alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States District Court

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA §

§

v. § CRIMINAL ACTION NO. 3:22-CR-00123-S

§

EDUARDO ALEJANDRO MEZA (1) §

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION CONCERNING PLEA OF GUILTY

EDUARDO ALEJANDRO MEZA (1), by consent, under authority of United States v. Dees, 125 F.3d 261 (5th 

Cir. 1997), has appeared before me pursuant to FED. R. CRIM. P. 11, and has entered a plea of guilty to Count One of the 

Indictment. After cautioning and examining EDUARDO ALEJANDRO MEZA (1) under oath concerning each of the 

subjects mentioned in Rule 11, I determined that the guilty plea was knowledgeable and voluntary and that the offense 

charged is supported by an independent basis in fact containing each of the essential elements of such offense. I therefore 

recommend that the plea of guilty be accepted, and that EDUARDO ALEJANDRO MEZA (1) be adjudged guilty of 

8 U.S.C. 1326(a), Illegal Reentry After Removal from the United States, and have sentence imposed accordingly. After 

being found guilty of the offense by the District Judge: 

☐ The Defendant is currently in custody and should be ordered to remain in custody. 

☐ The Defendant must be ordered detained pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3143(a)(1) unless the Court finds by clear and 

convincing evidence that the Defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other person or the community 

if released.

☐ The Government does not oppose release.

☐ The Defendant has been compliant with the current conditions of release. 

☐ I find by clear and convincing evidence that the Defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other 

person or the community if released and should therefore be released under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(b) or (c). 

☐ The Government opposes release.

☐ The Defendant has not been compliant with the conditions of release. 

☐ If the Court accepts this recommendation, this matter should be set for hearing upon motion of the 

Government.

☐ The Defendant must be ordered detained pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3143(a)(2) unless: (1)(a) the Court finds there is 

a substantial likelihood that a motion for acquittal or new trial will be granted, or (b) the Government has 

recommended that no sentence of imprisonment be imposed, or (c) exceptional circumstances are clearly shown 

under § 3145(c) why the Defendant should not be detained; and (2) the Court finds by clear and convincing evidence 

that the Defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other person or the community if released. 

SIGNED October 13, 2022. 

 

 _____________________________________ 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE

Failure to file written objections to this Report and Recommendation within fourteen (14) days from the date of its 

service shall bar an aggrieved party from attacking such Report and Recommendation before the assigned United States 

District Judge. 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(B). 

Case 3:22-cr-00123-S Document 22 Filed 10/13/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 35
#### SHACKLEY v. STATE.

No. 25117.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Jan. 24, 1951.

None on appeal, for appellant.

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

WOODLEY, Commissioner.

Appellant was convicted for the offense of selling whiskey, an alcoholic beverage containing alcohol in excess of four per cent by weight, in a dry area. A jury being waived, the trial court assessed his punishment at a fine of $300.

There are no bills of exception or a statement of facts in the record.

The proceedings appear to be regular.

The judgment is affirmed.

Opinion approved by the Court.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

TARA FARRELL et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

NEW MILLENIUM CONCEPTS, LTD.,

Defendant.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

Civil Action No. 3:22-cv-00728-M

ORDER

Before the Court is Defendant’s Unopposed Motion for an Extension of Time to Respond 

to the Complaint. ECF No. 62. The Motion is GRANTED. 

The deadline for Defendant to answer the Complaint is extended until May 18, 2023. 

SO ORDERED.

April 25, 2023.

BARBARA M. G. LYNN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:22-cv-00728-M Document 63 Filed 04/25/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 887
#### CORLEY v. STATE.

No. 21491.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 12, 1941.

Rehearing Denied April 9, 1941.

B. P. Maddox, of Tahoka, for appellant.

Lloyd 'W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

CHRISTIAN, Judge.

Conviction for a misdemeanor; punishment being assessed at a fine of $10.

The prosecution originated in the justice court. After an appeal to the county court, and, upon a trial de novo, judgment was entered assessing a fine of $10 against the appellant. Article 53, C.C.P., reads as follows: “The Court of Criminal Appeals shall have appellate jurisdiction coextensive with the limits of the State in all criminal cases. This article shall not be so construed as to embrace any case which has been appealed from any inferior court to the county court or county court at law, in which the fine imposed by the county court or county court at law shall not exceed one hundred dollars.”

Under the terms of the statute, this court has no jurisdiction of the appeal. Nichols v. State, 129 Tex.Cr.R. 44, 84 S.W.2d 725; Harlan v. State, 138 Tex.Cr.R. 47, 134 S.W.2d 289.

The appeal is dismissed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.

