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

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

MAURICIO PAVEL DE LA FUENTE ET 

AL.,

Plaintiffs,

v. No. 4:22-cv-0345-P

WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL 

ASSOCIATION ET AL.,

Defendants.

ORDER

On May 31, 2022, the Parties notified the Court that “they have fully 

compromised and settled all claims and matters in controversy between 

them.” ECF No. 17. In accordance with the representation that all 

claims and matters in controversy are settled, the Court ORDERS that 

this case is DISMISSED with prejudice. 

SO ORDERED on this 31st day of May, 2022.

Mark T. Pittman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:22-cv-00345-P Document 18 Filed 05/31/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 293
EXHIBIT
23.1




CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM




We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the following Registration
Statements:




1.
            Registration
      Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-61231) pertaining to the 1998 stock option
      plan of PDI, Inc.,


2.
            Registration
      Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-60512) pertaining to the 2000 Omnibus
      Incentive Plan of PDI, Inc., and


3.
            Registration
      Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-123312) pertaining to the 2004 Stock Award and
      Incentive Plan of PDI, Inc.;




of our
reports dated March 11, 2009, with respect to the consolidated financial
statements and schedule of PDI, Inc. and the effectiveness of internal control
over financial reporting of PDI, Inc., included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K)
for the year ended December 31, 2008.




/s/Ernst
& Young LLP


MetroPark,
New Jersey


March 11,
2009
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman, Chief Justice

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 March 7, 2017

p0227

Order 

Clerk

March 7, 2017

152874(14)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 152874

COA: 329618

Saginaw CC: 85-006709-FC

JOSEPH EARL GIBBS,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s September 

27, 2016 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order 

was entered erroneously.
**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**

|                                                                                                               |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| /s/ R.              DAVID RUSSELL                                                              |
|                                                                                                                    |
| R.                David RussellPresident                and Chief Executive OfficerNovember                8, 2005 |

|                                                                                                                                                                           |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| /s/ MELVYN              WILLIAMS                                                                                                                           |
|                                                                                                                                                                                |
| Melvyn                WilliamsChief                Financial Officer and Senior Vice President-Finance                and Corporate DevelopmentNovember                8, 2005 |

----
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED AUGUST 13, 2013

NO. 03-12-00328-CV

In the Matter of M. O., Appellant

APPEAL FROM 98TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, PEMBERTON AND ROSE

AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE PURYEAR

THIS CAUSE came on to be heard on the record of the court below, and the same being 

considered, because it is the opinion of this Court that there was no error in the adjudication of 

the juvenile court: IT IS THEREFORE considered, adjudged and ordered that the adjudication 

of the juvenile court is in all things affirmed. It FURTHER appearing to the Court that 

appellant has filed an affidavit of inability to pay costs, it is FURTHER ordered that no costs of 

appeal be assessed against appellant; and that this decision be certified below for observance.
H. Con. Res. 285 Agreed to September 23, 1994

One Hundred Third Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,

the twenty-fifth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-four

Concurrent Resolution

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That in the enrollment of the bill (S. 2182) to authorize

appropriations for fiscal year 1995 for military activities of the

Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense

programs of the Department of Energy, to prescribe personnel

strengths for such fiscal year for the Armed Forces, and for other

purposes, the Secretary of the Senate shall make the following

corrections:

(1) In section 3136, strike out ‘‘20 percent’’ and insert

in lieu thereof ‘‘80 percent’’.

(2) In section 132(a)(1)(C), strike out ‘‘(described in subsection (i))’’ and insert in lieu thereof ‘‘(described in subsection

(h))’’.

(3) In section 924, strike out ‘‘Court of Military Criminal

Appeals’’ each place it appears and insert in lieu thereof ‘‘Court

of Criminal Appeals’’.

(4) In section 1661(b)(4)—

(A) strike out ‘‘by adding at the end’’ in subparagraph

(A) and insert in lieu thereof ‘‘by inserting after section

3020’’; and

(B) strike out ‘‘by adding at the end’’ in subparagraph

(B) and insert in lieu thereof ‘‘by inserting after section

8020’’.

