alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### TIME FINANCE CO. v. VARNEY.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Dec. 5, 1952.

*234Stratton & Stratton, Pikeville, K. C. Davis, Louisville, for appellant.

James B. Stephenson and Abner May, Pikeville, for appellee.

CAMMACK, Chief Justice.

This is an appeal from a judgment enjoining the Time Finance Company from further prosecuting in West Virginia a suit on a note against Carl Varney. The Company is authorized to conduct a small loan business in Kentucky. It is also authorized to conduct its business in West Virginia, and it has an office in that state at Williamson. Carl Varney lives in Pike County, Kentucky. In October, 1949, he borrowed $300 through the Company’s office in Williamson. The note provided it be paid in 20 monthly installments of $20.52 each, including interest. When Varney was sued on the note in October, 1950, he had paid the Company only $37.62 on the principal and interest. Varney worked I for the Eastern Coal Company, which was operating a mine in Pike County. The headquarters for the Coal Company and its payroll offices are located in Bluefield, West Virginia. That city is in the magisterial district of Justice of the Peace J. A. Bailey. The Company filed its suit against Varney in Magistrate Bailey’s court. Publication service was had against Varney and garnishment on the Coal Company. Shortly after the institution of that action Varney filed the injunctive action now before us in the Pike Circuit Court. Subsequently, a judgment was entered against Varney in Magistrate Bailey’s court. It was stipulated that Varney still owed the Company $299.88, with interest, at the West Virginia small loan rate from February 9, 1950. This was the amount sued for in the West Virginia action.

 A court of equity has power to enjoin a resident from prosecuting a suit against another resident in a foreign jurisdiction, but this power is to be used sparingly. Reed’s Adm’x v. Illinois Central R. Company, 182 Ky. 455, 206 S.W. 794. But it is equally true that one who seeks equity must come into court with clean hands. Varney admitted he owed the balance on the note. Apparently, the only thing which he seeks to avoid is the application of the West Virginia law, which directs the employer to withhold 20 per cent of the employee’s wages when under garnishment. Section 3834(3) West Virginia Code, 38-5A-3. In November, 1950, Varney made $316. The amount withheld was $62.

It was through his own choice that Varney obtained his loan at Williamson rather than at Pikeville. The fact that the distance is about four times as great from his home to Bluefield, West Virginia, as it is to Pikeville would not warrant the exercise of the extraordinary powers of a court of equity to enjoin the prosecution of the suit in West Virginia. Actually, Varney had no defense to the West Virginia suit.

Judgment reversed, with directions to set it aside, and for the entry of a judgment consistent with this opinion.
```

[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 185 (Friday, September 22, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 57355]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-24337]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

Gastroenterology and Urology Devices Panel of the Medical Devices 
Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

    This notice announces a forthcoming meeting of a public advisory 
committee of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The meeting will 
be open to the public.
    Name of Committee: Gastroenterology and Urology Devices Panel of 
the Medical Devices Advisory Committee.
    General Function of the Committee: To provide advice and 
recommendations to the agency on FDA's regulatory issues.
    Date and Time: The meeting will be held on October 19, 2000, 9:30 
a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Location: Best Western Washington Gateway Hotel, Grand Ballroom, 
1251 West Montgomery Ave., Rockville, MD.
    Contact Person: Jeffrey W. Cooper, Center for Devices and 
Radiological Health (HFZ-470), Food and Drug Administration, 9200 
Corporate Blvd., Rockville, MD 20850, 301-594-1220, ext. 122, or FDA 
Advisory Committee Information Line, 1-800-741-8138 (301-443-0572 in 
the Washington, DC area), code 12523. Please call the Information Line 
for up-to-date information on this meeting.
    Agenda: The committee will discuss, make recommendations, and vote 
on a premarket approval application for a device for the treatment of 
vesicoureteral reflux.
    Procedure: Interested persons may present data, information, or 
views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before the committee. 
Written submissions may be made to the contact person by October 12, 
2000. Oral presentations from the public will be scheduled between 
approximately 10 a.m. and 10:30 a.m., and between approximately 3:30 
p.m. and 4 p.m. Time allotted for each presentation may be limited. 
Those desiring to make formal oral presentations should notify the 
contact person before October 12, 2000, and submit a brief statement of 
the general nature of the evidence or arguments they wish to present, 
the names and addresses of proposed participants, and an indication of 
the approximate time requested to make their presentation.
    Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2).

    Dated: September 15, 2000.
Linda A. Suydam,
Senior Associate Commissioner.
[FR Doc. 00-24337 Filed 9-21-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-F
```
|                                                                                                            
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                            
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                              
|View History: Annual                                                                                        
|View History: Annual                                                                                        
|View History:                                                                                               
|                                                                                                            
|Pennsylvania Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs, Wet (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                            
|                                                                                                            
|Pennsylvania Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs, Wet (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                            

