alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Submitted May 9, 2019 *

Decided May 13, 2019

Before

J OEL M. FLAUM, Circuit Judge

DAVID F. HAMILTON, Circuit Judge

MICHAEL Y. SCUDDER, Circuit Judge

No. 17

‐ 2942

KENDALL LEE HARLSON,

Plaintiff

‐ Appellant

,

v

.

BRANDON KENNEDY McKALLIP,

Defendant

‐ Appellee

. Appeal from the United States District

Court for the Southern District of Indiana,

Indianapolis Division.

No. 1:17

‐ cv

‐ 01852

‐ RLY

‐ MPB

Richard L. Young,

J udge

.

O R D E R

Kendall Harlson sued Brandon McKallip under the Hate Crimes Act, 18 U.S.C.

§ 249, alleging that McKallip trespassed on his property; verbally threatened him; and

struck him with rocks, causing serious bodily injury. The district court screened the

complaint, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), and concluded that it lacked subject

‐ matter

jurisdiction over Harlson’s claims because he did not invoke diversity jurisdiction and

* The defendant was not served with process in the district court and is not

participating in this appeal. We have agreed to decide the case without oral argument

because the appeal is frivolous. F ED

. R. A PP

. P. 34(a)(2)(A). NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited onl y in accordance with Fed. R. A pp

. P. 32.1No. 17

‐ 2942 Page 2

no private civil claim exists under the Hate Crimes Act. The court ordered Harlson to

show cause why the complaint should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Harlson

responded that his claim was for attempted murder and that McKallip should be held

responsible for the substantial injuries that his violent acts caused. The district court

dismissed the complaint for lack of subject

‐ matter jurisdiction, adding that any criminal

charges had to be brought by the State, and not in a civil case.

Harlson’s appellate brief recounts the factual circumstances underlying his suit

and generally disputes the district court’s decision, which he reads as wrongly

exculpating McKallip. But the district court ruled only that Harlson cannot sue

McKallip for his conduct in federal court. Federal courts, unlike state courts, may decide

civil cases only if there is a sound basis for federal jurisdiction, such as when the parties

are citizens of different states, see 28 U.S.C. § 1332, or the suit presents a federal

question, see id. § 1331. No grant of federal subject

‐ matter jurisdiction applies here.

Harlson alleged that both he and McKallip are citizens of Indiana, so the district court

did not have diversity jurisdiction. And federal criminal statutes do not create private

civil claims. C ent. Bank of Denver, N.A. v. First Interstate Bank of Denver, N.A.

, 511 U.S.

164, 190–91 (1994). Thus, Harlson may not bring this suit against McKallip in federal

court.

AFFIRMED
Order entered December 31, 2021

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-21-01014-CV

IN RE ROBERT B. READ, JR., Relator

Original Proceeding from the 366th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 366-81170-06

ORDER

Before Justices Osborne, Pedersen, III, and Goldstein

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DENY relator’s petition for 

writ of mandamus. We DENY AS MOOT his motion seeking leave to file his 

petition for writ of mandamus.

/s/ BILL PEDERSEN, III

JUSTICE
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





Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, the undersigned, Donghao Yang, Chief Financial Officer of Synutra International, Inc. (the “Registrant”), hereby certifies, to his knowledge, that the Registrant’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2010 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.





Date: November 4, 2010
/s/ Donghao YangName: Donghao YangTitle: Chief Financial Officer




A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





The foregoing certification is being furnished with the Registrant’s Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and it is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Registrant, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.
(a)  A
        review of Toyota Motor Credit Corporation’s activities and of its performance under the Sale and Servicing Agreement, dated as of April 13, 2022 (the “Sale and Servicing Agreement”), among Toyota Auto Finance Receivables LLC, as seller, Toyota
        Motor Credit Corporation, as servicer (in such capacity, the “Servicer”) and sponsor, and Toyota Auto Receivables 2022-B Owner Trust, as issuer, during the year ended December 31, 2023 has been made under my supervision.
  (b)  To



        the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Sale and Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout the aforementioned period.
    /s/ James Schofield
EXHIBIT 31.1





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d)





I, Barrett E. Green, certify that:





1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Entergy Texas Restoration Funding II, LLC (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);





2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;





3.  Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;





4.  I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicer, and based on my knowledge and the compliance review conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement in all material respects; and





5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.





