alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
S.D. Warren Company's (The "Company") Consolidated Statements of Operations For
the Quarter Ended December 30, 1998 and Balance Sheet as of December 30, 1998
found on page 4 and 5, respectively, of the Company's Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-29-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-30-1998
<CASH>                                           4,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   41,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,300
<INVENTORY>                                    189,800
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               298,600
<PP&E>                                       1,286,500
<DEPRECIATION>                                 310,800
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,581,800
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          281,600
<BONDS>                                        499,300
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          124,100
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     321,400
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,581,800
<SALES>                                        333,400
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               333,400
<CGS>                                          260,500
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  295,600
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              14,300
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 97,300
<INCOME-TAX>                                    40,500
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             55,200
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    55,200
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.51
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Order filed August 23, 2018

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14 - 18 - 00680 - CV

____________ IN THE INTEREST OF M .E. H . On Appeal from the 345th District Court

Travis County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. D - 1 - AG - 15 - 002375



### ORDER This appeal is one of five appeals pending from the underlying suit. Those appeals were filed in the Third Court of Appeals and transferred to this court by order of the Supreme Court. The appeal numbers are:

3rd Court of Appeals 14th Court of Appeals 03 - 18 - 00165 - CV 14 - 18 - 00281 - CV 03 - 18 - 00475 - CV 14 - 18 - 00675 - CV 03 - 18 - 00489 - CV 14 - 18 - 00680 - CV 03 - 18 - 00490 - CV 14 - 18 - 00681 - CV 03 - 18 - 00491 - CV 14 - 18 - 00682 - CV This order pertains to appeal 14 - 18 - 00680 - CV only .The notice of appeal states appellant desires to appeal from the “Order to

Revoke Suspension of Commitment signed by the Court on May 10, 2018.” No such order appears in the clerk’s record, which was filed August 8, 2018. Accordingly, we direct the Travis County District Clerk to file a supplemental cl erk’s record by September 4, 2018 , containing: 1. Motion to Revoke Suspension of Commitment, filed February 7, 2018; and 2. Order to Revoke Suspension of Commitment, signed May 10, 2018. See Tex. R. App. P. 34.5(c). If either of the requested items is not part of the case file, the district clerk is directed to file a supplemental clerk’s record containing a certification so stating. PER CURIAM
Exhibit 23.1

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The
Board of Directors
CRA International, Inc.:

We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-3 Nos. 333-142064, 333-118691 and
333-123903, Form S-8 Nos. 333-133450, 333-63451, 333-62910, 333-97163, 333-63453 and
333-120539) of CRA International, Inc. of our reports dated February 10, 2011, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of CRA International, Inc. as of
January 1, 2011, November 27, 2010, and November 28, 2009, and the related consolidated statements of operations, cash flows, and shareholders' equity for the five-week period
ended January 1, 2011 and for each of the fiscal years in the three-year period ended November 27, 2010, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of
January 1, 2011, which reports appear in the November 27, 2010 Annual Report on Form 10-K of CRA International, Inc.

As
discussed in note 1 to the consolidated financial statements, CRA International, Inc. adopted ASC Topic 470-20,Debt(formerly
FASB Staff Position No. Accounting Principles Board Opinion 14-1,Accounting for Convertible Debt Instruments That May Be Settled in Cash upon Conversion (Including
Partial Cash Settlement), effective November 29, 2009.

/s/ KPMG LLPBoston, Massachusetts
February 10, 2011


---



QuickLinks
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3386 

To require Certificates of Citizenship and other Federal documents to reflect 

name and date of birth determinations made by a State court and 

for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 30, 2013 

Mr. SMITH of Texas (for himself and Ms. BASS) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To require Certificates of Citizenship and other Federal documents to reflect name and date of birth determinations 

made by a State court and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Accuracy for Adoptees 

5 Act’’. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3386 IH

1 SEC. 2. RECOGNITION OF STATE COURT DETERMINATIONS 

2 OF NAME AND BIRTH DATE. 

3 Section 320 of the Immigration and Nationality Act 

4 (8 U.S.C. 1431) is amended by adding at the end the fol5 lowing: 

6 ‘‘(c) A Certificate of Citizenship or other Federal doc7 ument issued or requested to be amended under this sec8 tion shall reflect the child’s name and date of birth as indi9 cated on a State court order, birth certificate, certificate 

