alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Herman JENKINS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-766.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

March 19, 1971.

Rehearing Denied May 27, 1971.

Walter R. Talley, Public Defender, Bra-denton, for appellant.

*488Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Warren H. Petersen, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lakeland, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Everett v. State, Fla.App.1964, 161 So.2d 714.

PIERCE, C. J., and HOBSON and Mc-NULTY, JJ., concur.
Re: Duration of the Public Comment Period in Matter No. R207011, 

Trade Regulation Rule on Unfair or Deceptive Fees

The Commission has received several requests seeking an extension of the period for public 

comment on its notice of proposed rulemaking in Matter No. R207011, Trade Regulation Rule on Unfair 

or Deceptive Fees. Those requesting an extension have stated they desire additional time to provide 

information. 

Pursuant to Section 18 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 57a, also known as the Magnuson-Moss 

Warranty Federal Trade Commission Improvements Act, which authorizes the FTC to prescribe rules 

with respect to unfair or deceptive fees, the Commission voted to authorize the publication of its NPRM 

on October 6, 2023. Thereafter, on October 11, 2023, the NPRM was announced and made publicly 

available on the Commission’s website. The NPRM was subsequently published in the Federal Register 

on November 9, 2023, with a sixty-day comment period that ends on January 8, 2024. The public will 

thus have had 60 days between the proposal’s publication and the close of the comment period. While 

this period affords the public a meaningful opportunity to provide the Commission with comments 

regarding its rulemaking proposal, the Commission will extend the period for public comment on its 

NPRM an additional 30 days to February 7, 2024. 

The Commission has appreciated its ongoing engagement with stakeholders on issues relating to 

unfair or deceptive fees. The Commission will continue to welcome public comment on its NPRM 

through the extended comment period, which will now close on February 7, 2024. 

By the Commission, 

April Tabor 

Secretary

SEAL:

ISSUED: December 19, 2023
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-50596

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JEREMIAH TAVAREZ RAMON,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 7:15-CR-204-2

Before DENNIS, GRAVES, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jeremiah Tavarez Ramon, federal prisoner # 57879-380, moves this 

court to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal from the denial of his motion 

for judicial notice and petition for official criminal charges that he filed in his 

28 U.S.C. § 2255 proceedings. By moving to proceed IFP, Ramon challenges 

the district court’s certification that his appeal is not taken in good faith. See 

Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997). As we do not have 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

October 19, 2018

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 17-50596 Document: 00514689804 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/19/2018
No. 17-50596

2

jurisdiction to review the interlocutory order denying Ramon’s motion for 

judicial notice and petition for official criminal charges, see Askanase v. 

Livingwell, Inc., 981 F.2d 807, 809-10 (5th Cir. 1993), his appeal is 

DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION. His motion to proceed IFP on 

appeal is DENIED. 

 Case: 17-50596 Document: 00514689804 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/19/2018
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 quarterly report of Signature Group Holdings, Inc. (the “Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned in the capacity and on the date 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 his knowledge:





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





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




Dated this 1st of July, 2011.




/s/ Kyle RossKyle RossExecutive Vice President and Interim Chief Financial Officer
`[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 808 Engrossed in House (EH)]

103d CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 808

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

                  For the relief of James B. Stanley.





103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                               H. R. 808

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT


 
                  For the relief of James B. Stanley.

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

SECTION 1. APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS.

    (a) Payment.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall pay, out of any 
money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, $400,577 to James B. 
Stanley.
    (b) Basis.--The payment required by subsection (a) shall be to 
compensate James B. Stanley for the physical, psychological, and 
economic injuries sustained by him as a result of the administration to 
him, without his knowledge, of lysergic acid diethylamide by United 
States Army personnel in 1958.

SEC. 2. SATISFACTION OF CLAIMS.

    The payment made pursuant to section 1(a) shall be in full 
satisfaction of all claims James B. Stanley may have against the United 
States for--
            (1) the injuries received by him as described in section 1; 
        and
            (2) for any injuries received by him subsequent to his 
        discharge from the United States Army that are the result of 
        the injuries described in section 1.

