alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. William Smith, Appellant, v Dominic J. Mantello, as Superintendent of Wende Correctional Facility, et al., Respondents.

Judgment unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed, in accordance with the following memorandum: Supreme Court erred in converting petitioner’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus to a CPLR article 78 proceeding, and we modify the judgment to delete that directive. Where the sole basis for petitioner’s continued incarceration is the Board of Parole’s determination to revoke his parole, habeas corpus is an appropriate procedure to challenge the validity of that determination *(People ex rel. Saafir v Mantello,*163 AD2d 824; *People ex rel. Newcomb v Metz,*64 AD2d 219, 221).

Petitioner’s remaining contentions lack merit. There is no requirement that the Board of Parole review the transcript of the final revocation hearing before making its final decision. The applicable statute and regulation require the Hearing Officer to submit his findings of fact and recommended disposition to the Board (Executive Law § 259-d [1]; § 259-i [3] [f] [xi]; 9 NYCRR 8005.20 [d]). The Board must base its final decision upon the findings of fact and recommendation "and such other information as the panel may deem necessary” (9 NYCRR 8005.20 [d]). The Board did not violate its own rule in this case by making its decision without reviewing the hearing transcript.

Petitioner admitted that he violated two rules governing his parole. Although he proffered an explanation for each violation, the Division of Parole sustained its burden of proving guilt by a preponderance of the evidence. The Hearing Officer stated in detail his reasons for recommending that relator be held for 24 months before reconsideration of release on parole, and we perceive no basis for concluding that the disposition was excessive. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Rath, Jr., J.—art 78.) Present—Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Boomer, Green, and Balio, JJ.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350

In connection with the Quarterly Report of SIFCO Industries, Inc. (Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
March 31, 2011as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (Report), the undersigned officer of the Company certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: May 9, 2011



/s/ Michael S. LipscombMichael S. LipscombPresident and Chief Executive Officer


This certification accompanies this Report on Form 10-Q pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by SIFCO
Industries, Inc. for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act). Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of
1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that SIFCO Industries, Inc. specifically incorporates it by reference.

A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to SIFCO Industries, Inc. and will be retained by SIFCO Industries, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



24
EXHIBIT
32.1
 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 Annual Report of Atlas America Public #11-2002 Ltd. (the
"Partnership") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Freddie M. Kotek, Chief Executive Officer of the MGP, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:
 
 1)
              the
      Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
and
 2)
              the
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Partnership.
 
 By:
              /s/ Freddie M.
      KotekName:
              Freddie
      M. KotekTitle:
              Chief
      Executive Officer of the Managing General PartnerDate:
              March
      28, 2008
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 10.2

                                    AMENDMENT
                                       TO
                           LOAN AND SECURITY AGREEMENT
                           ---------------------------

         This Amendment to Loan and Security Agreement is entered into as of
August 30, 2001 (the "Amendment"), by and among IPRINT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
("Creditor") and WOOD ALLIANCE, INC., d/b/a WOOD ASSOCIATES, INC. ("Borrower").



                                    RECITALS
                                    --------

         Borrower and Creditor are parties to that certain Loan and Security
Agreement dated as of June 29, 2001 (the "Agreement"). The parties desire to
amend the Agreement in accordance with the terms of this Amendment.

         NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:

         1.    The definition of "Maturity Date" in Section 1.1 is hereby
               amended and restated in its entirety as follows: "July 1, 2002".

         2.    Unless otherwise defined, all capitalized terms in this Amendment
               shall be as defined in the Agreement. Except as amended, the
               Agreement remains in full force and effect.

         3.    This Amendment may be executed in two or more counterparts, each
               of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together
               shall constitute one instrument.



       IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Amendment as of
the first date above written.

                                          IPRINT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

                                          By:  /s/ Royal P. Farros
                                              ----------------------------------
                                          Title:  CEO
                                                 -------------------------------

                                          WOOD ALLIANCE, d/b/a WOOD ASSOCIATES,
                                          INC.


                                          By:  /s/ Monte Wood
                                              ----------------------------------
                                          Title:  CEO
                                                 -------------------------------
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

Pensacola Aviation Center, LLC, 

Complainant 

v. 

Pensacola International Airport, 

City of Pensacola, FL 

Respondent 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

FAA Docket No. 16-12-12 

NOTICE OF EXTENSION OF TIME 

This matter is before the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) based on the abovereferenced complaint, filed in accordance with FAA Rules of Practice for Federally-Assisted 

Airport Enforcement Proceedings, 14 CFR Part 16 (Rules of Practice). Pursuant to the 

Rules of Practice, §16.ll(a), the date by which the Director, FAA Office of Airport 

Compliance and Management Analysis will issue a Director's Determination in this matter 

is hereby extended to on or before December 21, 20 1 5. 

Randall S. Fiertz 

Director, Airport Compliance and 

Management Analysis 

f e.,/-Jo, if;r 

I 

Date 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on Septembe , 2015, I served via Certified mail a true 

copy ofthe FAA's Notice of Extension ofTime, addressed to: 

Counsel for Complainant: 

Leonard D. Kirsch, Esq. 

