alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

LUBBOCK DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA §

§

§

V § CRIMINAL NO: 5:15-CR-065-C-BG

§

§

TIMOTHY PAUL ADAME (01) §

REPORT OF ACTION AND RECOMMENDATION ON PLEA

BEFORE THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

This Report of Action on Plea is submitted to the court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(3). 

This case has been referred by the United States District Judge to the undersigned for the taking of

a felony guilty plea. The parties have consented to appear before a United States Magistrate Judge

for these purposes.

The defendant appeared with counsel, Charles S. Chambers, before the undersigned United

States Magistrate Judge who addressed the defendant personally in open court and informed the

defendant of, and determined that the defendant understood, the admonitions under Rule 11 of the

Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

The defendant pled guilty (pursuant to a plea bargain agreement with the Government) to

Count(s) 3 of the Indictment, charging defendant with the violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1),

841(b)(1)(B)(ii), and 18 U.S.C. § 2, that is, Possession with Intent to Distribute 500 Grams or More

of Cocaine and Aiding and Abetting.

The undersigned Magistrate Judge finds the following:

(1) The defendant, with the advice of counsel, has consented orally and in writing to

enter this guilty plea before a Magistrate Judge subject to final approval and

Case 4:22-cr-00158-P Document 174 Filed 10/28/15 Page 1 of 2 PageID 86
sentencing by the United States District Judge;

(2) The defendant fully understands the nature of the charge and penalties;

(3) The defendant fully understands the terms of the plea agreement;

(4) The defendant understands his constitutional and statutoryrights and wishes to waive

these rights, including the right to a trial by jury and the right to appear before a

United States District Judge;

(5) The defendant's plea is made freely and voluntarily;

(6) The defendant is competent to enter this plea of guilty;

(7) There is a factual basis for this plea; and

(8) The ends of justice will be served by acceptance of the defendant's plea of guilty.

Therefore I recommend that the defendant’s plea of guilty be accepted and that Timothy

Paul Adame be adjudged guilty and sentence be imposed accordingly. The United States District

Judge has the power to review my actions in this proceeding and possesses final decision-making

authority. Thus, if the defendant has any objections to the findings or any other action of the

undersigned, the defendant should make those known to the United States District Judge on

or before November 11, 2015, fourteen (14) days from today’s date. 

SIGNED this 28th day of October, 2015.

______________________________________

NANCY M. KOENIG

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 4:22-cr-00158-P Document 174 Filed 10/28/15 Page 2 of 2 PageID 87
IA

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 176

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States protecting

reproductive rights.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 5, 1993

Mrs. MINK introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on the Judiciary

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United

States protecting reproductive rights.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled

3 (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the fol4 lowing article is proposed as an amendment to the Con5 stitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all

6 intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when

7 ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several
2

•HJ 176 IH

1 States within seven years after the date of its submission

2 for ratification:

3 ‘‘ARTICLE—

4 ‘‘The right of individuals to have full control over re5 productive decisions affecting their own bodies shall not

6 be abridged.’’

Æ
Case 4:22-cr-00122-O Document 78 Filed 05/18/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 160
Case 4:22-cr-00122-O Document 78 Filed 05/18/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 161
III

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 146

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

OCTOBER 19 (legislative day, OCTOBER 13), 1993

Received

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Authorizing the use of the Capitol building and grounds

for events to commemorate the 200th anniversary of

the laying of the cornerstone of the Capitol.

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring),

3 SECTION 1. USE OF CAPITOL BUILDING AND GROUNDS.

4 The Commission on the Bicentennial of the United

5 States Capitol (hereinafter in this resolution referred to

6 as the ‘‘Commission’’) may use the Capitol building and

7 grounds on October 23, 1993, or on such other date as

8 the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the

9 President pro tempore of the Senate may jointly des10 ignate, for events to commemorate the 200th anniversary

11 of the laying of the cornerstone of the Capitol.
2

•HCON 146 RDS

1 SEC. 2. TERMS AND CONDITIONS.

2 The events referred to in section 1 shall be free of

3 admission charge to the public and arranged under condi4 tions to be prescribed by the Architect of the Capitol and

5 the Capitol Police Board.

