alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Michael C. Robinson, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

John Adams et aI., 

Respondents. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Civil Action No. 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

FILED 

MAY - 5 2010 

Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy 

Courts for the District of Columbia 

10 (YI'U9 

This matter comes before the court on the plaintiff s pro se complaint and application to 

proceed in forma pauperis. The Court will grant the application to proceed in forma pauperis and 

will dismiss the complaint for lack of jurisdiction. 

Petitioner is incarcerated in Amarillo, Texas, in a facility that is not operated by the 

Federal Bureau of Prisons. He does not identify the court that sentenced him, but attacks his 

conviction and sentence claiming ineffective assistance of counsel, among other things. He does 

not indicate that he is in prison under a federal sentence, and his prison number indicates that he 

is not a federal prisoner. Based on the information provided, the petition will be construed as 

one filed by a prisoner under a state sentence seeking habeas review under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

Federal court review of state convictions is available under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 only after 

the exhaustion of available state remedies. See 28 U.S.C. §2254(b )(1). Once the state remedies 

are exhausted,"an application for a writ of habeas corpus [] made by a person in custody under 

the judgment and sentence of a State court ... may be filed in the district court for the district 

wherein such person is in custody or in the district court for the district within which the State 
court was held which convicted and sentenced [petitioner] and each of such district courts shall 

have concurrent jurisdiction to entertain the application." 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). The petition 

does not indicate whether the petitioner has exhausted his state remedies. To the extent that the 

prisoner has exhausted his state remedies, his federal recourse lies in the United States District 

Court for the Northern District of Texas. Because the petitioner has not established that this 

Court has jurisdiction over this petition, it will be dismissed. 

A separate final order accompanies this memoran 

Date: 

2
### NUMBER 13

- 17

- 00 526

- CV



## COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

- EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________ JAVIER R. SALINAS JR. , APPELLANT,

v.

SARAH SALINAS , APPELLEE

.

____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 105 th District Court of Nueces County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________



## MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Contreras and Benavides

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Contreras

Appellant Javier R. Salinas Jr. filed a notice of appeal from a judgment rendered

on June 29, 2017 in trial court cause number 2016

- FAM

- 5253

- D in the 105th District Court

of Nueces C ounty, Texas. This Court previously abated this appeal to enable the parties

to engage in settlement negotiations. Appellant has now filed a n unopposed motion to2

dismiss this appeal based on an agreement reached during mediation with appellee,

Sarah Sali nas. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.1(a)(1) (A).

T he Court, having considered the documents on file and the unopposed motion to

dismiss the appeal, is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. See id.

Accordingly, we REINSTATE this appeal. We GRANT the unopposed motion to dismiss

the appeal. The costs of appeal will be taxed against appellant. See id. R. 42.1(d)

( “ Absent agreement of the parties, the court will tax costs against the appellant. ” ). We

dismiss any other pending motions as moot.

DORI CONTRERAS JUSTICE Delivered and filed the 11th day of January , 201 8

.
EXHIBIT 99.1

                            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 Amended  Quarterly  Report of Global Assets & Services,
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report").
I, Bertram Cutler, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to
18 USC section  1350, as adopted  pursuant to section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge and belief:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
for 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.

                                        /s/ Bertram Cutler
                                        --------------------------
                                      Bertram Cutler, Chief Executive Officer

Dated 08/23/02
#### STATE OF CONNECTICUT *v.*DAVID MORALES

(14243)

Landau, Schaller and Hennessy, Js.

Argued February 15

decision released March 12, 1996

*Patricia A. King,*for the appellant (defendant).

*Timothy J. Sugrue,*executive assistant state’s attorney, with whom, on the brief, were *Michael Dearington,*state’s attorney, and *Gary Nicholson,*assistant state’s attorney, for the appellee (state).

PER CURIAM.

This case is controlled by *State*v. *Cuffee,*32 Conn. App. 759, 630 A.2d 621 (1993).

The judgment is affirmed.
EXHIBIT 31.2

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Richard L. Feinstein, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Image Technology
Laboratories, Inc.

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does 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 quarterly
report.

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the period presented in this quarterly report.

4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the
registrant and I have:

      (a)   designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
            material information relating to the registrant, including its
            consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me by others within
            those entities, particularly during the period in which this
            quarterly report is being prepared;

      (b)   Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
            and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about
            the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of
            the end of the period covered by this report based on such
            evaluation; and

      (c)   Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
            control over financial reporting that occurred during the
            registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth
            fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
            affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
            registrant's internal control over financial reporting;

5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, to the registrant's
auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent function):

      (a)   all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
            controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
            record, process, summarize and report financial data and have
            identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in
            internal controls; and

      (b)   any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
            other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's
            internal controls.


November 19, 2004                         /s/ Richard L. Feinstein
                                          ------------------------
                                          Richard L. Feinstein
                                          Chief Financial Officer
#### Bessie T. MORRIS, Petitioner, v. Agnes THOMAS, Respondent.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Dec. 3, 1954.

