alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the lim ited circumstances set forth in 5 T H C IR

. R.

47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FIFTH CIRCUIT

_________________

No. 97-10433

(Summary Calendar)

_________________

WILBERT RAY ADAMS,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE,

INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION; TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF

CRIMINAL JUSTICE, Reception and Diagnostic

Center; TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE

- ROBERTSON UNIT, Classification Committee; H D

SHAFFER, Dr; TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL

JUSTICE

- ROBERTSON UNIT, Mail Room; YBARRA,

Sgt.; TDCJ, PARDON AND PAROLE DIVISION;

STEWART, Officer; FUENTES, Officer,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:96-CV-186

December 16, 1997

Before WEINER, BARKSDALE, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *-2-

Wilbert Ray Adams, Texas prisoner # 629929, appeals the

judgment of the district court dismissing his civil rights action

as frivolous. He contends, succinctly, that the district court

erred in treating all of the incidents as separate claims and

ruling that the claims were barred by the statute of limitations.

Adams argues that the theory of his civil rights action was that

there was a racially motivated conspiracy to retaliate against him

for exercising his right of access to the courts.

“[A]ny cause of action against the defendants accrued as soon

as [Adams] knew or should have known of the overt acts involved in

the alleged conspiracy.” H elton v. Clements

, 832 F.2d 332, 335

(5th Cir. 1987). Given the facts presented in the complaint, Adams

knew or should have known about the alleged conspiracy more than

two years before he filed his complaint on May 13, 1996. All of

his claims except those related to his convictions for delivery of

drugs and forgery are time-barred. To the extent that a judgment

in favor of Adams would necessarily imply the invalidity of those

convictions or sentences, his claim is not cognizable because there

is no showing that the convictions or sentenc es have been

invalidated. See Heck v. Humphrey , 512 U.S. 477, 114 S. Ct. 2364

(1994). Moreover, Adams’ complaint did not contain any facts

i ndicating the existence of an agreement, nor did it demonstr ate

any type of collusion amo ng the defendants. S ee Way v. Mueller

Brass Co. , 840 F.2d 303, 308 (5th Cir. 1988) (holding that “‘bald-3-

allegations‘ of an agreement do not suffice” to show conspiracy).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing

the action as frivolous. Adams’ appeal is without arguable merit.

See Howard v. King

, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Because

the appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. 5th Cir. R. 42.2.
#### Toby YARBROUGH, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 28372.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 6, 1956.

*911No attorney on appeal for appellant.

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

PER CURIAM.

The offense is drunken driving upon a public highway; the punishment, a fine of $75 and three days’ confinement in jail.

The record on appeal contains no statement of facts or bills of exception, without which nothing is presented for our consideration.

The judgment is affirmed.
Exhibit 32.1


                         IDI Global, Inc.

                 CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT
    Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
                      18 U.S.C. Section 1350

The undersigned executive officer of IDI Global, Inc. certifies pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:

1.    the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended
      June 30, 2004, 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 Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
      the Company.




                            /s/ Kevin R. Griffith
Date: August 14, 2004       __________________________________________
                            Kevin R. Griffith
                            Chief Executive Officer
                            Principal Financial Officer
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2048 

To expand the eligibility for the provision of Government headstones, markers, 

and medallions for veterans buried at private cemeteries. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 26, 2011 

Mr. RYAN of Ohio introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To expand the eligibility for the provision of Government 

headstones, markers, and medallions for veterans buried 

at private cemeteries. 

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

3 SECTION 1. EXPANSION OF ELIGIBILITY FOR THE PROVI4 SION OF GOVERNMENT HEADSTONES, MARK5 ERS, AND MEDALLIONS FOR VETERANS BUR6 IED AT PRIVATE CEMETERIES. 

7 Section 203(b) of the Dr. James Allen Veteran Vision 

8 Equity Act of 2007 (Public Law 110–157; 38 U.S.C. 2306 

9 note) is amended— 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2048 IH

1 (1) by striking ‘‘headstones and markers’’ and 

2 inserting ‘‘headstones, markers, and medallions’’; 

3 and 

4 (2) by striking ‘‘on or after’’ and inserting ‘‘be5 fore, on, or after’’. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Filed 4/29/15 by Clerk of Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2015 ND 108

State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee

v.