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1990's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        | 0      | 0      | 14     | 26    
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 53     | 69     | 66     | 59     | 38     | 36     | 36     | 5      | 10     | 0     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 2      | 0      | 0      | 2      | 2      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = 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
#### AUSTIN v. STATE.

No. 24776.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 24, 1950.

*221None on appeal for appellant.

A. C. Winborn, Crim. Dist. Atty., Houston, E. T. Branch, Asst. Crim. Dist. Atty., Houston, George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

GRAVES, Judge.

The conviction is for burglary. The penalty assessed is confinement in the penitentiary for a period of two years.

The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception. The indictment and all matters of procedure appear to be in regular form.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5373 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5373

           To suspend temporarily the duty on Isononylamine.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 7, 2012

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
           To suspend temporarily the duty on Isononylamine.

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

SECTION 1. ISONONYLAMINE.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.01.00        Isononylamine (CAS  Free            No change      No change      On or before     ''.
                          No. 27775-00-4)                                                   12/31/2015
                          (provided for in
                          subheading
                          2921.19.60)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
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 Labor

###### Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration

# AGENCY:

Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration, Department of Labor.

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

                        The Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration (PWBA) is announcing that a collection of information has been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501*et seq.*) (PRA 95) and 5 CFR 1320 for the Application for EFAST Electronic Signature and Codes for EFAST Transmitters and Software Developers (Form EFAST-1). This notice announces the OMB approval number and expiration date.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Address requests for copies of the information collection request (ICR) or additional comments on the ICR to Gerald R. Lindrew, U.S. Department of Labor, Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room N-5647, Washington, DC 20210. Telephone: (202) 219-4782. This is not a toll-free number.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    On March 9, 2000, PWBA published a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     (65 FR 12577) announcing its intent to request renewal under the PRA of the Application for EFAST Electronic Signature and Codes for EFAST Transmitters and Software Developers. On September 25, 2000, OMB renewed its approval of the information request under OMB control number 1210-0117. The approval expires on March 3, 2002.                

Under 5 CFR 1320.5(b), an Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection displays a valid control number.

Dated: September 27, 2000.

Gerald B. Lindrew,

Deputy Director, Office of Policy and Research, Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration.

[FR Doc. 00-25231  Filed 9-29-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-29-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM QUARTERLY
REPORT ON FORM 10QSB FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1997 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                             234
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,848
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 3,082
<PP&E>                                          26,253
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (5,896)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  25,685
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,830
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            91
<OTHER-SE>                                      19,618
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    25,685
<SALES>                                          3,832
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 4,017
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      801
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,596
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  65
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,569
<INCOME-TAX>                                       458
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,111
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,111
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .11
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .11
        

</TABLE>
*The Honorable Mark W. Bennett, Chief Judge, United States District Judge for

the Northern District of Iowa, sitting by designation.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 99-3412

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the Western

v. * District of Arkansas.

*

James Dale Barnes, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: March 14, 2000

Filed: March 23, 2000 

___________

Before MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD and FAGG, Circuit Judges, and BENNETT,*

District Judge.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Through his operation of a home health agency, James Dale Barnes filed

fraudulent Medicare claims and attempted to conceal the substantial proceeds. After

authorities uncovered Barnes's scheme, a jury convicted Barnes of three counts of

money laundering and two counts of structuring transactions to evade reporting

requirements. The district court denied Barnes's motion for judgment of acquittal and
-2-

sentenced Barnes to imprisonment for 105 months. Barnes appeals both his

convictions and sentence. 