McBreen & Kopko 

500 North Broadway 

Jericho, New York 11753 

Tel: (516) 364-1095 

Fax: (516) 364-0612 

Counsel for Respondent: 

Robert J. Williams, Esq. 

Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis, LLP 

Fifth A venue Place 

120 Fifth A venue, Suite 2700 

Pittsburgh, PA 15222-3001 

Tel: ( 412) 577-5223 

Fax: (412) 765-3858 

Copy to: 

FAA Part 16 Airport Proceedings Docket 

FAA Airport Compliance and Management Analysis, (A CO-l 00) 

Claudia Roberts 

Office of Airport Compliance and 

Management Analysis
```
**CERTIFICATION**

I, W. JAMES SCILACCI, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2004, of Southern
California Edison 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
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.   The registrant'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 registrant
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 registrant, 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 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 registrants' 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; and

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

     (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 registrant'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 registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

Date:  May 7, 2004

                                               /s/ W. JAMES SCILACCI
                                      ---------------------------------------
                                                 W. JAMES SCILACCI
                                 Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
```
#### STINSON v. STATE.

No. 26327.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 25, 1953.

No attorney on appeal, for appellant.

George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., of Austin for the State.

GRAVES, Presiding Judge.

Appellant was charged with the offense of burglary, and a former conviction of an offense of like character is alleged for the purpose of enhancing the penalty.

There is no statement of facts accompanying the record, and no bills of exception are found therein.

The proceedings seem to be regular, and the judgment of the court appears to be properly based upon the proof of one burglary as well as the prior conviction alleged. Under these circumstances, appellant was awarded a penalty of 12 years’ confinement in the state penitentiary.

We see no reason why the judgment should not be allowed to stand in the absence of any errors disclosed by the record.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

YV &DVH1R

ORDER

%(,75(0(0%(5('RQWKLVGD\WKHUHZDVSUHVHQWHGWRWKH&RXUWWKH0RWLRQIRU

$GPLVVLRQ3UR+DF9LFHILOHGE\FRXQVHOIRU

DQGWKH&RXUWKDYLQJUHYLHZHGWKHPRWLRQHQWHUV

WKHIROORZLQJRUGHU

,7,625'(5('WKDWWKH0RWLRQIRU$GPLVVLRQ3UR+DF9LFHLV*5$17('DQG

PD\DSSHDURQEHKDOIRI

LQWKHDERYHFDVH

,7,6)857+(525'(5('WKDWLIKHVKH

KDVQRWDOUHDG\GRQHVRVKDOOLPPHGLDWHO\WHQGHUWKHDPRXQWRIPDGHSD\DEOHWRClerk, U.S.

District CourtLQFRPSOLDQFHZLWK/RFDO&RXUW5XOH$7OI

6,*1('WKLVWKHGD\RI



WACO DIVISION

DROPBOX, INC.

6:20-cv-00251-ADA

MOTION OFFENSE, LLC

JASON H. LISS

DROPBOX, INC.

JASON H. LISS DROPBOX, INC.

JASON H. LISS

February 23

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 6:20-cv-00251-ADA Document 190-1 Filed 02/06/23 Page 1 of 1
|                                                                                       
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                       
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                         
|View History: Annual                                                                   
|View History: Annual                                                                   
|View History:                                                                          
|                                                                                       
|Texas Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                       
|                                                                                       
|Texas Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                       

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1980's                                                                                                                            |        | 1,115  | 1,220  |        |        |        | 313    | 347    | 752    | 847   
|1990's                                                                                                                            | 150    | -52    | 994    | 1,239  | 747    | 469    | 1,175  | -451   | -790   | 1,165 
|2000's                                                                                                                            | -1,155 | 274    | 998    | 1,053  | 797    | 602    | 891    | 74     | -4     | 1,090 
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 1,263  | 676    | 753    | 1,655  | 574    | 2,094  | 1,679  | 2,837  | 3,492  | -3,156
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 4,590  | -823   |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5359 

To suspend temporarily the duty on 3-(1-Bromo-8-chloroimidazo[1,5- 

a]pyrazin-3-yl)cyclobutanone (OSIP–690631, bicyclic intermediate). 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 7, 2012 

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

on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on 3-(1-Bromo-8- 

chloroimidazo[1,5-a]pyrazin-3-yl)cyclobutanone (OSIP– 

690631, bicyclic intermediate). 

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

3 SECTION 1. 3-(1-BROMO-8-CHLOROIMIDAZO[1,5-A]PYRAZIN-3- 

4 YL)CYCLOBUTANONE (OSIP–690631, BICYCLIC 

5 INTERMEDIATE). 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

7 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

8 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

9 new heading: 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5359 IH

‘‘ 9902.01.00 3-(1-Bromo-8- 

chloroimidazo[1,5- 

a]pyrazin-3- 

yl)cyclobutanone (OSIP– 

690631, bicyclic intermediate), (CAS No. 