Martin Thomas Blackcloud, Defendant and Appellant

No. 20140229

Appeal from the District Court of Burleigh County, South Central Judicial District, the Honorable Gail Hagerty, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Pamela A. Nesvig, Assistant State’s Attorney, Courthouse, P.O. Box 5518, Bismarck, ND 58506-5518, for plaintiff and appellee.

Charles A. Stock, 407 North Broadway, P.O. Box 605, Crookston, MN 56716-0605, for defendant and appellant.

State v. Blackcloud

No. 20140229

Per Curiam.

[¶1]Martin Thomas Blackcloud appeals from a criminal judgment entered after a jury found him guilty of gross sexual imposition.  On appeal, Blackcloud argues the State did not present sufficient evidence to overcome his alibi defense.  We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3).

[¶2]Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

Carol Ronning Kapsner

Lisa Fair McEvers

Daniel J. Crothers

Steven E. McCullough, D.J.

[¶3]The Honorable Steven E. McCullough, D.J., sitting in place of Sandstrom, J., disqualified.
#### Perry Bussell TUNNELL, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 28892.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 20, 1957.

No attorney for appellant of record on appeal.

■ Dan Walton, Dist. Atty., Thomas D. White, Asst. Dist. Atty., Houston, and Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

PER CURIAM.

The offense is burglary; the punishment, three years.

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

The judgment is affirmed.
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

      ( print page 14513)    
Pursuant to section 1009 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting. 

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Topics in Drug Disposition and Toxicity.                    

*Date:*                         March 8, 2024.                    

*Time:*                         12:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, Rockledge II, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Stacey Nicole Williams, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 867-5309,                         *stacey.williams@nih.gov.*

This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

 Dated: February 21, 2024.

David W. Freeman, 

Supervisory Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2024-03907 Filed 2-26-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2094 

To amend title VIII of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 

1965 to require the Secretary of Education to complete payments under 

such title to local educational agencies eligible for such payments within 

3 fiscal years. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 2, 2011 

Mr. LARSEN of Washington (for himself, Mr. HASTINGS of Washington, Mr. 

SMITH of Washington, Mrs. MCMORRIS RODGERS, Mr. DICKS, Mr. GONZALEZ, Mr. INSLEE, Mr. MORAN, Ms. HIRONO, Ms. HANABUSA, Mr. 

KISSELL, and Mr. MCDERMOTT) introduced the following bill; which was 

referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To amend title VIII of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to require the Secretary of Education 

to complete payments under such title to local educational agencies eligible for such payments within 3 

fiscal years. 

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 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Impact Aid Timely 

5 Repayment Act of 2011’’. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2094 IH

1 SEC. 2. TIMELY PAYMENTS. 

2 Section 8010 of the Elementary and Secondary Edu3 cation Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7710) is amended by add4 ing at the end the following: 

5 ‘‘(d) TIMELY PAYMENTS.— 

6 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2), 

7 the Secretary shall pay a local educational agency 

8 the full amount that the agency is eligible to receive 

9 under this title for a fiscal year not later than Sep10 tember 30 of the second fiscal year following the fis11 cal year for which such amount has been appro12 priated if, not later than 1 calendar year following 

13 the fiscal year in which such amount has been ap14 propriated, such local educational agency submits to 

15 the Secretary all the data and information necessary 

16 for the Secretary to pay the full amount that the 

17 agency is eligible to receive under this title for such 

18 fiscal year. 

19 ‘‘(2) PAYMENTS WITH RESPECT TO FISCAL

20 YEARS IN WHICH INSUFFICIENT FUNDS ARE APPRO21 PRIATED.—For a fiscal year in which the amount 

22 appropriated under section 8014 is insufficient to 

23 pay the full amount a local educational agency is eli24 gible to receive under this title, paragraph (1) shall 

25 be applied by substituting ‘is available to pay the 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 2094 IH

1 agency’ for ‘the agency is eligible to receive’ each 

2 place it appears.’’. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 99.1





CERTIFICATION





Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted), Daniel V. Santi, M.D., Ph.D., Chief Executive Officer of Kosan Biosciences Incorporated (the Company), and Michael S. Ostrach,
President, Chief Operating Officer and Acting Principal Financial and Accounting Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies that, to his or her knowledge:





1.  The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, as amended, for the period ended September 30, 2002, and to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 99.1 (the Periodic
Report), fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and





2.  The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the Company at the end of the periods covered by the Periodic Report and the results of
operations of the Company for the periods covered by the Periodic Report.





This certification accompanies the
Periodic Report pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.