In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: The Bank of New York Mellon, as Indenture Trustee.





---




Date:  March 24, 2023








By /s/ Barrett E. Green


Name:  Barrett E. Green


Title:   Vice President and Treasurer


of Entergy Texas, Inc., as Servicer


(Senior officer in charge of the servicing function)
|   | 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. |
|--------|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| August 14, 2009 |   | /s/ Jeffrey O. Nyweide |
|---------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------|
|                      |   | Name:                                 | Jeffrey O. Nyweide |
|                      |   | Title:                                | Chief Financial Officer, Executive Vice |
|                      |   |                                  | President – Corporate Development, and |
|                      |   |                                  | Secretary (Principal Financial Officer and |
|                      |   |                                  | Principal Accounting Officer) |

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-6054

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

RONALD SCOTT MARTIN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Salisbury. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr.,

District Judge. (CR-92-236-S, CA-96-196-4)

Submitted: April 16, 1998 Decided: May 1, 1998

Before WILKINS and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ronald Scott Martin, Appellant Pro Se. John Warren Stone, Jr.,

Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order denying his

motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1994) (current version at 28

U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997)). We have reviewed the

record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United

States v. Martin, Nos. CR-92-236-S; CA-96-196-4 (M.D.N.C. Dec. 31,

1997). See Lindh v. Murphy, 521 U.S. ___, 1997 WL 338568 (U.S. June

23, 1997) (No. 96-6298). 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.

AFFIRMED
8:30 a.m. Call to Order - Roll Call - Welcome

Barbara Grove, Chair

8:40 a.m. FGIS Program Updates

Arthur Neal, Deputy Administrator

Denise Ruggles, Executive Program Analyst

Karla Whalen, Director, Quality Assurance & Compliance Division

Charles Parr, Acting Director, Field Management Division

Byron Reilly, Director, International Affairs Division

Dr. Ed Jhee, Director, Technology and Science Division

10:00 a.m. Break

10:15 a.m. Discuss Industry Issues:

• FGIS User Fees & Budget

• Lab Scales

• Vessel Fumigation Policy

• Data Standards

GIAC

11:30 a.m. Lunch

1:00 p.m. Discuss Industry Issues:

• FGIS User Fees & Budget

• Lab Scales

• Vessel Fumigation Policy

• Data Standards

GIAC

3:45 p.m. Public Comments

(If allotted time is not fully utilized, the GIAC will resume the agenda 

after the last public comment)

4:30 p.m. Wrap-up Discussions on Industry Issues

GIAC

5:00 p.m. Adjourn

Barbara Grove

Wednesday 

August 30th

August 30 - 31, 2023 - National Grain Center - Kansas City, Missouri

Hybrid & Onsite - All times reflect Central Time
8:30 a.m. Call to Order 

Barbara Grove

8:40 a.m. Public Comments

(If allotted time is not fully utilized, the GIAC will resume the agenda 

after the last public comment)

9:00 a.m. Discuss Recommendations

Barbara Grove

10:00 a.m. Finalize Recommendations

Barbara Grove

10:45 a.m. Break

11:00 a.m. Officer Elections

GIAC

11:30 a.m. Discuss Agenda Items for Next Meeting

Barbara Grove

11:45 a.m. Closing Remarks

Arthur Neal

Barbara Grove

12:00 p.m. Meeting Adjourns

Thursday 

August 31st

August 30 - 31, 2023 - National Grain Center - Kansas City, Missouri

Hybrid & Onsite - All times reflect Central Time
June 4, 2015

1

Amendment for Exemption No. 11238 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2014-0719 

Registered Owner Name:

San Diego Gas & Electric Company

Registered Owner Address:

8316 Century Park Court

San Diego CA 92123

Attn: Dallas Cormier, CP52E

Aircraft Description:

Quadcopter

Aircraft Serial Number:

W13DCD06030300

Aircraft Builder:

DJI

Year Manufactured:

2015

Aircraft Model Designation:

Inspire

Engine Model:

DJI3510

Registered Owner Name:

San Diego Gas & Electric Company

Registered Owner Address:

8316 Century Park Court

San Diego CA 92123

Attn: Dallas Cormier, CP52E

Aircraft Description:

Octocopter

Aircraft Serial Number:

03P0011144

Aircraft Builder:

DJI.

