alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Karl G. BYRD, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The BALTIMORE SUN COMPANY; Baltimore Graphic Communications Union # 31, Defendants-Appellees, and Robert Stallings, President, Baltimore Graphic Communications Union # 31, Defendant.

No. 01-2054.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 14, 2002.

Decided Aug. 30, 2002.

Ralph T. Byrd, Laytonsville, Maryland, for Appellant. Charles Lamasa, Baltimore, Maryland; Howard K. Kurman, Of-fit, Kurman & Alms, P.A., Owings Mills, Maryland, for Appellees.

*703Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Vacated and remanded by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Karl G. Byrd, Sr., appeals from the dismissal of his employment discrimination complaint, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e to 2000e-17 (2000), for failure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). The district court found that Byrd failed to set forth sufficient facts to establish a prima facie discrimination claim in his complaint. On appeal, Byrd argues he is not required to plead a prima facie case in his complaint, and instead must merely comply with the liberal pleading standards found in Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a). He relies on a recent case, *Swierkiewicz v. Sorema,*534 U.S. 506, 122 S.Ct. 992, 152 L.Ed.2d 1 (2002), which stands for that proposition. The district court did not have the benefit of *Swierkiemcz’s*reasoning. Therefore, we vacate and remand for further proceedings consistent with that decision. Our decision renders moot Byrd’s motion for summary disposition, so we deny that motion. 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.

*VACATED AND REMANDED.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>      5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS FOR NOONEY INCOME FUND LTD.,  L.P. AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                                            0000725266
<NAME>                                           NOONEY INCOME FUND LTD., L.P.

<S>                                                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                           12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                  DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                     JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                       DEC-31-2000
<CASH>                                                 843,093
<SECURITIES>                                                 0
<RECEIVABLES>                                          115,445
<ALLOWANCES>                                                 0
<INVENTORY>                                                  0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                       972,730
<PP&E>                                              10,610,094
<DEPRECIATION>                                       5,432,883
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       7,118,195
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                  270,972
<BONDS>                                              1,103,395
<COMMON>                                                     0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                        0
<PREFERRED>                                                  0
<OTHER-SE>                                           5,612,541
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         7,118,195
<SALES>                                              2,046,376
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     2,086,963
<CGS>                                                        0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     1,703,435
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                             0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                     108,097
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                        275,431
<INCOME-TAX>                                                 0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                          0
<DISCONTINUED>                                               0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                              0
<CHANGES>                                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                                           275,431
<EPS-BASIC>                                              17.96
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                0


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT
      32.2




CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) OR




RULE
      15d-14(b) and 18 U.S.C. §1350,




AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO




SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002






In
      connection with the quarterly report of Internal Hydro International, Inc.
      (the
      "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2006 as filed
      with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
      Lior Segal, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
      U.S.C. §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.




Date: November
              13, 2006
            By:
            /s/ Lior
              SegalLior
              SegalTitle:
              Chief
              Financial Officer
United States Court of Appeals

For the First Circuit

Nos. 06-1399, 06-2345

MINYA K. ZERU and RUSSOM B. GHEBRAI,

Petitioners,

v.

ALBERTO R. GONZALES,

Attorney General of the United States,

Respondent.

ERRATA SHEET

The opinion of this court, issued September 19, 2007, should

be amended as follows:

On cover sheet: Replace "ALBERTO F. GONZALES" with "ALBERTO

R. GONZALES"

On page 2, line 20: Replace "The petition is" with "The

petitions are"

On page 6, line 24-page 7, line 1: Delete "dated December

1999"

On page 9, line 20: Replace "arrest" with "incident"

On page 17, line 13: Replace "dates of sequences" with

"dates or sequences"

On page 20, line 14: Delete "gang"

On page 30, line 7: Replace "November 23" with "November 26"
**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 Communicate.com Inc. (“Communicate”) on
      Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, David M. Jeffs,
      President, Chief Executive Officer of Communicate and the sole member of the
      Board of Directors, certify, pursuant to s.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 represents, the financial condition
      and result of operations of Communicate.








*/s/
      David M. Jeffs*


David
      M.
      Jeffs


Chief
      Executive Officer






May
      12,
      2006













**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 Communicate.com Inc. (“Communicate”) on
      Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, J. Cameron Pan,
      Secretary, Treasurer, and Chief Financial Officer of Communicate, certify,
      pursuant to s.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 represents, the financial condition
      and result of operations of Communicate.








*/s/
      J. Cameron Pan*


J.
      Cameron Pan


Chief
      Financial Officer






May
      12,
      2006
#### John Elmer ELMORE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 28119.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 29, 1956.

No appearance for appellant.

Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

PER CURIAM.

The offense is possession of whisky for the purpose of sale in a dry area; the punishment, 20 days in jail and a fine of $200.