In challenging his convictions, Barnes mainly attacks the sufficiency of the

evidence. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict and drawing

all permissible inferences in the verdict's favor, however, we conclude there is

substantial evidence to support the jury's verdict. Contrary to Barnes's assertions, the

Government proved all the elements of money laundering and structuring beyond a

reasonable doubt, and thus the district court properly denied Barnes's motion for

judgment of acquittal. On the money laundering counts, the Government proved the

predicate offense of mail fraud as charged in the indictment, and the proof at trial did

not vary from the indictment's allegations. On the structuring counts, the district court

did not abuse its discretion in merging three counts into one before submission to the

jury. As for Barnes's sentence, the district court did not commit error in applying U.S.

Sentencing Guidelines Manual (U.S.S.G.) § 2S1.1 (money laundering), rather than the

financial fraud guidelines, when sentencing Barnes on his money laundering

convictions. The district court also properly enhanced Barnes's sentence under

U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1 for more than minimal planning. Having carefully reviewed all of

Barnes's arguments, we affirm his conviction and sentence.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
**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 Integrated Brand Solutions Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the period ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Steve Bajic, the President, Treasurer, Secretary and Director (Principal Executive Officer, Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer) of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

(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.

Dated: June ___, 2005.

 
| */s/ Steve Bajic* |
|-------------------|

Signature:  Steve Bajic 
| Title: | President, Treasurer, Secretary and Director |
|--------|----------------------------------------------|

(Principal Executive Officer, Principal Financial Officer 

and Principal Accounting Officer)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

WACO DIVISION

DROPBOX INC

vs.

MOTION OFFENSE, LLC, MOTION

OFFENSE, LLC, DROPBOX INC

§

§

§

§

§

NO: WA:20-CV-00251-ADA

ORDER SETTING VOIR DIRE AND PRE-VOIR DIRE CONFERENCE

This matter is before the Court on its own Motion. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY

ORDERED that the above entitled and numbered case is set for a Video Conference to discuss

voir dire protocol with the Honorable Judge Derek T. Gilliland on Friday, May 5, 2023 at 2:00

PM. The conference will be conducted by video at:

https://txwd-uscourts.zoomgov.com/j/1610427634?pwd=V2RpaERVTkdySGI4b2F6cTZGSWRiZz09 

and will be attended by at least one counsel for each party having appeared as of the date of this

Order.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that voir dire is set before the undersigned for Thursday,

May 11, 2023 at 09:00 AM in District Courtroom #2, in the United States Courthouse, 800

Franklin Ave., Waco, TX 76701. 

 SIGNED this 29th day of March, 2023.

______________________________

DEREK T. GILLILAND

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 6:20-cv-00251-ADA Document 268 Filed 03/29/23 Page 1 of 1
Case 6:20-cv-00454-ADA Document 2 Filed 06/02/20 Page 1 of 1
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 10**  **- 6**  **9 22** 

HARVEY P. SHORT , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,
v. ADRIAN HOKE, Warden , Defendant

- Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern Distric t of West Virginia , at Charleston
. David A. Faber , Senior District Judge. ( 2:09

- cv - 01097 )

Submitted : November 30, 2010 Decided: December 7, 2010

Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and WYNN , Circuit Judges.

Dismiss ed by un published per curiam opinion
. Harvey P. Short , Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Harvey P. Short seeks to appeal the district court ’ s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and denying relief without prejudi ce on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition for failure to exhaust state court remedies . The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006) . A certificate of appealabilit y will not issue absent “ a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. ” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006)
. When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural ground s, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently review ed the record and

co nclude that Short has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. Short’s motion to compel the Circuit Court of Kanawha County to adjudicate his state habeas corpus petition is3 denied. We d ispense 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. DISMISSE D
#### KING v. STATE.

No. 22622.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 10, 1943.

B. B. Chappell, of Lubbock, for appellant.

Spurgeon E. Bell, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of the burglary of a private residence at nighttime and assessed a penalty of fifteen years by a jury verdict.

The appeal is before us without bills of exception and without statement of fact. The procedure is regular. Nothing is presented for our consideration.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.