Year Manufactured:

2015

Aircraft Model Designation:

Spreading Wings S Models

Engine Model:

DJI4114PRO

San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E) received Exemption No. 11238 on March 26, 

2015 for the InstantEye Mk-2 Gen2 and amendment approval on May 7, 2015 for Pulse 

Aerospace and PrecisionHawk.

SDG&E is requesting this amendment to include additional Unmanned Aircraft models from DJI. 

See above, full explanation of Unmanned Aircraft we wish to include in our exemption. DJI has 

already received multiple approvals for Section 333, such as Exemption No. 11278, 11225, and 

S11252. 

There will be no change in the condition and reasons relative to public interest and safety 

that were the basis for granting the original exemption. None of our operations would 

change; we are just requesting to add additional Unmanned Aircraft to our exemption for 

greater flexibility.
U. S. Department of Agriculture

Agricultural Marketing Service

NOTICE OF SALE OF COTTON

FOR RELEASE AT 4:00 P.M. CT January 7, 2020

USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service today announced the sale of Cotton. The cotton bales were sold under 

Invitation 2020U0020 dated January 6, 2020.

Invitation 2020U0020

Catalog 

Lot No. Catalog Location Purchaser Pounds Sold 

Price Sold 

(per Pound) CCC Revenue 

5 GRENADA, MS ECOM USA 18,814 0.6180 $ 11,627.05 

6 GRENADA, MS ECOM USA 8,300 0.6520 $ 5,411.60 

10 WALNUT HILL, FL ALLENBERG COTTON CO. 3,103 0.1885 $ 584.92 

30,217 $ 17,623.57
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-7823
OMAR AL-MUWWAKIL, Plaintiff - Appellant, versusOFFICER PUTMAN, Greensville Correctional Center; MEDICAL STAFF, Greensville Correctional Center; GREENSVILLE CORRECTIONAL CENTER; M. A. TIDWELL, B-Unit Warden; JOHN M. JABE, Chief Warden, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca B. Smith, District Judge. (CA-94-1193-2) Submitted: February 7, 1996 Decided: February 28, 1996 Before MURNAGHAN and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Omar Al-Muwwakil, Appellant Pro Se. Jill Theresa Bowers, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Al-Muwwakil v. Putman , No. CA-94-1193-2 (E.D. Va. Oct. 23, 1995). 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.

AFFIRMED
391 A.2d 697

#### Commonwealth v. Leslie E. Ross, Appellant.

Submitted March 20, 1978.

Paul Messing, Assistant Defender, and Benjamin Lerner, Defender, for appellant; Mark E. Gottlieb, Assistant District Attorney, and Edward G. Rendell, District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Judgment of sentence affirmed.

JACOBS, P. J., and HOFFMAN and SPAETH, JJ., dissent.

*628See, *Commonwealth v. Holmes,*248 Pa.Super. 552, 558, 375 A.2d 379, 382 (1977); *Commonwealth v. Jones,*250 Pa.Super. 116, 378 A.2d 481, 483 (1977).
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

Sixth Appellate District

State of Texas

MIKEL EUGENE HALL, JR.,

Appellant

v. NO. 06-15-00053-CR

 Trial Court #2013-F-00107

STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

SECOND MOTION FOR EXTENSION

OF TIME TO FILE APPELLANT’S BRIEF

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:

COMES NOW Mikel Eugene Hall, Jr., Appellant, by and through his

below named Attorney and pursuant to Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure,

hereby requests an extension of the time period for the filing of the Appellant’s

Brief and in support of same would show the Court as follows:

I.

A. This case is pending from the 5th Judicial District Court of Cass County,

Texas. The date of the Judgment is March 11, 2015, with sentence being

imposed by the trial court on March 11, 2015.

B. The case was styled, “State of Texas v. Mikel Eugene Hall, Jr., Cause No.

2013F00107, Count I and Count II.

1

ACCEPTED

06-15-00053-CR

SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS

TEXARKANA, TEXAS

9/15/2015 10:24:39 AM

DEBBIE AUTREY

CLERK

 FILED IN 6th COURT OF APPEALS TEXARKANA, TEXAS 9/15/2015 10:24:39 AM DEBBIE AUTREY Clerk
C. Appellant was convicted of the offense of Indecency with Child and

Sexual Assault of child.