6 SEC. 3. EVENT PREPARATIONS.

7 (a) STRUCTURES AND EQUIPMENT.—Subject to the

8 approval of the Architect of the Capitol, the Commission

9 is authorized to erect upon the Capitol grounds such

10 stages, sound amplification devices, and other related

11 structures and equipment as may be required for the

12 events referred to in section 1.

13 (b) ADDITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS.—The Architect of

14 the Capitol and the Capitol Police Board are authorized

15 to make any such additional arrangements, including the

16 use of voluntary and uncompensated staff and services,

17 as may be required to carry out the events referred to in

18 section 1.

19 (c) REPRESENTATIONS.—The Architect of the Cap20 itol shall take such actions as may be necessary to ensure

21 that sponsors of the events referred to in section 1 do not
3

•HCON 146 RDS

1 make representations that such sponsorship in any way

2 constitutes an endorsement by the Federal Government.

Passed the House of Representatives October 18,

1993.

Attest: DONNALD K. ANDERSON,

Clerk.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 218 (Thursday, November 9, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 67415]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-28783]


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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Special Emphasis Panel in Bioengineering and Environmental 
Systems; Notice of Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meeting:

    Name: Special Emphasis Panel in Bioengineering and Environmental 
Systems (1189).
    Date and Time: December 19-20, 2000; 8 a.m.-5 p.m.
    Place: National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, 
Arlington, VA.
    Type of Meeting: Closed.
    Contact Person: Leon Esterowitz, Program Director, Biomedical 
Engineering and Research to Aid Persons with Disabilities, Division 
of Bioengineering and Environmental Systems, National Science 
Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230, Telephone: 
(703) 292-8320.
    Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice and recommendations 
concerning proposals submitted to NSF for financial support.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate unsolicited proposals and 
proposals received under the Initiative on Sensing and Imaging 
Technologies for Multi-Use Applications Program Announcement 
(Announcement Number NSF 00-106), as part of the selection process 
for awards.
    Reason for Closing: The proposals being reviewed include 
information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including 
technical information; financial data, such as salaries; and person 
information concerning individuals associated with the proposals. 
These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), (4) and (6) of the 
Government in the Sunshine Act.

    Dated: November 6, 2000.
Karen J. York,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 00-28783 Filed 11-8-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
### MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT 1800 Washington Boulevard eBaltimore MD 21230 

# MDE Martin O'Malley Governor 410-537-3000 e 1-800-633-6101

Anthony G. Brown Lieutenant Governor

October 24, 2007 Mr. Donald Welsh Regional Administrator 

### (3RAOO) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region III 1650 Arch Street Philadelphia PA 19103-2029 Dear Mr. Welsh: Shari T. Wilson Secretary Robert M. Summers, Ph.D. Deputy Secretary

The purpose ofthis letter is to submit copies of State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision # 07-13 concerning the establishment ofrequirements for the construction of new major sources and major modifications that are compatible with federal requirements. This SIP Revision includes amendments to Regulations .01
- .03, repeal ofexisting Regulations .04 and .05, and adoption of new Regulations .04
- .09 under COMAR 26.11.17 Nonattainment Provisions for Major New Sources and Major Modifications. The Notice ofProposed Action for the amendments and new regulations was published in the Maryland Register on July 6, 2007. A public hearing was held on August 8, 2007. The amendments and new regulations were adopted on September 18, 2007 and became effective on October 22,2007. All administrative procedures were properly followed throughout the adoption process. If you have any questions concerning this SIP submittal, please feel free to call me at (410) 537-3084 or have a member ofyour staffcall Mr. George (Tad) S. Aburn, Jr., Director, Air and Radiation Management Administration, at (410) 537-3255. Sincerely, 

# JU0! LitlShari T. Wilson Secretary STW:dhr Enclosures
cc: Judith Katz George (Tad) 

### S. Aburn, 

### Jr.

Recycled Paper www .mde.state .md .us TTY Users 1-800 -735-225 8 Via Ma ryland Relay Service
#### GLEGHORN v. STATE.

No. 22922.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 25, 1944.

E. F. Fruechte, of Wichita Falls, and Rollie Fancher, of Seymour, for appellant.

Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

GRAVES, Judge.

Appellant was charged with a violation of the liquor laws of Baylor County, and was by a jury assessed a fine of $500.

