alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
The Honorable Barbara S. Jones, of the United States District Court *

for the Southern District of New York, sitting by designation. 

09-0184-cr

USA v. Pagett

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT

SUMMARY ORDER 

RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1,

2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1.

WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN

ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON

ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL.

1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals

2 for the Second Circuit, held at the Daniel Patrick Moynihan

3 United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, in the City of

4 New York, on the 12 day of November, two thousand and ten. th

5

6 PRESENT: BARRINGTON D. PARKER,

7 RICHARD C. WESLEY,

8 Circuit Judges,

9 BARBARA S. JONES,

10 District Judge.

*

11

12 

13

14 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

15

16 Appellee,

17

18 -v.- 09-0184-cr

19

20 LARRY PAGETT, a/k/a LORENZO BLAISLE, a/k/a LESLIE PAGETT,

21 a/k/a BIZ,

22

23 Defendant-Appellant.

24 

25

26
2

1 FOR APPELLANT: GARY S. VILLANUEVA, Law Offices of Gary

2 Villanueva, New York, NY.

3

4 FOR APPELLEE: MORRIS J. FODEMAN, Assistant United

5 States Attorney (David C. James & Soumya

6 Dayananda, Assistant United States

7 Attorneys, of Counsel, on the brief), for

8 Loretta E. Lynch, United States Attorney,

9 Eastern District of New York, Brooklyn,

10 NY.

11

12 Appeal from the Eastern District of New York (Korman,

13 J.).

14

15 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED

16 AND DECREED that the judgment of the District Court just be

17 AFFIRMED. 

18 Appellant appeals from a judgment of the United States

19 District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Korman,

20 J.), which sentenced him to 110 months of imprisonment,

21 three years of supervised release, and a special assessment

22 of $100. This sentence was imposed on Appellant, a

23 previously convicted felon, after he plead guilty to

24 knowingly and intentionally possessing a firearm in

25 violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2). Appellant

26 seeks to have this sentence vacated and to have the case

27 remanded for resentencing. We assume the parties’

28 familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural

29 history, and the issues presented for review.
3

1 The sentence imposed by the District Court was neither

2 procedurally nor substantively erroneous. We have

3 considered Appellant’s arguments and find them to be wholly

4 without merit.

5 For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the District

6 Court is hereby AFFIRMED.

7

8 FOR THE COURT:

9 Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe, Clerk

10

11
#### BURKHALTER v. PENNSUCO AGGREGATES, INC., et al.

No. 39436.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 1970.

Certiorari denied without opinion.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>      5
<LEGEND>       THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION
               EXTRACTED FROM THE CONDENSED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS,
               THE CONDENSED BALANCE SHEET AND THE ACCOMPANYING NOTES
               TO THE CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN THE
               COMPANY'S FORM 10-K FOR THE TWELVE MONTH PERIOD ENDING
               DECEMBER 31, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
               REFERENCE TO SUCH.
</LEGEND>


<CAPTION>
<S>                                <C>

<MULTIPLIER>                             1,000
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                  DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                     JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                       DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           12-MOS
<CASH>                                   5,371
<SECURITIES>                                 0
<RECEIVABLES>                           28,567
<ALLOWANCES>                              (272)
<INVENTORY>                              1,204
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                        35,473
<PP&E>                                  31,941
<DEPRECIATION>                         (21,443)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          51,648
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                   52,160
<BONDS>                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                    5,100
<PREFERRED>                                  0
<COMMON>                                    54
<OTHER-SE>                              (6,669)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>            51,648
<SALES>                                 17,441
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                        17,441
<CGS>                                   23,500
<TOTAL-COSTS>                           23,500
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                         4,378
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                       1,555
<INCOME-PRETAX>                        (16,981)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                    (16,981)
<DISCONTINUED>                               0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                          2,047
<CHANGES>                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                           (16,981)
<EPS-BASIC>                           ($0.68)
<EPS-DILUTED>                           ($0.68)




</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)

In connection with this Report on Form 10-Q for the three and six months ended March 31, 2014, or the Report, of PennantPark
Floating Rate Capital Ltd., or the Registrant, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Arthur H. Penn, Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, that:



| | (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 Registrant.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                  
|------------------
|/s/ Arthur H. Penn
|Arthur H. Penn    
|May 8, 2014
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-06-00472-CR

William Monroe, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 331ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 993517, HONORABLE BOB PERKINS, JUDGE PRESIDING

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

William Monroe seeks to appeal from a judgment of conviction for aggravated sexual

assault of a child. The trial court has certified that Monroe waived the right of appeal. See Tex. R.