Rehearing Denied March 4, 1955.

Bessie T. Morris, Louisville, for petitioner.

■ D. L. Frederick, Louisville, for respondent.

MONTGOMERY, Justice.

Bessie T. Morris has filed a petition for a writ of coram nobis seeking to have this Court recall its mandate-and judgment in the case of Morris v. Thomas, Ky., 240 S.W.2d 99, and grant a new trial on the grounds of an “error in facts” and newly discovered evidence.

In the case of Morris v. Thomas, 310 Ky. 501, 220 S.W.2d 958, this Court affirmed the Chancellor’s finding for Thomas. Bessie T. Morris then filed suit under Section 518 of the Civil Code of Practice to have the judgment set aside on the grounds of newly discovered evidence! The Chancellor sustained a demurrer to the petition and dismissed the petition. This judgment was appealed to this Court, and the judgment of dismissal was affirmed in Morris v. Thomas, Ky., 240 S.W.2d 99.

The question to be determined is: Will a writ of coram nobis lie in a civil action under the present rules of this Court?

The writ of coram nobis is a common law writ primarily used in civil cases and seldom used in criminal cases for the purpose of calling to the court’s attention an error in facts. Although the writ was rarely used in criminal cases, it is considered by courts and writers to be an appropriate remedy in criminal prosecutions as well as . in civil actions. Sanders v. State, 85 Ind. 318, 44 Am.Rep. 29. This case and the citations therein were approved by this Court in Jones v. Commonwealth, 269 Ky. *772,*108 S.W.2d 812.

The text writers agree that the writ of coram nobis exists unless' superseded -or abolished by statute. Sanders v. State, supra.

*424In the case of Anderson v. Buchanan, 292 Ky. 810, 168 S.W.2d 48, this Court wrote an extended opinion on the writ of co ram nobis, and it was pointed out that the legislature had made provision for the granting of a new trial of a civil action after final judgment and affirmance by the Court of Appeals by enacting Section 518 of the Civil Code of Practice. In the adoption of the new Civil Rules of Practice, Section 518 was brought forward in CR 60.02. This rule in part provides:

> “Writs of coram nobis, coram vobis, audita querela, and bills of review and bills in the nature of a bill of review, are abolished, and the procedure for obtaining any relief from a judgment shall be by motion as prescribed in these rules or by an independent action.”

 The writ of coram nobis1 in civil cases only has been abolished and the remedy is now provided by CR 60.02. The petitioner, having once sought relief on the same ground under Section 518 of the Civil Code of Practice, has exhausted her remedy.

Writ denied.
Exhibit 31(a)
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a)
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K of Interphase Corporation (the Company);2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does 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, the financial statements, and other financial information included
in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4.
    
    The Companys other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the Company and have:
     5.
    
    The Companys other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Companys auditors and the
audit committee of the Companys board of directors:
   Date: March 20, 2009
    
    Signature:
    /s/  Gregory B. KalushChief Executive Officer
Exhibit 32.01 and 32.02

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE 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

Based on the evaluation by Mr. Balmer, the chief financial officer of the
company, the effectiveness of the company's disclosure controls and procedures
conducted as of a date within 90 days of the filing date of this quarterly
report, Mr. Balmer concluded that, as of the evaluation date, (I) there were
no significant deficiencies or material weaknesses of the company's disclosure
controls and procedures,  (ii) there were no significant changes in the
internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal
controls subsequent to the evaluation date, and (iii) no corrective actions
were required to be taken.

The Company had no revenue during the first two quarters of 2003.  The Company
has been dormant in its operations and is currently pursuing business
combinations or the required capital needed to have current operations.


Power Save International, Inc.
Registrant

/s/ Scott Balmer
------------------------------
Scott Balmer
Director and CEO
## IN THE UNI TED STATES COURT OFAPPEALS FOR THE FIF TH CIRCU IT

No. 11-30381 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee
v. LONNIE POYDRAS, Defendant - Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana USDC No. 3:09-CR-121-1 Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * 

### After studying the briefs and record, and hearing oral argument, it is clear that the district co u rt erred in admitting the character evidence at issue, and that this error was harmful. We therefore REVERSE the defendant’s conviction and REMAND for a new trial consistent with this opinion. U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f A p p ea l s F i ft h C i rc u i t 

## F I L E D April 30 , 20 12 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Pursua nt to 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 , the court hasd ete rm inedthat this op inion s houldnot * be publ ish ed and is not pr ece dent excep t unde r the lim ite d cir cum st ance s se t forth in 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 .4. 

### Case: 11-30381 Document: 00511839518 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/30/2012
Page 1 of 3

Disposition Comments

Docket No: FAA-2013-0463 These comments are in

Directorate ID: 2012-NM-165-AD response to an SNPRM

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

Next Step: FRAN SNPRM

 No Comments/Only Supportive Comments Received – If this box is checked, no signatures are 

required.