SEC. 3. INELIGIBILITY FOR ADDITIONAL BENEFITS.

    James B. Stanley shall not be eligible for any compensation or 
benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs or the Department of 
Defense for any injury received by him as described in section 1.

SEC. 4. LIMITATION OF ATTORNEYS' OR AGENTS' FEES.

    It shall be unlawful for an amount of more than 10 per centum of 
the amount paid pursuant to section 1 to be paid to or received by any 
attorney or agent of James B. Stanley for any service rendered in 
connection with the payment made by this Act. Any person who violates 
this section shall be guilty of an infraction and shall be subject to a 
fine in the amount provided in title 18, United States Code.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 21, 1993.

            Attest:






                                                                 Clerk.`
#### Gregory P. POUK, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 77-1670.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 21, 1978.

Jack 0. Johnson, Public Defender, and Paul C. Helm, Asst. Public Defender, Bar-tow, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and William I. Munsey, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The only point raised by appellant in this appeal which has merit is whether, as appellant contends, the trial court erred in failing to give his requested instruction on justifiable homicide. We agree with his contention and reverse.

The state of Florida charged appellant Gregory P. Pouk with second-degree murder in violation of Section 782.04(2), Florida Statutes. He pled not guilty, and after trial a jury found him guilty as charged. The trial judge sentenced appellant to serve five years in prison and suspended the last two years placing appellant on probation for that time.

The Supreme Court of Florida has held that when a trial court gives an instruction on manslaughter, as the court did here, it must also give an instruction on justifiable homicide and excusable homicide. *Hedges v. State,*172 So.2d 824 (Fla.1965); *see, also, Whitehead v. State,*245 So.2d 94 (Fla. 2d *930DCA 1971); *Green v. State,*244 So.2d 167 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971). This is so even where there is no evidence to support a finding of justifiable or excusable homicide because manslaughter cannot be adequately defined without such an instruction. *Hedges v. State, supra.*

The state contends that appellant did not request a justifiable homicide instruction. We have reviewed the record and find that it does not support the state’s argument. Accordingly, we remand the case for a new trial.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

BOARDMAN, C. J., and OTT and DAN-AHY, JJ., concur.
#### Dick HAYES et al., Appellants, v. METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, a political subdivision, et al., Appellees.

No. 72-1152.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Feb. 26, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
-I 

## 6wo-q.*9F\).. 6wo-D.. g:fgq -t\,. 6WO-E.............

6WO-P 6WO-S 

# PuebIo

P.O. Box1846'Taos.

New Mexico'87571 0t t06/t I Miguel I. Flores Director, Water Quality Protection

Division USEPA, Region 6 (6WQ) 1445 Ross Avenue. Suite 1200 Dallas, Texas 75202 RE: National Pollutant Discharge

Elimination

System (NPDES)

General Permit for Point Source Discharges

from Application

of Pesticides

(PGP) To Whom

it May Concem: The Pueblo ofTaos has examined

the proposed National Pollutant Discharge

Elimination

System (NPDES)

General Permit for Point Source Discharges

from Application

ofPesticides

(PGP). Since 2006, Taos Pueblo has had U.S. E.P.A.

approved Water Qualif Standards,

which apply

to all surface

waters in and around the exterior

boundaries

of Taos Pueblo. Pursuant to section

404 and5 l8 ofthe Clean Water Act, Taos

Pueblo is the certifying

agency for all such

activities that occur

on Taos Pueblo Lands. As Taos Pueblo includes lands at the bottom

ofthe Rio Pueblo

deTaos Watershed,

where the riverjoins the Rio Grande,

Taos Pueblo Water QualityStandards

hould be considered

in the development

and promulgation

for any NPDES

Permit in the Rio Pueblo

de Taos Watershed.