The record on appeal contains no statement of facts or bills of exception. All proceedings appear to be regular and nothing is presented for review. The judgment is affirmed.
II

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2069

To suspend temporarily the duty on specialized glass for use in glass-ceramic

stovetops.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 12, 1996

Mr. HOLLINGS (for himself and Mr. THURMOND) introduced the following bill;

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To suspend temporarily the duty on specialized glass for

use in glass-ceramic stovetops.

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

3 SECTION 1. TEXTURED ROLLED GLASS SHEETS.

4 Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized Tar5 iff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting

6 in numerical sequence the following new heading:
2

S 2069 IS

‘‘ 9902.70.03 Textured rolled glass

sheets having a composition consisting essentially, as analyzed in

percent by weight on

the oxide basis, of: SiO2

66.5–68%; Al2O3 19.5–

21% Li2O 2.5–4.5%;

ZnO 1–2%; MgO 1–

2%; TiO2 4–5%; V2O5

0.02–0.3% (provided

for in subheadings

7003.12.00 and

7003.19.00) .................. Free No Change No Change On or before

12/31/98

’’.

1 SEC. 2. RETROACTIVE APPLICABILITY.

2 Notwithstanding section 514 of the Tariff Act of

3 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1514) or any other provision of law, upon

4 proper request filed with the customs officer concerned on

5 or before the 90th day after the date of enactment of this

6 Act, the entry of any article described in section

7 9902.70.03 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedules (as

8 amended by section 1 of this Act)—

9 (1) which was made after January 1, 1995, and

10 before the 15th day after the date of enactment of

11 this Act; and

12 (2) with respect to which there would have been

13 no duty if the amendment made by this Act applied

14 to such entry,

15 shall be liquidated or reliquidated as though such entry

16 had been made on the 15th day after the date of the enact17 ment of this Act.

Æ
II

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2113

To increase funding for child care under the temporary assistance for needy

families program.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 24, 1996

Mr. KERRY introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To increase funding for child care under the temporary

assistance for needy families program.

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

3 SECTION 1. INCREASED FUNDING FOR CHILD CARE.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 418(a) of the Social Secu5 rity Act, as amended by 603(b) of the Personal Respon6 sibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996,

7 is amended by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the

8 following:

9 ‘‘(3) APPROPRIATION.—For grants under this

10 section, there are appropriated—
2

•S 2113 IS

1 ‘‘(A) $2,967,000,000 for fiscal year 1997;

2 ‘‘(B) $3,067,000,000 for fiscal year 1998;

3 ‘‘(C) $3,167,000,000 for fiscal year 1999;

4 ‘‘(D) $3,367,000,000 for fiscal year 2000;

5 ‘‘(E) $3,567,000,000 for fiscal year 2001;

6 and

7 ‘‘(F) $3,717,000,000 for fiscal year

8 2002.’’.

9 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

10 subsection (a) shall take effect as if enacted on August

11 22, 1996.

Æ
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 Quarterly report of Megola, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ending October 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Joel Gardner,
acting in the capacity as the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, certify to the best of my knowledge, 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 result of operations
            of the Company.


/s/ Joel Gardner
------------------------
    Joel Gardner
    CEO and CFO


    December 20, 2005
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Royal G. JONES, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 01-35574.

D.C. No. CV-00-00116-DWM CR-96-00040-DWM.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted July 22, 2002 *.

Decided July 30, 2002.

Before BROWNING, KOZINSKI, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Royal G. Jones, a federal prisoner, appeals pro se the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion, challenging his conviction and sentence for possession of an unregistered sawed-off shotgun, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 5861(d). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253. We review de novo, *Sanchez v. United States,*50 F.3d 1448, 1451-52 (9th Cir.1995), and affirm.

Jones contends that he received ineffective assistance of counsel on two grounds. First, counsel failed to object to the jury instruction that omitted *mens rea*as a necessary element of 26 U.S.C. § 5861(d). We previously ruled in Jones’ direct appeal that although *mens rea*should have been included in the instruction, evidence of Jones’ guilt was so strong that no reasonable trier of fact could have thought Jones lacked the requisite *mens rea. United States v. Jones,*No. 97-30151, 1999 WL 373165, at *3, 182 F.3d 928 (9th Cir. May 19,1999) (unpublished memorandum). Because the jury instruction error was harmless, *see United States v. Gracidas-Ulibarry,*231 F.3d 1188, 1197 (9th Cir.2000) (en banc), his attorney’s failure to object to it was not prejudicial. *See United States v. Baldwin,*987 F.2d 1432, 1439 (9th Cir.1993).