Dated:  November 25, 2002





By:

/s/    DANIEL V. SANTI, M.D., PH.D.Daniel V. Santi, M.D., Ph.D. Chairman and Chief Executive Officer





By:

/s/    MICHAEL S. OSTRACHMichael S. Ostrach President, Chief Operating Officer and Acting Principal Financial and Accounting Officer
Source Specific Federal Implementation Plan for Implementing Best Available Retrofit Technology for Four

Corners Power Plant; Navajo Nation; Extension of Notification Deadline

Proposed Rule

EPA

‐ R09

‐ OAR

‐ 2013

‐ 0498

Docket Index as of June 26, 2013

Item Number Document Name

1 Pre

‐ Publication Signed version to Propose Extension of FCPP Notification Deadline

2 Docket Index (as of June 26, 2013)

3 2012_1231 Letter from APS to EPA

4 2013_0523 PDF from ACC website Retail Competition Docket Letter

5 2013_0619 Letter from APS to EPA
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 203 

To better provide for compensation for certain persons injured in the course 

of employment at the Santa Susana Field Laboratory in California. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 6, 2011 

Mr. GALLEGLY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Education 

and the Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 

Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within 

the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To better provide for compensation for certain persons injured in the course of employment at the Santa Susana 

Field Laboratory in California. 

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

3 SECTION 1. DEFINITION OF MEMBER OF SPECIAL EXPO4 SURE COHORT. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 3621(14) of the Energy 

6 Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program 

7 Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 7384l(14)) is amended by adding 

8 at the end the following new subparagraph: 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 203 IH

1 ‘‘(D) The employee was so employed for a 

2 number of work days aggregating at least 250 

3 work days before January 1, 2006, by the De4 partment of Energy or a Department of Energy 

5 contractor or subcontractor at the Santa 

6 Susana Field Laboratory in California.’’. 

7 (b) REAPPLICATION.—A claim that an individual 

8 qualifies, by reason of section 3621(14)(D) of the Energy 

9 Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program 

10 Act of 2000 (as added by subsection (a) of this Act), for 

11 compensation or benefits under such Act shall be consid12 ered for compensation or benefits notwithstanding any de13 nial of any other claim for compensation with respect to 

14 such individual. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
#### Alice Fay CAIN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 27823.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 23, 1955.

*942No appearance for appellant.

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

PER CURIAM.'

The conviction, on a plea of guilty, is for the offense of violation of the liquor law; the punishment, a fine of $200.

The record on appeal contains no statement of facts or bills of exception. All proceedings appear to tie regular and nothing is presented for review. The judgment is affirmed.
Exhibit 31.1

              CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER CERTIFICATION

I, Kevin R. Griffith, certify that:

1.    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of IDI Global,
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 statement made, in light of the circumstances under which 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 report, fairly present in all material respects
the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small
business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.

4.    The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) 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)) for the
small business issuer and have:

      (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer,
including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within
those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;

      (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer'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 small business issuer's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small
business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's
fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business
issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and

5.    The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit
committee of small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing
the equivalent function):

      (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and

      (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's
internal control over financial reporting.


                            /s/ Kevin R. Griffith
Date: August 26, 2004       _________________________________________________
                            Kevin R. Griffith, Chief Executive Officer
The Lofty Lens

The Sky Is The Limit

45 North Halsey Road Dover, DE 19901 ✲ (302) 387- 3131 ✲ theloftylens.com
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1954 

To implement the President’s request to increase the statutory limit on 

the public debt. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 24, 2011 

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

on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To implement the President’s request to increase the 

statutory limit on the public debt. 

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

3 SECTION 1. FINDING. 

4 The Congress finds that the President’s budget pro5 posal, Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal 

6 Year 2012, necessitates an increase in the statutory debt 

7 limit of $2,406,000,000,000. 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1954 IH

1 SEC. 2. INCREASE IN STATUTORY LIMIT ON THE PUBLIC 

2 DEBT. 

3 Subsection (b) of section 3101 of title 31, United 

4 States Code, is amended by striking out the dollar limita5 tion contained in such subsection and inserting in lieu 

6 thereof ‘‘$16,700,000,000,000’’. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
#### Harold WELLS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 27644.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 8, 1955.

No attorney on appeal for appellant.

Dan Walton, Dist. Atty., Houston, Leon Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

PER CURIAM.

The offense is the unlawful sale of heroinj a narcotic drug; the punishment,, seven years in the state penitentiary.

■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, and no motion for rehearing will be entertained in this case.