clark County Nevada $3,466,234.98 

Middlesex County State of New Jersey New Jersey $12,752,523.35 

City of Albuquerque Dona Ana County New Mexico $8,227,943.32 

State of Ohio City of Toledo Ohio $34,025,186.76 

State of Ohio Hamilton County Ohio $36,630,221.58 

Cleveland County State of Oklahoma Oklahoma $2,286,526.86 

Total $294,003,201.71
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-8195

DENNIS L. SNIPES, Petitioner – Appellant,

v. CECILIA REYNOLDS, Respondent – Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (0:07-cv-03516-CMC-MCIV)

Submitted: June 8, 2009 Decided: June 18, 2009

Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Susan L. Ferguson, Burbank, California, for Appellant. William Edgar Salter, III, Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Dennis L. Snipes seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El

v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Snipes has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

DISMISSED
**                                                                                                                                                     Exhibit 32.01**

**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 Abby, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending November 30,2012  as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Lawson Kerster  , Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

 

(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 result of operations of the Company.

/*s/*Lawson Kerster 

By: Lawson Kerster 

Chief Executive Officer

 

Dated October 12, 2012 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement 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.
#### Tommy McNEAL v. STATE of Mississippi.

No. 45587.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Feb. 2, 1970.

*492J. W. Kellum, Sumner, for appellant.

A. F. Summer, Atty. Gen., by Guy N. Rogers, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Velia Ann Mayer, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.

ROBERTSON, Justice:

The appellant, Tommy McNeal, was indicted, tried and convicted of the crime of murder in the Circuit Court of Coahoma County, Mississippi. The jury, in its verdict, fixed the punishment at life inprisonment in the penitentiary.

About 11:30 p. m., March 9, 1968, James Bogan Weems, the manager of the Red Bird Service Station on U. S. Highway 61 in Clarksdale, Mississippi, was killed with a single pistol shot. The proof was that the appellant attempted to rob the Red Bird Service Station and shot the manager when he resisted. The evidence was sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the appellant committed the offense, and the jury was justified in returning a verdict of guilty.

The principal complaints of the appellant are: that the trial court erred in granting (1) an instruction for the State containing this language, “ * * * and in said attempt to rob the said James Bogan Weems, did willfully, unlawfully and feloniously shoot and kill James Bogan Weems,” and (2) an instruction defining the offenses of robbery and attempted robbery.

The granting of both of these instructions was proper in this case. The proof was that the appellant was in the act of robbing or attempting to rob James Bogan Weems at the time he shot and killed him.

Witnesses testified that the appellant made the statement that he was going to get some money, that he exhibited his pistol to them before the attempted robbery and killing, that money was found on the driveway of the service station after the shooting, and that the drawer of the cash register was open. The evidence was ample and sufficient to justify a definition of these two collateral offenses.

41 C.J.S. Homicide § 361 (1944) thus explains the applicable law:

> “Where a homicide is perpetrated in the commission of another offense, and is for that reason murder, or murder in the first or other degrees, whether or not there is a specific intent to kill * * * an instruction defining the law applicable to such a state of facts may and should be given. An instruction as to a collateral offense should properly define and explain the other offense involved * * *.”

The trial court properly defined and explained the other offense involved. The instructions, when considered and read together, were not contradictory and clearly and adequately informed the jury of the applicable law. We find no error in them. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Affirmed.

GILLESPIE, P. J., and JONES, PATTERSON and INZER, JJ., concur.
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-19-0000018 11-APR-2019 10:33 AM
The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 provided the U.S. Department of the Treasury $9 billion for the 

Emergency Capital Investment Program (ECIP) to provide direct investments into Community Development 

Financial Institution (CDFI) and Minority Depository Institution (MDI) banks, credit unions and holding companies. 

These investments are designed to support the efforts of community financial institutions to, among other things, 

provide loans, grants, and forbearance for small and minority-owned businesses and consumers, especially in lowincome and financially underserved communities that struggled the most during the COVID-19 crisis.

These mission-driven financial institutions specialize in delivering responsible capital, credit and financial services 

to underserved communities. The investments made by Treasury are expected to be used for a range of 

community investments, including loans to low-income and minority borrowers and underserved small business, 

the development and preservation of affordable housing, and investments in community development projects.

Emergency Capital Investment Program Fact Sheet

Pennsylvania

 

For More Information: 

For Media Inquiries: 

For General Inquiries:

Please visit https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/cares/emergency-capital-investment-program

Please contact the U.S. Treasury Press Office at (202) 622-2960

Please email ecip@treasury.gov for additional information

Treasury has awarded institutions headquartered within Pennsylvania over

$66 million in ECIP investment funds. 

Institution Headquarters City Type Award Amount 

Asian Financial Corporation Philadelphia CDFI & MDI $ 66,069,000 

Hill District Federal Credit Union Pittsburgh CDFI & MDI $ 247,000 

Note: Headquarters City indicates institution headquarters location only. Institution's lending activity may go beyond identified city.
#### Nathaniel TERRY, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-162.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Sept. 27, 1972.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
AALEGAL 8179634959 09/20 '11 09:08 NO.294 01/02 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION A^vf^n^^^^^^^^ 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMIN'ISTRATION ,t'!iv^^\Vn-nA^ 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, 

Complamajit 

V. 