App. P. 25.2(a)(2); Monreal v. State, 99 S.W.3d 615, 622 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003); see also Blanco

v. State, 18 S.W.3d 218, 220 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000). 

The appeal is dismissed. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d).

__________________________________________

Bob Pemberton, Justice

Before Chief Justice Law, Justices Puryear and Pemberton

Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction

Filed: September 6, 2006

Do Not Publish
### SCPW-14-0001049
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI # I

MICKEY A. MADDOX, Petitioner,

vs. STATE OF HAWAI # I, Respondent.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (CAAP-14-0001108; CAAP-14-0001109; S.P.P. NO. 13-10004(3);

CR. NOS. 07-1-0139 and 09-1-0284)
ORDER DENYING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS ( B y : R e c k t e n w a l d , C
. J
. , N a k a y a m a , M c K e n n a , P o l l a c k , a n d W i l s o n , J J
. )



### Upon consideration of Petitioner Mickey A. Maddox’s “Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Immediate Release of Prisoner),” filed on August 11, 2014, the documents attached thereto and submitted in support thereof, and the record, it appears that Petitioner currently seeks relief in the Intermediate Court of Appeals in appeals that were consolidated under CAAP-14-0001108 and Petitioner presents no special reason for invoking the supreme court’s original jurisdiction. See Oili v. Chang, 57 Haw. 411, 412, 557 P.2d 787, 788 (1976). Therefore,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the application for writ of habeas corpus is denied. Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-14-0001049 02-FEB-2015 12:26 PM

### IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that all motions pending

in this original proceeding are dismissed.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai # i, February 2, 2015. /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack /s/ Michael D. Wilson

2
EXHIBIT
32.1

CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL

OFFICER
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 Report of Melanthios Acquisition Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended
September 30, 2013 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, William
Tay, 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/ William Tay

William
Tay, President, Secretary and

Principal
Financial Officer

Dated:
November 5, 2013
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Finance and Accounting Service Providing payment services for the U.S. Department of Defense

Search
Search

Search

              - 
              - 
              - 
              - 
              - 

-  Military Member		 
-  Retired Military & Annuitant		 
-  Civilian Employee		 
-  Contractor & Vendor		 

Homedebtandclaimsmilitarydebts

**866-912-6488 **Mon-Fri:7:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. ESTContact UsPrivacy Information

askDFAS

                        - Make a Payment
                        - Installment Payments
                        - Education Debt Information                            - Types of Education Debts
                          - Student Deferment
                          More
                        - Waivers and Remissions                            - Current or Former Military
                          - Retiree
                          - Annuitants
                          - Civilian Employees
                          - Former Spouse
                          - Completing Your Application
                          - Finance Officials - Waivers
                          - Finance Officials - Remissions
                          More
                        - Check Payment Status
                        - Update Mailing Address
                        - Travel Advance Debts
                        - Protesting Your Debt                            - Base Level Debt
                          - Non Base Level
                          More
                        - Payment in Arrears                            - Submitting a Claim
                          - Disability Severance Tax Refunds
                          More
                        - Correction of Records
                        - Bankruptcy
                        - Failure to Pay a Debt
                        - Frequently Asked Questions

### Stay Connected

Department of Defense     Department of Veterans Affairs     Military Employment Verification     Warrior Care Website     Defense Contract Mgmt Agency  DoD Forms     Department of State     Civilian Personnel Mgmt Service     DTS Travel Center     System for Award Mgmt (SAM)    Congressional/LegislationPersonnel Force Innovation     Freedom of Information Act     DFAS Hotline   Contact Us     Accessibility / Section 508    EEO / No Fear Act  

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Justice

###### Antitrust Division

                    Notice is hereby given that, on August 15, 2018, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301*et seq.*                     (“the Act”), 3D PDF Consortium, Inc. (“3D PDF”) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, Kamel Shaath (individual), Ottawa, CANADA; Owen Ambur (individual), Hilton Head, SC; and Rick Laxman (individual), Salt Lake City, UT, have been added as parties to this venture.                

No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and 3D PDF intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.

                    On March 27, 2012, 3D PDF filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on April 20, 2012 (77 FR 23754).                

                    The last notification was filed with the Department on May 22, 2018. A notice was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on June 19, 2018 (83 FR 28447).                

Suzanne Morris,

Chief, Premerger and Division Statistics Unit, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 2018-19073 Filed 8-31-18; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 4410-11-P
#### Commonwealth *v.*O’Gorman, Appellant.

Argued October 1, 1941.

Before Keller, P. J., Cunningham, Baldrige, Rhodes, Hirt and Kenworthey, JJ.

*Cletus M. Lyman,*with him *George A. Shutack,*for appellant.