On Motion for Rehearing.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant has filed a motion for rehear-, ing and to have his appeal reinstated, in which he attacks the jurisdiction of the justice court to try the case originally, and of the county court on appeal.

We do not think that the question of jurisdiction of these courts may be raised in this manner. We adhere to our holding that we have no jurisdiction to decide any matter presented, and the motion for rehearing is denied.
Exhibit 99.1





CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER OR PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350





In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q of SmartForce PLC for the quarter ended June 30, 2002, I, Gregory M. Priest, Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of SmartForce PLC, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to §
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:





(1)  such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for
the quarter ended June 30, 2002 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2002 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of SmartForce PLC





/s/    GREGORY M. PRIESTGregory M. Priest Chairman of the
Board, President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer and Acting Principal Financial Officer)





August 14, 2002
#### HARDY v. STATE.

No. 25626.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Jan. 9, 1952.

R. E. Murphey, Coleman, for appellant.

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

WOODLEY, Commissioner.

The conviction is for possession of whiskey for the purpose of sale in a dry area with punishment assessed at 60 days in jail and a fine of $250.

*820The statement’of facts has been carefully examined, and .we find no proof showing the dry status of the area in which the liquor was found.

It follows that the evidence is insufficient to sustain the conviction.

In view of another trial, attention is directed to the cases of Wood v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 243 S.W.2d 31, and Buck v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 243 S.W.2d 700, wherein search warrants were held invalid because of the use of “and/or” in setting forth the-name of the person in oharge of the premises to be.searched.

The judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded.

Opinion approved by the Court.
April 17, 2014



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

MAX PROTETCH, INC. , Appellant

NO. 14

- 13

- 00125

- CV V.

JOHN A. HERRIN , Appellee

____________ ____________________ This cause, an appeal from the judgment in favor of ap pellee, John A. Herrin, signed November 19, 2012, was heard on the transcript of the record. We have inspected the record and find no error in the judgment. We order the judgment o f the court below AFFIRMED

. We order appellant, Max Protetch, Inc. to pay all costs incurred in this appeal.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
Plaintiff(s) 

V.

United States District Court 

 Eastern District of California

Case Number:

APPLICATION FOR PRO HAC VICE 

AND PROPOSED ORDER

Defendant(s)

Pursuant to Local Rule 180(b)(2) of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, 

 hereby applies for permission to appear and participate as 

counsel in the above entitled action on behalf of the following party or parties:

On (date), I was admitted to practice and presently in good standing in the

 (court). A certificate of good standing from that court is 

submitted in conjunction with this application. I have not been disbarred or formally censured by a court of 

record or by a state bar association; and there are not disciplinary proceedings against me. 

 I have / I have not concurrently or within the year preceding this application made a pro hac vice 

application to this court. (If you have made a pro hac vice application to this court within the last year, list 

the name and case number of each matter in which an application was made, the date of application and 

whether granted or denied.)

Date: Signature of Applicant: /s/ 

U.S. District Court – Pro Hac Vice Application 

Revised July 6, 2021 

Page 1 

/

Tara Farrell et al.

2:21-cv-01691-JAM-JDP

New Millennium Concepts, Ltd.

Ronald W. Breaux

New Millennium Concepts, Ltd.

11/03/1989

Supreme Court of Texas

01/26/2022

✔

Ronald W. Breaux

Case 3:22-cv-00728-M Document 36 Filed 01/27/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 666
Pro Hac Vice Attorney

Applicant's Name: 

Law Firm Name: 

Address: 

City: State: Zip: 

Phone Number w/Area Code: 

City and State of Residence: 

Primary E-mail Address: 

Secondary E-mail Address: 

I hereby designate the following member of the Bar of this Court who is registered for ECF with whom the 

Court and opposing counsel may readily communicate regarding the conduct of the case and upon whom 

electronic notice shall also be served via the Court’s ECF system: 

Local Counsel's Name: 

Law Firm Name: 

Address: 

City: State: Zip: 

Phone Number w/Area Code: Bar # 

ORDER 

Dated: January 26, 2022 /s/ John A. Mendez

THE HONORABLE JOHN A. MENDEZ

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

U.S. District Court – Pro Hac Vice Application 

Revised July 6, 2021 

Page 2

Ronald W. Breaux

Haynes and Boone, LLP

2323 Victory Avenue, Suite 700

Dallas TX 75219

(214) 651-5688

Dallas, TX

ronald.breaux@haynesboone.com

elaine.hadaway@haynesboone.com

Mark D. Erickson

Haynes and Boone, LLP

600 Anton Blvd., Ste. 700

Costa Mesa CA 92626

(949) 202-3000 104403

The Pro Hac Vice Application is APPROVED. The Pro Hac Vice Attorney is DIRECTED to request

filing access through PACER.