This case is in the same condition, relative to the affidavit aijd search warrant, as our cause No. 229^1, Jones v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 182 S.W.2d 919, this day decided. In both the affidavit and warrant the premises searched, and where the liquor was found, are merely set forth as being the “premises of W. G. Gleg-horn.” No further connection therewith is shown in either the affidavit or warrant; no allegation of possession, occupation or control over such premises upon the part of appellant.

Under the authorities cited in our No. 22921, Jones v. State, supra, this judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.
{"agency":"Treasury","generated":"2015-04-17 13:32:23","items":[{"id":"1","parent":null,"text":"Reporting Quarter","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/10\/15","fields":[{"type":"select","name":"2-1-year","label":"Reporting Year","options":[{"label":"2011","value":"2011"},{"label":"2012","value":"2012"},{"label":"2013","value":"2013"},{"label":"2014","value":"2014"},{"label":"2015","value":"2015"}],"value":"2015"},{"type":"select","name":"2-1-quarter","label":"Reporting Quarter","options":[{"label":"Q1","value":"Q1"},{"label":"Q2","value":"Q2"},{"label":"Q3","value":"Q3"},{"label":"Q4","value":"Q4"}],"value":"Q2"}],"multiple":false},{"id":"1-1","parent":"1","text":"Ten Oldest Requests","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/10\/15","fields":[{"type":"select","name":"2-1-1-oldest","label":"Ten Oldest","options":[{"label":"0","value":"0"},{"label":"1","value":"1"},{"label":"2","value":"2"},{"label":"3","value":"3"},{"label":"4","value":"4"},{"label":"5","value":"5"},{"label":"6","value":"6"},{"label":"7","value":"7"},{"label":"8","value":"8"},{"label":"9","value":"9"},{"label":"10","value":"10"}],"value":"10"}],"multiple":false},{"id":"1-3","parent":"1","text":"","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/10\/15","fields":[{"type":"select","name":"2-1-3-closed","label":"Ten Oldest Closed","options":[{"label":"0","value":"0"},{"label":"1","value":"1"},{"label":"2","value":"2"},{"label":"3","value":"3"},{"label":"4","value":"4"},{"label":"5","value":"5"},{"label":"6","value":"6"},{"label":"7","value":"7"},{"label":"8","value":"8"},{"label":"9","value":"9"},{"label":"10","value":"10"}],"value":null}],"multiple":false},{"id":"1-2","parent":"1","text":"FOIA Requests Information","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/08\/21","fields":[{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-component","label":"Component","options":[],"value":["BEP","DO","FinCEN","Fiscal Service","IRS","MINT","OCC","TIGTA","TTB"]},{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-received","label":"Received","options":[],"value":["36","191","100","80","2927","22","411","88","41"]},{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-processed","label":"Processed","options":[],"value":["27","144","82","73","2744","19","358","71","35"]},{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-backlog","label":"Backlog","options":[],"value":["11","282"," ","2","363"," ","20"," "," "]}],"multiple":true}],"year":"2015","quarter":"Q2"}
### I N THE UNI TED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FI F TH CI RCUI T

No. 12-10984 Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

v. SEBASTIAN DELAGARZA, Defendant-Appellant

A ppeal from the United States District Court f or the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:10-CR-55-3
Before JONES, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * T h e F e d e r a l P ublic Defender appointed to represent S e b a s t i a n D e L a G a r z a has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders

v. C alifornia , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United S tates v . F lores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). DeLaGarza has not filed a response. We have rev i e w e d c o u n s el’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with

c o u n s e l ’ s a s s e s s m e n t that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave t o withdraw is GRANTED, U n i t e d S t a te s C o u r t o f A p p e al s

F i f t h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D June 18, 2013 Ly l e W . Cay ce Clerk

* Purs uant to 5 T H C I R
. R

. 47. 5, the court has d eterm ined that this op inion should not be p ublis hed and is not p reced ent excep t und er the lim ited circum s tances s et forth in 5 T H C I R
. R. 47. 5. 4. Case: 12-10984 Document: 00512277816 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/18/2013No. 12-10984

counsel is excused from further responsibilities he r e i n, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 T H C I R
. R. 42.2.