10 of foreign birth, certificate of birth abroad, or similar 

11 State vital records document issued by the child’s State 

12 of residence in the United States after the child has been 

13 adopted or readopted in that State.’’. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
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 LaSalle Hotel Properties (LHO) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Jon E. Bortz, Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of LHO, 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, as amended; and
| | --- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



February 18, 2004





/s/    JON E. BORTZJon E. BortzChairman of the Board, Presidentand Chief Executive Officer
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6856

HAYER SIMMONS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus HENRY J. PONTON, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. David G. Lowe, Magistrate Judge. (CA-02-550) Submitted: October 24, 2003 Decided: November 10, 2003 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Hayer Simmons, Appellant Pro Se. Amy L. Marshall, OF FICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* The parties consented to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2000). 2 PER CURIAM: Hayer Simmons seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s * order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). The order is appealable only if a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. SeeMiller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, , 123 S. Ct. 1029, 1039 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Simmons has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We deny Simmons’s motions for an evidentiary hearing and for appointment of counsel. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.3 DISMISSED
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 99-2592

___________

Gregory D. Graves, *

*

Appellant, *

*

v. *

*

Larry May, Warden, North Central *

Unit, Arkansas Department of *

Correction; Jeff Dean, Lieutenant, *

North Central Unit, Arkansas * Appeal from the United States

Department of Correction; * District Court for the

Lindy Greene, Sgt., Port/Security, * Eastern District of Arkansas.

North Central Unit; John Belken, *

Assistant Warden, North Central Unit, *

Arkansas Department Correction; *

James Arnold, Sgt., Field/Squad Rider, *

North Central Unit, Arkansas *

Department of Correction, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

 Submitted: November 3, 1999

 Filed: December 3, 1999

___________

Before McMILLIAN, RICHARD S. ARNOLD, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.
1The Honorable Henry L. Jones, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern

District of Arkansas, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of

the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

-2-

Gregory Graves, an Arkansas inmate, appeals from the district court’s1 grant of

summary judgment in favor of defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 case. Having

carefully reviewed the record and the parties’ briefs, we conclude that the district court

properly granted summary judgment, as Graves did not produce evidence that

defendants knowingly compelled him to perform physical labor that was beyond his

strength, dangerous, or unduly painful. See Choate v. Lockhart, 7 F.3d 1370, 1374 (8th

Cir. 1993).

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 338 

To amend title 18, United States Code, to include certain territories and 

possessions of the United States in the definition of State for the purposes of chapter 114, relating to trafficking in contraband cigarettes 

and smokeless tobacco. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 22, 2013 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA (for himself, Mr. SABLAN, Ms. BORDALLO, and Mr. 

PIERLUISI) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend title 18, United States Code, to include certain 

territories and possessions of the United States in the 

definition of State for the purposes of chapter 114, relating to trafficking in contraband cigarettes and smokeless 

tobacco. 

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 ‘‘Stop Tobacco Smug5 gling in the Territories Act of 2013’’. 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with 
2 

•HR 338 IH

1 SEC. 2. TERRITORIES AND POSSESSIONS OF THE UNITED 

2 STATES INCLUDED IN THE DEFINITION OF 

3 STATE FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE PROHIBI4 TION AGAINST TRAFFICKING IN CONTRA5 BAND CIGARETTES AND SMOKELESS TO6 BACCO. 

7 Paragraph (4) of section 2341 of title 18, United 

8 States Code, is amended by striking ‘‘or the Virgin Is9 lands’’ and inserting ‘‘the Virgin Islands, American 

10 Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Is11 lands, or Guam’’. 