Case 3:22-cv-00728-M Document 36 Filed 01/27/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 667
EXHIBIT 99.2



BORDERS
GROUP, INC.

STATEMENT
OF GREGORY P. JOSEFOWICZ,CHAIRMAN, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF
BORDERS GROUP, INC.PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Gregory P. Josefowicz,
certify that the Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended October 26, 2003, of Borders Group, Inc. fully
complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that the information
contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of Borders Group, Inc.

Date: December 10, 2003

/s/ GREGORY P. JOSEFOWICZ
-----------------------------------------------
Gregory P. Josefowicz
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
Borders Group, Inc.

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

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 11

Declaring the sense of Congress regarding periods of silence in the public

schools.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 5, 1993

Mr. NEAL of North Carolina submitted the following concurrent resolution;

which was referred jointly to the Committees on Education and Labor

and the Judiciary

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Declaring the sense of Congress regarding periods of silence

in the public schools.

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That it is the sense of Congress—

3 (1) that the Constitution of the United States

4 does not preclude periods of stillness and silence in

5 the public schools to be used at the discretion of in6 dividual students for quiet and private prayer, medi7 tation, contemplation, or introspection; and

8 (2) that individual religious conscience should

9 not be violated or compromised in the establishment

10 or operation of such periods of stillness and silence.
2

HCON 11 IH

Æ
EXHIBIT 32.1 TO 10-QSB
----------------------

                            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 quarterly report of Prologic Management Systems,
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended December 31, 2005, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, James M. Heim, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, to
the best of my knowledge, 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 for the periods presented.


                  /s/ James M. Heim
                  ---------------------------------
                  James M. Heim
                  Chief Executive Officer
                  Prologic Management Systems, Inc.
                  February 14, 2006
#### MARTIN v. STATE.

No. 22221.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 17, 1942.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 14, 1942.

Jno. A. Ballowe, of Dallas, for appellant.

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

KRUEGER, Judge.

The' conviction is for burglary. The penalty assessed is confinement in the state penitentiary for a term of five years.

The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception. The indictment, as well as all other matters of procedure, appear to be regular.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.

On Motion for Rehearing.

DAVIDSON, Judge.

In his motion for rehearing, the appellant, for the first time, attempts to challenge the organization of the grand jury which returned the indictment in this case. There is nothing in the record before us which supports any of appellant’s contentions. The indictment and all proceedings relative thereto, as they appear in the reo ord before us, are regular.

The motion for rehearing is overruled.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.
1

Whalen, Marilyn

From: Poentis, Aaron Y CIV NAVFAC HI, EV <aaron.poentis@navy.mil>

Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 6:10 PM

To: Richard Takaba (richard.takaba@doh.hawaii.gov); roxanne.kwan@doh.hawaii.gov

Cc: steven.chang@doh.hawaii.gov; stuart.yamada@doh.hawaii.gov; Linder, Steven; Pallarino, 

Bob; Lovgren, Andrew C LCDR, NAVSUP FLCPH C700; Shimabuku, June T. CIV NAVFAC 

HI, EV4; Kishaba, Raelynn I CIV NAVFAC HI, EV4; Tsutsui, Bruce O CIV NAVFAC HI, 

OPHE3

Subject: RED HILL STATUS REPORT - March 10, 2015

Signed By: aaron.poentis@navy.mil

Importance: High

Hi Richard/Roxanne:

Attached are the updated information for the weekly progress report from Navy Region Hawaii, and the Fleet Logistic

Center Pearl Harbor for the week of March 10, 2015.  In a process to ease reading, only sections with changes will be

annotated.

1. Preliminary Work Plan  

Action complete.

2. Release Response Action Items (initiate immediately, complete as soon as practicable)

a. Action 1 ‐ Provide a schedule for the ventilation of Tank 5 and an estimated date to commence the investigation

of release point(s) within Tank 5.

Action complete.

b. Action 2  ‐ The rate of vertical migration for the released JP‐8 free product is unknown.  Information from the

previously collected basalt cores could be used for initial modeling of vertical migration.  This information is necessary to

protect drinking water resources from petroleum contamination.  Prepare models for petroleum JP‐8 releases of 10,000,

20,000 and 30,000 gallons from points at 25% intervals from the bottom to the top of Tank 5.   

No change.   

c. Action 3 ‐ Removal of petroleum free product from the area outside the tank will reduce downward migration of

the released JP‐8 free product.  Characterization of the free product plume and recovery of free product with increased

monitoring are required to address this plume.   