(5) In section 2832, strike out ‘‘Authority’’ each place it

appears (other than in the caption of subsection (b)) and insert

in lieu thereof ‘‘Agency’’.

Amend the title so as to read: ‘‘An Act to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 1995 for military activities of the

Department of Defense, for military construction, and for

defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe
H. Con. Res. 285—2

personnel strengths for such fiscal year for the Armed Forces,

and for other purposes.’’.

Attest:

Clerk of the House of Representatives.

Attest:

Secretary of the Senate.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 09-6705

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff – Appellee, 

 v. 

FRED DANIEL WILLIAMS, 

 Defendant – Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle 

District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. N. Carlton Tilley, 

Jr., Senior District Judge. (1:03-cr-00023-NCT-1) 

Submitted: June 12, 2009 Decided: June 29, 2009 

Before TRAXLER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. 

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Thomas Norman Cochran, Assistant Federal Public Defender, 

Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellant. Sandra Jane 

Hairston, Angela Hewlett Miller, Assistant United States 

Attorneys, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2 

PER CURIAM: 

Fred Daniel Williams appeals the district court’s 

order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for 

reduction of sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no 

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated 

by the district court. United States v. Williams, No. 1:03-cr00023-NCT-1 (M.D.N.C. April 14, 2009). We deny the motion for 

appointment of counsel and 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. 

AFFIRMED
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 219 (Monday, November 13, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67715-67716]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-28949]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Office of Inspector General


Performance Review Board Membership

    The following individuals are eligible to serve on the Performance 
Review Board (PRB) in accordance with the Department of Commerce Senior 
Executive Service Performance Appraisal System and the Office of 
Inspector General's PRB Charter:

Edward L. Blansitt, Deputy Inspector General
Elizabeth T. Barlow, Counsel to the Inspector General

[[Page 67716]]

Jill A. Gross, Assistant Inspector General for Inspections & 
Evaluations
Judith J. Gordon, Assistant Inspector General for Systems Evaluation
Stephen E. Garmon, Assistant Inspector General for Investigations
Robert Seabrooks, Assistant Inspector General for Auditing, Small 
Business Administration

Denise A. Yaag,
Executive Secretary, Performance Review Board, Office of Inspector 
General.
[FR Doc. 00-28949 Filed 11-9-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-55-M
Exhibit 32.1
 
 CERTIFICATION
 
 The undersigned, Mario A. Rivas, President and Chief Executive Officer of ANADIGICS, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certifies that the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period ended October 2, 2010 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 
 Dated: November 3, 2010
 By:
/s/ Mario A. RivasMario A. RivasPresident and Chief Executive Officer
 
 This certification shall not be deemed to be “filed” for the purpose of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and will not be incorporated by reference into any registration statement filed under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, unless specifically identified therein as being incorporated by reference.
 
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to ANADIGICS, Inc. and will be retained by ANADIGICS, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AMARILLO DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA §

§

v. § 2:22-CR-00030-Z-BR

§

RICARDO SANCHEZ (3) §

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

CONCERNING PLEA OF GUILTY

RICARDO SANCHEZ (3), 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 1 of the Superseding 

Information. After cautioning and examining RICARDO SANCHEZ (3) 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 RICARDO SANCHEZ (3) be adjudged guilty of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 

841(b)(1)(C) - POSSESSION WITH INTENT TO DISTRIBUTE A FENTANYL ANALOGUE 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 § 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.

Date: September 2, 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 2:22-cr-00030-Z-BR Document 99 Filed 09/02/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 220
IV

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 235

Concerning the negotiation of limitations on nuclear weapons testing.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 24, 1994

Mr. SABO (for himself, Mr. KOPETSKI, Mr. DELLUMS, and Mr. GEPHARDT)

submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on Foreign Affairs

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Concerning the negotiation of limitations on nuclear weapons

testing.