D. Punishment was assessed by the trial court at 15 years in the

Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.

E. The Appellant’s Brief is due to be filed September 10, 2015.

F. Appellant requests an extension of the filing of Appellant’s Brief of five

days, making the Appellant’s Brief due on September 15, 2015.

G. Appellant’s attorney has been diligent in researching and preparing the

Appellant’s brief for the Court however, due to counsel contracting a

stomach virus,Appellant’s counsel has hadinsufficient time to complete

Appellant’s brief.

H. There has been one previous requests for extensions in this cause.

II.

Appellant’s attorney has been diligent in pursuing this appeal and is not

seeking this extension for the purpose of delay.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, on the basis of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure,

Appellant’s attorney respectfully requests this Court to grant the Motion for

Extension of Time for the filing of Appellant’s Brief.

2
Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Alwin A. Smith 

Alwin A. Smith

TBN: 18532200

al@alwinsmith.com

602 Pine Street

Texarkana, Texas 75501

903/792-1608

903/792-0899 Fax

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

This is to certify that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing

Motion for Extension of Time to File Appellant’s Brief has been forwarded to

Ms.Courtney Shelton, 604 North Highway8, Linden,Texas 75563, on this the

15th day of September 2015 by U.S. Mail.

/s/ Alwin A. Smith 

Alwin A. Smith

3
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14**  **- 4351** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. SENITA BIRT DILL , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina , at Asheville
. Martin K. Reidinger , District Judge. ( 1:12

- cr - 00105

- MR

- DLH

- 1 )

Submitted : December 18, 2014 Decided: January 14, 2015

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and AGEE , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
. G. Ryan Willis, Drew Nelson, WILLIS JOHNSON & NELSON, PLLC, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. Anne M. Tompkins, United States Attorney, Don Gast , Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished op inions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Senita Birt Dill pled guilty to a false claims conspiracy , in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 286 (2012) , access device fraud , in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1029(a)(5) (2012) , and aggravated identity th eft , in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028A (2012) , based on her fraudulent tax

- filing scheme. On appeal , she raises two claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel, asserting that her attorney was ineffective by: (1) conceding a winning argument concern ing the Government’s untimely objections to the presentence report (“PSR”) ; and (2) failing to seek a continuance of the sentencing hearing once the trial court decided to consider the Government’s untimely objections to the PSR.
W e decline to reach Dill’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. Unless an attorney’s ineffectiveness conclusively appears on the face of the record, ineffective assistance claims are not generally addressed on direct appeal. United States v. Benton , 523 F.3d 424, 435 (4th Cir. 2008). Instead, such claims should be raised in a motion brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012), in order to permit sufficient development of the record. United States v. Baptiste , 596 F.3d 214, 216 n.1 (4th Cir. 2010). Because there is no con clusive evidence of ineffective assistance of counsel3 on the face of the record, we conclude that these claims should be raised, if at all, in a § 2255 motion. Thus, we affirm the criminal judgment
. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
Document

AMENDMENT TO THE
AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT




    This Amendment (“Amendment”) is entered into as of the 20th day of May 2022, by and between Home Bancorp, Inc. (the “Corporation”) and John W. Bordelon (the “Executive”).


WITNESSETH


    WHEREAS, the Corporation and the Executive previously entered into an Amended and Restated Employment Agreement, dated as of May 20, 2019 (the “Agreement”); and


    WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Agreement in order to extend its term, as provided in Section 2(b) thereof.


    NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto, intending to be legally bound hereby, agree as follows:


        1.    The last sentence in Section 2(a) of the Agreement is amended and restated to read as follows: “The terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be and remain in effect during the period beginning on the Effective Date of this Agreement and ending on May 20, 2025, plus such extensions, if any, as are provided pursuant to Section 2(b) hereof (the “Employment Period”).”


        2.    Except to the extent expressly amended hereby, the Agreement shall continue unmodified and shall remain in full force and effect.


    IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment has been duly executed by the parties hereto as of the day and year first written above.


                                HOME BANCORP, INC.




By:  /s/ Daniel G. Guidry                    By:   /s/ John A. Hendry            
         Daniel G. Guidry                        John A. Hendry
         Corporate Secretary                    Chairman of the Compensation Committee




                                 EXECUTIVE




                                  /s/ John W. Bordelon            
                                 John W. Bordelon