No change.  

d. Action 4 ‐ Additional studies and procedures are required to address the potential and impact of any future

releases from the USTs within the Complex.  This will require new financial and personnel resources to complete.  

Funding for the preliminary work plan and all necessary following work is critical.   

d.(1)  Groundwater Monitoring Wells

No change.
2

d.(2)  Site Characterization  

No change.   

d.(3)  AOC/SOW  

Discussions are ongoing.

d.(4)  Request for Additional Information  

No change.

d.(5)  BWS/USGS Groundwater Flow Study

No change.

Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions.

v/r,

Aaron
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 Commerce

###### Foreign-Trade Zones Board

          - [Order No. 1124]

Pursuant to its authority under the Foreign-Trade Zones Act of June 18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the Board) adopts the following Order:

*Whereas,*                     the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County (Tennessee), grantee of Foreign-Trade Zone 78, submitted an application to the Board for authority to expand FTZ 78 to include two new sites, as well as for manufacturing authority (computer products) within those sites for Dell Computer Corporation (FTZ Docket 23-2000; filed 6/1/2000);                 

*Whereas,*                     notice inviting public comment was given in                     **Federal Register**                     (65 FR 36888, 6/12/2000) and the application has been processed pursuant to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations; and,                

*Whereas,*                     the Board adopts the findings and recommendations of the examiner's report, and finds that the requirements of the FTZ Act and Board's regulations are satisfied, and that the proposal is in the public interest;                 

*Now, Therefore,*                     the Board hereby orders:                

The application to expand FTZ 78, and for manufacturing authority for Dell Computer Corporation, is approved, subject to the Act and the Board's regulations, including Section 400.28.

Signed at Washington, DC, this 24th day of October 2000.

Troy H. Cribb,

Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Import Administration, Alternate Chairman, Foreign-Trade Zones Board.

Attest: 

**Dennis Puccinelli,**

*Executive Secretary.*

[FR Doc. 00-28287 Filed 11-2-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l unani m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T HA N Z HA NG L U, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 08- 73934 A ge nc yN o. A 097- 883- 908 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

an O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d Jul y12, 2011 ** B e f o r e : S C H R O E D E R , A L A R C Ó N , an dL E A V Y , C ir c u it Ju d g e s . H an Z hang L u, ana t i ve and c i t i z e n of C hi na , pe t i t i ons f

orr e vi e w of

the B oard of Im m i grat i on A pp ea l s’ (“ B IA ”) order di sm i ss i ng hi s app ea l fr om an i m m i gr a t i on j udge ’ s de c i s i on de ny i ng hi s appl i c a t i on f ora s y l um and w i thhol di ng of r e m ova l . W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on unde r8 U . S . C . § 1252. W e r e vi e w f or 

# FI LED JU L 14 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS08- 73934 2 s ub s tan tia l e v id e n c e , Zehat ye v. G on zales , 45 3 F . 3d 11 82 , 11 84 –8 5 (9th C i r. 2 0 0 6 ) , an dw e d e n yth e p e titio n f o rr e v ie w . S ub s tan tia l e v id e n c e s up p o rts th e B I A ’s d e te rm in a tio n th a t L u is in e lig ib le f o ra s y lu m w h e r e h e c o n c e d e dh e s u f f e r e dn o p a s t p e r s e c u tio n an df a ile dto e s tab lis h aw e ll- f

o u n d e df e aro f f u tu r e p e r s e c u tio n in C h in a . See 8 U . S. C. § 1 1 0 1 ( a ) ( 4 2 ) ( A ) ; Arr i a g a - Ba rr i e n to s v . I NS , 937 F . 2d 411, 414 ( 9th C i r . 1991) ( n o tin g th a t p e r s e c u tio n o f ap e titio n e r ’s f

a m ilym e m b e r s m aye s tab lis h aw e llf ounde d f e ar , de s pi t e al a c k of

pe r s e c ut i on a ga i ns tthe pe t i t i one r , onl yi f the p e r s e c u tio n is “c lo s e lytie dto th e p e titio n e r ” ) . A c c o r d in g ly , L u ’s a s y lu m c la im f a ils . B ec ause L u fai l ed t o p rove el i gi bi l i ty f or as ylum , L u h as nece ss ar i l y f ai l ed to p r o v e e lig ib ilityf

o rw ith h o ld in g o f

r e m o v a l. Se e Fa ra h v . A s h c r o ft , 348 F . 3d 1 1 5 3 , 1 1 5 6 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 3 ) . P E T I T I ON F OR RE V I E W DE NI E D.