AMERICAN EAGLE AIRLINES, INC., 

Respondent 

FAA Civil Penalty 2008SW2]W9]P '' '•'*^ 

FAA Docket No. Not yet asisigned 

FDMS No. FAA-201 ].-029( 

Administrative Law Judge 

Hon. Richard C, Goodwin 

September 20, 20]] 

REQUEST TO WTTIiDRAW THE REQUEST FOR A HJJ:ARING 

AND THE ANSWER TO THE COMPLAINT 

Pursuant to §13.215, tlie Respondent, by counsel, Requests to "Witlidraw the Request for a 

Hearing and tlie AiDSwer to tlie Complaint canceling any need for a hearing set for tiiis matter. 

The basis of this motion is that the Administrator and Respondent. Uirougli counsel, have reached 

a settlement. 

Respectfully submitted the 20th day of September 20] L 

American Eagle Airlines, Inc. 

Bv: 

Francis C. Heil 

Senior Attorney for 

American Eagle Airlines 

P.O. 3ox6I96l6 

Mai) Drop 5675 

DFW Airport, TX 75261-9616 

Telephone: 202-496-5642 

Facsimile: 202-496-5660 
AALEGAL 8179634959 09/20 '11 09:09 NO.294 02/02 

CERTHi^lCATE OF SERVICE 

T hereby certify that today, September 20. 2011, I have sent by Facsimile and U.S. Mail 

tlie foregoing Motion to Wilhdra^! the Request for a Hearing aiid the Answer to fhe Complaint in 

the matter of FAA v. American Eagle Airlines, Inc., to the following: 

ONE COPY 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin 

Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation, Rm. EI2-320 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Telephone: 

Facsimile: 

202-366-2139 

202-366-7536 

Rena Price, Attorney 

Federal Aviation Admiriistration 

Office of the Regional Counsel (ASW-7) 

Southwest Region Headquarters 

2601 Meacham Blvd., Rm. 663 

Fort Worth, Texas 76137 

Telephone: 

Facsimile: 

817-222-5068 

817-222-5945 

ORICrNAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building, Suite 2W1000 

Facsimile: 202-493-5142 

isa Paparelli 

Paralegal for 

American Easle Airlines 

Telephone: SI7-967-1299 

Facsimile: 817-967-2937
NO T R EC OM M EN DE D F OR F UL L- TEX T P UB LIC AT ION F ile Nam e: 08a0229n.06 F iled: May 5, 2008 Nos. 08-5107/5108 UN ITED STA TES C OU RT OF AP P EA LS F OR THE SI XT H C IR CU IT
PAULG. HOUSE, P etitioner -Appellee/ Cross-A ppellan t,
v. RI CKY BE L L , Warden, Respondent-Appellan t/ Cross-A ppellee. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ON AP P E AL F ROM THE UN I TE D ST AT ES D I STR I CT CO UR T F OR THE EA STE RN DI STRI CT OF TEN

NESSEE M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

BEF OR E: M ER RI TT, NO RRIS, and SI LER , C ir c uitJudg e s. P ER CURIAM . Warden Ricky Be ll, repre sented by

th e Attorne y

Gene ral of the State of Te nn e s s e e , a

p p e a l s f r o m t h e c o n d i t i o n a l g r an t o f a w r i t o f h a b e a s c o r p u s , 2 8 U
. S
. C
. § 2 2 5 4 , to petitioner Paul G. House, who has bee n under se ntence of death since 1986. In addition to the assig nments of er

ror r aised by

responde nt, petitioner cross- appea ls the denial of ha beas r elief on the alleg ed misuse of fibe r evide nce by the prosec ution. As the date of convic tion confirms, this case ha s a long proce dural history , which we see no
rea son to recite he re. Suffice it to say that this court, sitti ng en banc , previously upheld the denia l of the writ in a closely

divided decision. Ho us e v . B e ll , 386 F.3d 668 ( 6th Cir. 2004) (en ba nc). The Supreme Court re verse d, howeve r. Ho us e v . B e ll , 547 U.S. 518 (2006 ). W e then r emande d the matter to the district court for further procee dings consistent with that opinion. Ho us e v . B e ll , 466Nos. 08-5107/5108

House v . Bell, W

arden

- 2 - F.3d 549 (6th Cir. 2006). The dist rict court g rante d a conditional writ vacating the conviction and sentenc e unless the State r etried pe titioner within 180 day s. Havi n g had the be nefit of the guidance provided by the Supreme Court, a s well as the extensive briefingand oral argument of the parties, we now aff irm the judg ment of the district cour t for the r easons se t forth in its memorandum opinion dated Dec ember 20, 2007. Given the e x tensive consideration that this case has re ceive d in the course of its twe nty -y ear history , a deta iled opinion by this court would serve no useful purpose and would only further delay resolution of this matter. Th e jud g me nt o f t

he dis tr ic t c ourt

is aff irm ed
.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5, the court has determined th a t

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________
No. 98-10230 Summary Calendar

_____________________

CURTIS JACKSON, JR.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

YAN TROKEL; LEW STERRETT JUSTICE CENTER MEDICAL DEPARTMENT,

Defendant-Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:97-CV-2922-R

_________________________________________________________________ October 27, 1998

Before JOLLY, SMITH, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Curtis Jackson, Jr., Texas state prisoner #97004495, appeals

from the district court’s dismissal of his civil rights suit

brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Jackson argues, as he did

for the first time in his objections to the magistrate judge’s

report and recommendation, that the defendants were deliber ately

indifferent to his serious medical needs. We have reviewed the

record and find no abuse of discretion by the district court. S ee

United States v. Riascos , 76 F.3d 93, 94 (5th Cir. 1996).2 A F F I R M E D.