2 Case: 12-10984 Document: 00512277816 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/18/2013
1

Njo, Heather

From: Schaeffer, John

Sent: Monday, December 23, 2013 2:04 PM

To: Bryant Hinnant

Cc: Njo, Heather; Lewis, Paul; Mattheisen, Mike

Subject: RE: Docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2009-0112 -- Charkit Chemical request for extension

Attachments: 127-68-4 HPV3 Letter to Charkit_Extension Approval Dec 23 2013.pdf

Bryant ­­ 

The letter approving your extension request has been mailed. For your convenience I am also 

sending you the attached pdf copy. 

Best regards, 

John 

John Schaeffer 

Senior Biologist 

USEPA/OPPT/CCD/CITB 

1201 Constitution Ave, NW 

Washington, DC 20460 

Mail Code: 7405M 

Phone: 202­564­8173 

­­­­­Original Message­­­­­ 

From: Bryant Hinnant [mailto:BHinnant@charkit.com] 

Sent: Friday, December 20, 2013 3:06 PM 

To: Schaeffer, John 

Subject: Docket EPA­HQ­OPPT­2009­0112 ­­ Charkit Chemical request for extension 

Mr. Schaeffer, pursuant to our telephone conversation on Wednesday, I contacted Mr. Vanderlip 

at Tiarco Chemical Company to discuss sharing their testing costs incurred in meeting the 

requirements of the captioned docket. Mr. Vanderlip indicated he understood our request but 

that he must present the issue to his senior management, some of whom are not available over 

the holidays. For that reason we are requesting an extension of the requirement to submit 

either a letter of intent to test or an exemption application until January 26, 2014. 

Please contact me if there is any concern regarding our request. I have also sent the 

original of this document via FedEx to your attention. 

Sincerely, 

Bryant Hinnant 

Charkit Chemical Corporation 

203­299­3220 

www.charkit.com
Exhibit 31.2



CERTIFICATION



I, William Goebel, certify that:



| | 1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the annual report on Form 10-K of FS Investment Corporation IV; and
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: April 24, 2019



|/s/ WILLIAM GOEBEL      | 
|----------------------- | 
|William Goebel          | 
|Chief Financial Officer |
<PAGE>

Exhibit 99.1


    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
                                   PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Carl W. Balezentis, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly
Report of Lark Technologies, Inc. on Form 10QSB for the period ending March 31,
2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly
Report on Form 10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial
condition and results of operations of Lark Technologies, Inc.

                                     By: /s/CARL W. BALEZENTIS, Ph.D
                                         -------------------------------------
                                         Carl W. Balezentis, Ph.D
                                         President and Chief Executive Officer



I, Jon H. Luksich, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly
Report of Lark Technologies, Inc. on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31,
2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly
Report on Form 10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial
condition and results of operations of Lark Technologies, Inc.

                                     By: /s/ JON H. LUKSICH
                                         -------------------------------------
                                         Jon H. Luksich
                                         Controller
#### GREEN v. STATE.

No. 21394.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Jan. 29, 1941.

R. W. Webb, of Snyder, for appellant.

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

CHRISTIAN, Judge.

The offense is possessing wine in a dry area for the purpose of sale; the punishment, a fine of one hundred dollars.

Fred W. Winch, who was an inspector of the Liquor Control Board,'testified that on the 24th of June, 1940, he bought two pints of wine from appellant in Scurry County. The county attorney and counsel for appellant agreed in open court that Scurry County was a dry area, and further agreed that the wine introduced in evidence and identified by the witness Winch as the wine he had purchased from the appellant was intoxicating. Testifying in his own behalf, appellant denied making the sale of wine to the witness Winch.

*260No bills of exception are brought forward. The evidence is deemed sufficient to support the judgment of conviction.

The judgment 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
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                       1,705,316
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         479,997
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                             2,100,627  
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 14,506,391
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                      10,494,659
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                        10,662,973
<LOANS>                                    112,342,658
<ALLOWANCE>                                    728,547
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             150,416,378
<DEPOSITS>                                 116,799,929
<SHORT-TERM>                                10,500,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          2,156,952
<LONG-TERM>                                          0   
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     1,250,356
<OTHER-SE>                                  19,709,141
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             150,416,378
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              4,467,686
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              657,392
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                76,865
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                             5,201,943
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           2,684,339
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,885,130
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        2,316,813
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   10,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              1,592,653
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,158,876
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   1,158,876
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   725,876
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.59
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.59
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.04
<LOANS-NON>                                  1,170,511
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               718,547
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              728,547
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           728,547
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>