 Has the referenced service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? If yes, 

list latest revision and attach a copy. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously 

published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance.

Instructions: Summarize all comments by issue (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of 

each issue. All comments relating to the same issue should be discussed together. Do not list all of the issues 

from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and 

describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA-IR-M-8040.1C Chapter 9.

ISSUE 1: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD: 

If NO, we don’t agree because 

ISSUE 2: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD:
Page 2 of 3

If NO, we don’t agree because 

For additional issues, double-click here
Page 3 of 3

Signature Section

Signature indicates concurrence with this action.

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

ASE Printed Name: Date

Branch Manager Date
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1693 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1693

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make the research credit 
 permanent and to increase the alternative simplified research credit.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 3, 2011

  Mr. Carney introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make the research credit 
 permanent and to increase the alternative simplified research credit.

    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 ``Research and Development Tax Credit 
Extension Act of 2011''.

SEC. 2. RESEARCH CREDIT MADE PERMANENT; INCREASE IN ALTERNATIVE 
              SIMPLIFIED RESEARCH CREDIT.

    (a) Research Credit Made Permanent.--
            (1) In general.--Section 41 of the Internal Revenue Code of 
        1986 is amended by striking subsection (h).
            (2) Conforming amendments.--
                    (A) Subsection (c) of section 41 of such Code is 
                amended by striking paragraph (4).
                    (B) Paragraph (1) of section 45C(b) of such Code is 
                amended by striking subparagraph (D).
            (3) Effective date.--The amendments made by this subsection 
        shall apply to amounts paid or incurred after December 31, 
        2011.
    (b) Increase in Alternative Simplified Research Credit.--
            (1) In general.--Subparagraph (A) of section 41(c)(5) of 
        such Code (relating to election of alternative simplified 
        credit) is amended by striking ``14 percent (12 percent in the 
        case of taxable years ending before January 1, 2009)'' and 
        inserting ``17 percent''.
            (2) Effective date.--The amendments made by this subsection 
        shall apply to taxable years ending after December 31, 2010.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE>                     5

<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM TOFUTTI
BRANDS INC.'S REPORT ON FORM 10-KSB FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED  DECEMBER 30, 2000
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH REPORT.
</LEGEND>



<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                    DEC-30-2000
<CASH>                                   2,211,000
<SECURITIES>                               269,000
<RECEIVABLES>                              876,000
<ALLOWANCES>                               270,000
<INVENTORY>                                908,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                         4,632,000
<PP&E>                                           0
<DEPRECIATION>                                   0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           4,813,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      860,000
<BONDS>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<COMMON>                                    64,000
<OTHER-SE>                               3,889,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             4,813,000
<SALES>                                 13,343,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                        13,343,000
<CGS>                                    8,192,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                         3,686,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        (103,000)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                          1,568,000
<INCOME-TAX>                               612,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        956,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                               956,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                      0.15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0.12



</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 32 (Thursday, February 15, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 11812]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-03268]


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

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS


Sunshine Act Meeting Notice

AGENCY: United States Commission on Civil Rights.

ACTION: Notice of Commission public business meeting.

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

DATES: Friday, February 23, 2024, 10 a.m. EST.

ADDRESSES: Meeting to take place virtually and is open to the public 
via livestream on the Commission's YouTube page: https://www.youtube.com/user/USCCR/videos.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Angelia Rorison: 202-376-8371; 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#cbbbbea9a7a2a8aaadadaaa2b9b88bbeb8a8a8b9e5aca4bd"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="304045525c5953515656515942437045435353421e575f46">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with the Government in 
Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b), the Commission on Civil Rights is holding 
a meeting to discuss the Commission's business for the month. This 
business meeting is open to the public. Computer assisted real-time 
transcription (CART) will be provided. The web link to access CART (in 
English) on Friday, February 23, 2024, is https://www.streamtext.net/player?event=USCCR. Please note that CART is text-only translation that 
occurs in real time during the meeting and is not an exact transcript.

Meeting Agenda

A. Approval of Agenda

B. Business Meeting

1. Presentation by State Advisory Committee Chairs on Reports and 
related Memorandum:

a. Chair Michelle Rydz, North Dakota Advisory Committee, ``Civil Rights 
and Fair Housing in North Dakota
b. Chair Steven Irwin, Pennsylvania Advisory Committee, ``Affirmatively 
Furthering Fair Housing: An Analysis of Fair Housing Access & Zoning 
Practices in Pennsylvania''
c. Rev. Dr. Donnie Anderson, Member, Rhode Island Advisory Committee, 
``Licensing Barriers to Employment Post-Conviction in Rhode Island''

C. Management and Operations

<bullet> Staff Director's Report

D. Adjourn Meeting

    Dated: February 13, 2024.
Angelia Rorison,
USCCR Media and Communications Director.
[FR Doc. 2024-03268 Filed 2-13-24; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P


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