Æ 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with
### C OURT OF 

### A PPEALS FOR THE



### F IRST 

### D ISTRICT OF 

### T EXAS AT 

### H OUSTON



### O RDER ON 

### M OTION



### November 7, 2008 Revision Cause number: 01

- 1 2

- 01108

- C V

Style: Telicia Owens

v

. Krista G. Handyside, M.D., Samuel J. Prater, M.D., Kenneth A. Totz, D.O., FACEP, and

Memorial Hermann Hospital System d/b/a Memorial Hermann

– Texas Medical Center

Date motion filed * : May 5, 2015

Type of motion: Motion for extension of time to file motion for rehearing and/or motion for en banc

reconsideration

Party filing motion: Ap pellee

Document to be filed: Motion for rehearing and/or motion for en banc reconsideration

Is appeal accelerated? No

If motion to extend time:

Original due date: May 8, 2015

Number of previous extensions granted: 0 Current Due date: May 8, 2015

Date Requested: June 22, 2015

Ordered that motion is:

 Granted

If document is to be filed, document due: June 22, 2015

 Absent extraordinary circumstances, the Court will not grant a dditional motions to extend time

 Denied

 Dismissed ( e.g. , want of jurisdiction, moot)

 Other: _____________________________________

Judge's signature:

__

/s/ Terry Jennings

__________________________________________

Panel consists of

____________________________________________

Date: May 7, 2015
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

CEDRIC ROSE, §

 Movant, §

§ No. 3:22-cv-699-M (BT)

v. § No. 3:07-cr-169-M-1

§

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Respondent. 

§

§

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

The Court has taken under consideration the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation 

of United States Magistrate Judge Rebecca Rutherford dated March 29, 2022. The Court has 

reviewed the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation for plain error and has found none. IT 

IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the 

United States Magistrate Judge are accepted. The Court notes that subsequent to the instant 

Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation, it accepted the Findings, Conclusions, and 

Recommendation dated January 20, 2022.

SO ORDERED this 26th day of April, 2022.

Case 3:22-cv-00699-M-BT Document 4 Filed 04/26/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 9
#### GIBSON v. BAX, Sheriff and Jailer.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Aug. 27, 1951.

Wilson K. Beatty, Louisville, for appellant.

Joseph M. Hayse, Louisville, Donald R. Pierce, Nellie S. Hayse, Louisville, amici curiae.

WADDILL, Commissioner.

This opinion is rendered pursuant to an order of this Court of August 20, 1951, affirming the judgment of the Jefferson Circuit Court.

Kenneth Bernal Gibson is in jail for contempt of court. The contempt order, which divests him of his liberty, was issued for civil contempt. Roper v. Roper, 242 Ky. 658, 47 S.W.2d 517; Sebastian v. Rose, 135 Ky. 197, 122 S.W. 120. His release was denied by this Court as an “insolvent debtor” in the case of Gibson v. Stiles, Ky., 240 S.W.2d 609. His incarcera-' tion was ordered by a Judge of the Chancery Branch of the Jefferson Circuit Court, following a hearing on a rule issued against him for disobedience of an order of that court directing him to pay alimony.

In an effort to escape further punishment he has instituted this habeas corpus proceeding in the Criminal Division of the Jefferson Circuit Court. The court dismissed his petition upon the ground that the Criminal Branch of the Jefferson Circuit Court has no jurisdiction to hear the writ.

A separation of the jurisdiction of the criminal and civil courts in counties having a population of a hundred fifty-thousand or more is expressly provided for in Section 137 of our Constitution. Jeffer*989son is the only county to which this section now applies. In Gardner v. Allen, 311 Ky. 147, 223 S.W.2d 723, we held that the Criminal Branch of the Jefferson Circuit Court had jurisdiction to hear a writ of habeas corpus in a criminal proceeding'; however, in a civil proceeding, it was necessary under Section 137 of our Constitution, for the writ to be heard by a judge of some branch other than the "Criminal Division of that Court.

It follows, therefore, that the court’s dismissal of the writ for lack of jurisdiction was proper. In Gibson v. Stiles, cited above, appropriate procedure was indicated for appellant to follow in the event he felt aggrieved by Judge Speck-man’s order.

Judgment affirmed.
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

HOMERO PEREZ-ESTRADA,

#59186-177,

§

§ 

 Movant, §

§ No. 3:22-cv-00707-E (BT) 

v. § No. 3:19-cr-00472-E-3 

§

UNITED STATES of AMERICA, §

 Respondent. §

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

After making an independent review of the pleadings, files and records in this case, and 

the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge dated May 

5, 2023, the Court finds that the Findings and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge are correct, 

and they are accepted as the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the Court.