*Albert E. Eeimbach,*District Attorney, for appellee.

*554November 17, 1941:

Opinion by

Baldrige, J.,

The appellant was convicted of failure to support his child born out of wedlock and was sentenced to pay $2.50 per week for its support and maintenance. The prosecution was brought under section 732 of the Act of June 24, 1939, P. L. 872, 18 PS §4732, which provides that all prosecutions, with certain exceptions with which we are not here concerned, “must be brought within two (2) years of the birth of the child.”

The child in question was born June 11, 1938. Information was filed before a justice of the peace June 7, 1940, and the bill of indictment was returned by the grand jury October 8, 1940. The appellant takes the position that as the indictment was returned more than two years after the birth of the child the judgment entered against him is illegal. He relies chiefly on *Commonwealth v. Haas,*57 Pa. 443, where there was under consideration section 77 of the Act of March 31, 1860, P. L. 427, 19 PS §211, which provides that “...... all indictments and prosecutions ...... for all misdemeanors, perjury excepted, shall be brought or exhibited within two years next after such ...... misdemeanor shall have been committed.” Mr. Justice Sharswood, speaking for the court, in the course of his opinion stated that prosecution and indictment in that statute are used synonomously and he significantly points out that while an indictment is a prosecution, the word prosecution has a larger signification than indictment. It will be noted that in section 77 not only a prosecution but an indictment shall be “brought or exhibited within two years.” Section 732 of the Act of 1939, supra, is entirely silent as to when an indictment must be found. It provides only that the prosecution must be commenced within two years, but does not require that an indictment, which is a step in a prosecution toward final judgment, should be found within that period.

*555This prosecution was instituted upon a complaint made under oath or affirmation of the parent of the child, and the swearing out of a warrant. When that was done the prosecution had been brought, or commenced.

In 22 C. J. S. 364, §234, it is stated: “The finding of an indictment or the filing of an information ordinarily under the various statutes is a sufficient commencement of a prosecution to prevent the running of the statute of limitations,......”

We are of the opinion that the statute of limitations does not operate in favor of this defendant as the prosecution, as provided in the statute, was started within two years of the birth of the child.

Judgment of the court below is affirmed.
V

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4012

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a certificate of documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the coastwise

trade for the vessel SEA BANDIT.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 10, 1994

Mr. SHAW introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Merchant Marine and Fisheries

A BILL

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a

certificate of documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the coastwise trade for the vessel

SEA BANDIT.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That notwithstanding section 27 of the Merchant Marine

4 Act, 1920 (46 App. U.S.C. 883), the Act of June 19, 1886

5 (46 App. U.S.C. 289), and section 12106 of title 46,

6 United States Code, the Secretary of Transportation may

7 issue a certificate of documentation with appropriate en8 dorsement for employment in the coastwise trade for the
2

•HR 4012 IH

1 vessel SEA BANDIT (State of Florida vessel registration

2 number 6605GJ).

Æ
I

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3982

Entitled the ‘‘Ocean Radioactive Dumping Ban Act of 1994’’.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 8, 1994

Mr. WELDON (for himself and Mr. ORTIZ) introduced the following bill; which

was referred to the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries

A BILL

Entitled the ‘‘Ocean Radioactive Dumping Ban Act of 1994’’.

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 The Act may be cited as the ‘‘Ocean Radioactive

5 Dumping Ban Act of 1994’’.

6 SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO THE OCEAN DUMPING ACT.

7 Title I of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanc8 tuaries Act of 1972 (Public Law 92–532) is amended—

9 (1) in section 3, by—

10 (A) striking paragraph (j);

11 (B) redesignating the following paragraphs

12 accordingly; and
2

HR 3982 IH

1 (C) altering any reference to those redesig2 nated paragraphs;

3 (2) in section 102(a), by striking ‘‘high-level’’

4 before ‘‘radioactive waste’’; and

5 (3) in section 104, by striking subsection (i).

Æ
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 168 (Wednesday, August 29, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 44040]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-18714]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER18-2264-000]


Macquarie Energy Trading LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial 
Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of 
Macquarie Energy Trading LLC`s application for market-based rate 
authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such 
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR 
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of 
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, 
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's 
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone 
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that 
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with 
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of 
liability, is September 12, 2018.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet 
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an 
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the 
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the 
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in 
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in 
the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the 
Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an 
eSubscription link on the website that enables subscribers to receive 
email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). 
For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#9ddbd8cfded2f3f1f4f3f8cee8ededf2efe9ddfbf8effeb3faf2eb"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="04424156474b6a686d6a61577174746b767044626176672a636b72">[email protected]</span></a>. or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: August 23, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-18714 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>