Second, Jones contends that counsel was ineffective because counsel advised him that informing the court of his mental health problems would subject him to a 20-year sentence in a mental institution.1 Jones contends that without that misadvice, he would have told the court about his mental health issues and the court would have ordered a competency hearing. Without any evidence or allegation that a competency hearing would have found him incompetent, Jones fails to demonstrate how he suffered any prejudice. *See Strickland v. Washington,*466 U.S. 668, 697, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984); *see also Mayfield v. Woodford,*270 F.3d 915, 925 (9th Cir.2001) (en banc) (finding no ineffective assistance of counsel after determining that there was no showing of *120prejudice and without resolving the issue of deficient performance).2

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

1

. To the extent that Jones contends that he was unable to assist in his defense or that he was unable to understand the proceedings against him, he never raised these points in the district court and they are not properly before us. *See Hiivala v. Wood,*195 F.3d 1098, 1102 (9th Cfir.1999) (per curiam) (limiting review to issues in the COA).

2

. Jones’ March 11, 2002 Motion to Supplement the Opening Brief is granted.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

April 28, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

130051 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 130051 

 COA: 263964 

Genesee CC: 99-004490-FC 

ANDRE STURGESS,

a/k/a ANDREA STURGESS,

a/k/a ONDRE STURGESS,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the September 28, 2005 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

KELLY, J., would grant leave to appeal to consider adoption of a prison mailbox 

rule in Michigan. 

s0424 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

April 28, 2006 

Clerk
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 455 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 455

To clarify the procedures for consultation under the Endangered Species 
Act on management plans for, and specific activities on, Federal lands, 
                        and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

            February 16 (legislative day, January 30), 1995

  Mr. Kempthorne (for himself and Mr. Craig) introduced the following 
bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment 
                            and Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To clarify the procedures for consultation under the Endangered Species 
Act on management plans for, and specific activities on, Federal lands, 
                        and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be referred to as the ``Consultation Clarification 
Act''.

SEC. 2. CLARIFICATION.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, whenever the listing of 
a species, or other procedure or decision related to a species listed 
under section 4(c)(1) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 
1533(c)(1)), requires consultation under section 7 of such Act (16 
U.S.C. 1536) on a resource management plan, or an amendment thereto or 
revision thereof, prepared pursuant to 43 U.S.C. 1712 or 16 U.S.C. 
1604, any action as defined in subsection (a)(2) of such section 7 
which is consistent with such plan may be undertaken on such lands 
prior to the completion of such consultation if, pursuant to the 
consultation procedures of such section 7, and related regulations, the 
land management agency responsible for such action determines or has 
determined that such action--
            (1) is not likely to affect such species; or
            (2) is not likely to adversely affect such species, and the 
        Secretary of the Interior or Secretary of Commerce, as 
        appropriate, concurs; or
            (3) is likely to adversely affect such species, and the 
        appropriate Secretary issues a biological opinion on such 
        action which finds that the action either (i) is not likely to 
        jeopardize such species or result in destruction or adverse 
        modification of its critical habitat, or (ii) is unlikely to 
        jeopardize such species or result in destruction or adverse 
        modification of its critical habitat and the land management 
        agency agrees to a reasonable and prudent alternative to such 
        action.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 530 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 530

To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to permit State and local 
  government workers to perform volunteer services for their employer 
 without requiring the employer to pay overtime compensation, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

               March 10 (legislative day, March 6), 1995

   Mr. Gregg introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
         referred to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to permit State and local 
  government workers to perform volunteer services for their employer 
 without requiring the employer to pay overtime compensation, and for 
                            other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``State and Local Volunteer 
Preservation Act''.

SEC. 2. WAIVER OF OVERTIME COMPENSATION.

    Section 7(o) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 
207(o)) is amended--
            (1) by redesignating paragraph (6) as paragraph (7); and
            (2) by inserting after paragraph (5), the following new 
        paragraph:
            ``(6) A public agency which is a State, political 
        subdivision of a State, or an interstate governmental 
        organization shall not be required to pay an employee overtime 
        compensation or provide compensatory time under this section 
        for any period during which the employee--
                    ``(A) volunteered to perform services for the 
                public agency; and
                    ``(B) signed a legally binding waiver of such 
                compensation or compensatory time.''.
                                 <all>
```
II

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 251

To make provisions of title IV of the Trade Act of 1974 applicable to

Cambodia.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 19 (legislative day, JANUARY 10), 1995

Mr. MCCAIN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To make provisions of title IV of the Trade Act of 1974

applicable to Cambodia.

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

3 SECTION 1. APPLICATION OF TRADE ACT OF 1974 TO CAM4 BODIA.

5 Notwithstanding any other provision of law, title IV

6 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2431 et seq.) shall

7 apply for purposes of determining the eligibility of the

8 products of Cambodia to receive nondiscriminatory (most

9 favored-nation) trade treatment.

Æ