In the case

of this National Pollutant Discharge

Elimination

System (NPDES)

General Permit for Point Source Discharges

from Application

of Pesticides

(PGP), Taos Pueblo is submitting

the following

comments

for inclusion

in the final draft permit.

o Copies

ofall Notifications,

associated

analy'tical

data, and writtenreports

for actions

covered under this permit

occurring

on Taos Pueblo lands shall be provided

to theTaosPueblo Governor's

Office aswell as

theTaos Pueblo Environmental

Office at the same

timetheyare provided to the U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency. Any correspondence between applicant and EPA related

to conective

action, enforcement,

monitoring,

or adverse

incident writtenr€ports should likewise be routed to Taos Pueblo. All requested

materials shall be sent to: Governor, Taos Pueblo, P.O. Box 1846,

Taos, NM, 87571

and Program Manager,

Taos Pueblo Environmental

Office Program

Manager,

same address. The Pueblo

ofTaos reserves

the right to certifo

this permit

pending a final draft. Ifyou need further information

please feel free to contact

he Pueblo

ofTaos Environmental

Program Manager Robert Gomez or Environmental

Scientist, Jeff Ogburn at (575) 751-4601

. Sincerely, Nelson J. Cord Govemor - Ta Mr. Brent

Larsen, USEPA, Region 6 (6WQ-PP) Mr. Randy

Gee, OEJTA, USEPA Region 6 

# EPA-t5f$lv'if II JAII -6 PH RTCEIVE

O OFcEPA-6!VC-lilX

0FC 

# Taos
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 17

- 50596 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
JEREMIAH TAVAREZ RAMON , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 7:15

- CR

- 204

- 2

Before DENNIS, GRAVES, and COSTA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
Jeremiah Tavarez Ramon, federal prisoner # 57879

- 380, moves this court to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal from the denial of his motion for judicial notice and petition for official criminal charges that he filed in his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 proceedings. By moving to proceed IFP, Ramon challenges the district court’s certification that his appeal is not taken in good faith. See Baugh v. Taylor , 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997). As we do not have

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED October 19, 2018

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 17-50596 Document: 00514689804 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/19/2018No. 17

- 50596

2 jurisdiction to review the i nterlocutory order denying Ramon ’s motion for judicial notice and petition for official criminal charges, see Askanase v. Livingwell, Inc. , 981 F.2d 807, 809

- 10 (5th Cir. 1993), h is appeal is DISMISSED FOR LA CK OF JURISDICTION. His motion to proceed IFP on appeal is DENIED. Case: 17-50596 Document: 00514689804 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/19/2018
## IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA

June 14, 2024 SC-2023-0460 Ex parte Benjamin Young. PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS (In re: Benjamin Young v. Stateof Alabama) (Colbert Circuit Court: CC-16-339.60; Criminal Appeals: CR21-0393). CERTIFICATE OF JUDGMENT WHEREAS, the petition for writ of certiorari in the above referenced cause has been duly submitted and considered by the Supreme Court of Alabama and the judgment indicated below was entered in this cause on June 14, 2024: Writ Denied. No Opinion. Bryan, J. -- Parker, C.J., and Shaw, Wise, Sellers, Mendheim, Stewart, Mitchell, and Cook, JJ., concur. NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to Rule 41, Ala. R. App. P., IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this Court's judgment in this cause is certified on this date. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, unless otherwise ordered by this Court or agreed upon by the parties, the costs of this cause are hereby taxed as provided by Rule 35, Ala. R. App. P.

I, Megan B. Rhodebeck, certify that this is the record of the judgment of the Court, witness my hand and seal.

Clerk, Supreme Court of Alabama
EXHIBIT 32





Certification
of Periodic Report by the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer


Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350


As
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002




Pursuant
to, and for purposes only of, 18 U.S.C. § 1350, I, Dennis J. Mouras, Chief
Executive Officer and acting principal financial officer of CareAdvantage, Inc.
(the “Company”), hereby certify that (i) the Annual Report of the Company on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and (ii)
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date:
      March 31, 2010
            /s/ Dennis J. MourasChief
      Executive Officer and acting Principal Financial Officer
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### APPEAL 