936901–73–4) (provided 

for in subheading 

2933.29.43) ....................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 

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

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JEROME CORSI, et al

Plaintiff, 

 v.

INFOWARS LLC, et al

Defendants

 Civil Action No. 1:20-cv-298-LY

 

NOTICE OF APPEAL

Plaintiffs Jerome Corsi and Larry Klayman hereby appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals 

for the Fifth Circuit this Court’s June 25, 2021 order Adopting Report and Recommendation of 

the United States Magistrate Judge, ECF No. 122, September 16, 2021 Order Denying Plaintiffs’

Motion for Reconsideration, ECF No. 155, October 12, 2021 Order Denying Motion to Stay and 

Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint, ECF No. 162, Final Judgment, ECF No.

123, and all other rulings and orders adverse to Plaintiffs in this matter. 

Dated: October 12, 2021 Respectfully Submitted, 

/s/Sanjay Biswas 

SANJAY BISWAS, Esq.

#24061235—Texas

#24966--Louisiana

11720 Duxbury Dr.

Frisco, Texas 75035

Telephone: (972)-866-5879

Email:sanjaybiswas41@gmail.com

Fax: 1-800-506-6804

Counsel for Dr. Jerome Corsi

/s/Larry Klayman 

Larry Klayman, Esq.

7050 W. Palmetto Park Rd

Boca Raton FL, 33433

Email:leklayman@gmail.com

Case 1:20-cv-00298-LY-DH Document 163 Filed 10/12/21 Page 1 of 2
2

Tel: 561-558-5336

Plaintiff Pro Se

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on October 12, 2021, a true copy of the foregoing was filed 

via ECF and served to all counsel of record though the Court’s ECF system.

/s/ Sanjay Biswas

Case 1:20-cv-00298-LY-DH Document 163 Filed 10/12/21 Page 2 of 2
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

August 4, 2017

No. 04-17-00451-CR

IN RE Richard LARES

Original Mandamus Proceeding1

ORDER

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Irene Rios, Justice

On August 2, 2017, Relator filed a motion for rehearing. The panel has considered the 

motion and it is DENIED.

It is so ORDERED on August 4, 2017. 

_________________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 4th day of August, 2017.

___________________________________

Luz Estrada

Chief Deputy Clerk

 

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2006CR10110, styled State of Texas v. Richard Lares, pending in the 

399th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Frank J. Castro presiding.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5476 

To suspend temporarily the duty on ceramic bases designed for high intensity 

discharge (HID) lamps, with metal locking pins to allow passage of 

an electrical current. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 7, 2012 

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

on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on ceramic bases designed 

for high intensity discharge (HID) lamps, with metal 

locking pins to allow passage of an electrical current. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CERAMIC BASES DESIGNED FOR HIGH INTEN4 SITY DISCHARGE (HID) LAMPS, WITH METAL 

5 LOCKING PINS TO ALLOW PASSAGE OF AN 

6 ELECTRICAL CURRENT. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

8 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•HR 5476 IH

1 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

2 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Ceramic bases designed for 

high intensity discharge 

(HID) lamps, with metal 

locking pins to allow passage of an electrical current (provided for in subheading 8536.61.00) ......... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 

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

4 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

5 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

6 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AUSTIN DIVISION

El Campo Ventures, LLC

Plaintiff

vs.

Stratton Securities, Inc., Stratton Oilfield

Systems Texas, LLC, Daniel Stratton,

Shannon Stratton

Defendants

Target Logistics Management, LLC

Intervenor

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL NO:

AU:20-CV-00560-RP

ORDER SETTING MOTIONS HEARING IN PERSON

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above entitled and numbered case is set for

MOTIONS HEARING IN PERSON in Courtroom 4, on the Fifth Floor, United States

Courthouse, 501 West Fifth Street, Austin, TX, on Friday, June 09, 2023 at 09:00 AM. All

parties and counsel must appear at this hearing. 

IT IS SO ORDERED this 31st day of May, 2023.

______________________________

ROBERT PITMAN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:20-cv-00560-RP Document 155 Filed 05/31/23 Page 1 of 1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 22-0226

__________________

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v. ORDER

BRADLEY JAY HILLIOUS,

Defendant and Appellant.

__________________

This Court granted Appellant’s request for a stay of this appeal on 

October 31, 2023, so the Flathead County District Court could rule upon 

Appellant’s Motion for New Trial and Request for Evidentiary Hearing. 

The Flathead County District Court denied the motion and 

supplemented the appellate record with additional district court filings 

on December 20, 2023. Appellant now requests the stay be lifted and a 

new briefing schedule set.

Upon consideration of Appellant’s Unopposed Motion to Lift Stay 

of Appeal, with good cause appearing,

IT IS ORDERED that the stay in this matter is lifted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Appellant shall prepare, file, 

and serve an opening brief on or before February 5, 2024. 

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

January 5 2024

01/05/2024

Case Number: DA 22-0226