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation 

of the United States Magistrate Judge are accepted. Moreover, considering the record in this case, 

the Court DENIES a certificate of appealability. The Court adopts and incorporates by reference 

the Magistrate Judge’s Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation filed in this case in support 

of its finding that Movant has failed to show (1) that reasonable jurists would find this Court’s 

“assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong,” or (2) that reasonable jurists would 

find “it debatable whether the [motion] states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right” 

and “debatable whether [this Court] was correct in its procedural ruling.” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 

U.S. 473, 484 (2000).

If Movant files a notice of appeal, he must pay the $505.00 appellate filing fee or submit a 

motion to proceed in forma pauperis.

Case 3:22-cv-00707-E-BT Document 18 Filed 05/26/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID 172
2

SO ORDERED this 26th day of May, 2023.

Case 3:22-cv-00707-E-BT Document 18 Filed 05/26/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID 173
TO: ATTN: 

## Rulemaking Cover Sheet Secretary of State Admini strative Procedure Officer , 101 SHS , Augusta ME 04333 1. Agency: Department of Environmental Protection 2. Agency umbrella and unit number: 06-096 3. Title of rule : Surface Coating Facilities 4
. Chapter number assigned to the rule: 129 5. Dates/methods of notice: January 14, 2015 6. Date /place of hearing: none 

# 2015-120

ACCEPTED FOR FlUNG 

## JUL -2 2015
SECRETARY OF STATE

7. Type: new rule X partial amendment(s) of existing rule suspension of existing rule repeal of rule emergency rule Ll repeal and replace (complete replacement of existing chapter, with former version simultaneously repealed) 8. Name and phone of agency contact person: Tom Graham 207-287-7598 9. If a major substantive rule under Title 5, c. 375, sub-CII-A, check one of the following 0 provisional adoption (prior to Le g i s lative review) 0 final adoption 0 emergency adoption of major substantive rule 10. Certification Statement: I , Patricia W. Aho, hereby certify that the attached is a true copy of the rule described above and lawfully adopted by the Department of Environmental Protection June 2, 2015. I further certify that all portions of this rule are adopted in compliance with the requirem ents



### 11. of



## th~ Maine



## = **~rocedure ~**  Srgnaturer' 

# _____rj.j;tW 1/J_ 

# , IJJlJJ.J Printed name & title: Patricia W
. Aho, Commissioner
Approved as to form and legality by the Attorney General on 

# fo/ '2 

## 1 (;) Signature



# ~ (origiri'aiSigl1lltUft;,Jersali)JSiglled an Assistant Attorney General) Printed Name:



# --' **..l--"" '--=-**  **tii:**

**"'-" -=** 

**-= 7)**  **------=. -.::..L..** 
**,- _..**  **~/ ....:..._** **----' YI**  **--= '----**  EFFECTIVE DATE: 

## JUL
- 7 2015 

# RECEIVED JUL 0

## 2 OFFiCE OF SECRETARY OF STATE AUOOSTA, MA!NE
United States District Court 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

DALLAS DIVISION 

CHRISTIAN CABALLERO, § 

§ 

v. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:22-CV-00616-S-BK 

§ 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA § 

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION 

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

The United States Magistrate Judge made findings, conclusions, and a recommendation in 

this case. No objections were filed. The Court reviewed the proposed Findings, Conclusions and 

Recommendation for plain error. Finding none, the Court ACCEPTS the Findings, Conclusions 

and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. 

Further, considering the record in this case and pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate 

Procedure 22(b), Rule 1 l(a) of the Rules Governing§§ 2254 and 2255 proceedings, and 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c), the Court DENIES a certificate ofappealability. The Court adopts and incorporates by 

reference the Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge 

filed in this case in support of its finding that the Movant has failed to show (1) that reasonable 

jurists would find this Court's "assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong," or (2) 

that reasonable jurists would find "it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the 

denial of a constitutional right" and "debatable whether [this Court] was correct in its procedural 

ruling." Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). 

Case 3:22-cv-00616-S-BK Document 12 Filed 02/22/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID 73
IfMovant files a notice of appeal, he must pay the $505.00 appellate filing fee or submit a 

motion to proceed informapauperis. 

SO ORDERED. 

SIGNED February 22, 2024. 

2 

Case 3:22-cv-00616-S-BK Document 12 Filed 02/22/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID 74