### O F 

### F LORIDA 

### S ECOND 

### D ISTRICT

EDWARD STODDARD, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. No. 2D23-1532 September 27, 2023 Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Pasco County; Gregory G. Groger, Judge. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. CASANUEVA, SILBERMAN, and LaROSE, JJ., Concur. Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 122 (Monday, June 25, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 29556]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-13553]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding 
Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for 
approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 
1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part 225), and all other 
applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company 
and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the 
power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the 
banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, 
including the companies listed below.
    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings 
required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the 
Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The applications will also be available 
for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested 
persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated 
in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the 
acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether 
the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards 
in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, 
nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these 
applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the 
offices of the Board of Governors not later than July 16, 2018.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis (Mark A. Rauzi, Vice 
President), 90 Hennepin Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55480-0291:
    1. Border Bancshares, Inc., Greenbush, Minnesota; to acquire Union 
Bancshares, Inc., Fargo, North Dakota, and thereby indirectly acquire 
Union State Bank of Fargo, Fargo, North Dakota.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, June 20, 2018.
Ann Misback,
Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2018-13553 Filed 6-22-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
#### ST. JOE PAPER COMPANY, a Florida corporation, Appellant, v. Dan F. MICKLER et al., Appellees.

No. M-345.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Oct. 19, 1971.

Kent, Durden & Kent, Jacksonville, for appellant.

Willard Howatt, Harold M. Wayne, St. Augustine, and Marks, Gray, Yates, Con-roy & Gibbs, Jacksonville, for appellees.

ORDER ON MANDATE

PER CURIAM.

Whereas, the judgment and decision of this court in the above case was filed November 17, 1970, and reported in 241 So.2d 415, wherein the judgment of the Circuit Court for St. Johns County was affirmed,

Whereas, this decision and judgment was reviewed by the Supreme Court of Florida by certiorari proceedings and this Court’s judgment and decision was quashed,

Whereas, the Mandate of the Supreme Court of Florida has been filed with this court, therefore,

It is ordered that the judgment and opinion of this court filed November 17, 1970, be set aside and held for naught and the opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida filed July 21, 1971, 252 So.2d 225, be adopted as this court’s opinion and judgment and same shall accompany the mandate of this court to the Circuit Court for St. Johns County, with directions to enter a judgment extending “agricultural zoning” to the land involved.

SPECTOR, C. J., and CARROLL, DONALD K., and WIGGINTON, JJ, concur.
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the
Registration Statement (Form S-8 Registration No. 333-93403)
pertaining to the 1999 Long-Term Incentive Plan and Stock
Option Agreement For Paul M. Jennings of our current report
dated February 18, 2000 with respect to the financial
statements of ASD Systems, Inc. for the years ended December
31, 1999 and 1998 and August 5, 1999 (except for Note 11, as
to which the date is August 23, 1999) with respect to the
financial statements of ASD Partners, Ltd. for the period
October 14, 1997 to December 31, 1997, included in the
Annual Report (Form 10K) for the year ended December 31,
1999.

                              /s/ Ernst & Young LLP



Dallas, Texas
October 31, 2000
#### Jo Ann FULLER v. C. J. UNDERWOOD et ux.

No. 61917.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 28, 1978.

In re: C. J. Underwood and Janey Lou Underwood, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit. Parish of Ouachita. 355 So.2d 62.

Denied.
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 32


                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 Multi-Media Tutorial Services, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended February 29, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report") on the date hereof, I, Barry
Reichman, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, to my best
knowledge and belief, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 certify that:

     (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d));; and

     (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
materially respects, the consolidated financial condition of the Company as of
the dates presented and consolidated result of operations of the Company for the
period presented.

Date: July 7, 2005
                                        By: /s/ Barry Reichman
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Chief Executive Officer,
                                            Chief Financial Officer and Director

This certificate has been furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
#### Cavell GALLOWAY v. EMPLOYERS MUTUAL OF WAUSAU et al.

No. 54396.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 1, 1974.

In re: Employers Mutual of Wausau, Jack A. Wilson, Luther J. Bowers and Walter Morton applying for certiorari or writ of review to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Parish of Jefferson. 286 So.2d 676.

Application denied; under the facts found by the court of appeal, there is no error in their judgment.

SUMMERS, J., is of the opinion the writ should be granted.

MARCUS, J., is of the opinion the writ should be granted.