Whereas, on January 25, 1994, the United States joined with

thirty-seven other nations to begin negotiations for a

comprehensive treaty to ban permanently all nuclear

weapons testing;

Whereas, on March 14, 1994, the President decided to extend

the current United States nuclear testing moratorium at

least through September 1995;

Whereas the United States is seeking to extend indefinitely

the Non-Proliferation Treaty at the April 1995 NPT

Extension Conference;
2

HCON 235 IH

Whereas conclusion of a comprehensive test ban treaty would

contribute toward successful negotiations to extend the

Non-Proliferation Treaty; and

Whereas, agreements to eliminate nuclear testing and control

the spread of nuclear weapons would contribute to the

national security of the United States, its allies, and

other nations around the world: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That Congress—

3 (1) applauds the President for maintaining the

4 United States nuclear testing moratorium and for

5 taking a leadership role toward negotiation of a com6 prehensive test ban treaty;

7 (2) encourages all nuclear powers to refrain

8 from conducting nuclear explosions, prior to conclu9 sion of a comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty; and

10 (3) urges the Conference on Disarmament to

11 make all possible progress toward a comprehensive

12 test ban treaty by the end of 1994.

Æ
To:

From: Date: Subject: File

Antonio M. Bouza September 4, 2001 NEMA meeting August 28, 001

On August 28, 2001, NEMA had an informal meeting with DOE to review DOE's draft test procedure for distribution transformers. A total of nine NEMA individuals, members and employees, were physically present or joined the conversation by phone. The group representing DOE for the hour and a half meeting included Carl Adams (DOE), Oskars Petersons (NIST) and Antonio Bouza (DOE). NEMA was told that DOE is planning on having a public workshop on the test procedure, re-opening, early next year. Which will allow all interested stakeholders an opportunity to publicly comment on any issues related to DOE's test procedure for Distribution Transformers. NEMA made three major technical suggestions, which DOE is exploring: • Scope ® Ambient testing temperature • DOE's sampling plan To: File From: Antonio M. Bouza Date: September 4, 2001 Subject: NEMA meeting August 28, 2001

On August 28, 2001, NEMA had an informal meeting withDOE to review DOE's draft test procedure for distribution transformel'S. Atotal of nine NEMA individuals, members and employees, were physicallypresent orjoined the conversationby phone. The group representing DOE for the hour and a half meeting included Carl Adams (DOE), Oskars Petersons (NIST) andAntonio Bouza (DOE). NEMA was told tht"l.t DOE is planning onhaving a public workshop on tIle test procedure, re-opening, early next year. Which will allow all interested stakeholders an opportunity to publicly comment on any issues related to DOE's test procedure for DistributionTransformers. NEMA made three major technical suggestions, which DOE is exploring:

o Scope • Ambient testing temperature • DOE's sampling plan
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 291 Engrossed in House (EH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 291

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That in the enrollment of the bill (S. 1587) to revise and streamline 
the acquisition laws of the Federal Government, and for other purposes, 
the Secretary of the Senate shall make the following corrections:
            (1) In paragraph (2)(A) of the matter proposed to be added 
        at the end of section 3553(f) of title 31, United States Code, 
        by paragraph (2) of section 1403(c)--
                    (A) strike out ``person'' both places it appears 
                and insert in lieu thereof ``party''; and
                    (B) strike out ``subparagraph (C)'' and insert in 
                lieu thereof ``subparagraph (B)''.
            (2) In the matter proposed to be inserted in section 
        111(f)(5) of the Federal Property and Administrative Services 
        Act of 1949 by subsection (a) of section 1435, insert after 
        ``and no party'' in the second sentence the following: ``(other 
        than a small business concern (within the meaning of section 
        3(a) of the Small Business Act))''.
            (3) In the matter proposed to be added at the end of the 
        Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act by section 4101--
                    (A) strike out ``subsection (c)'' in subsection 
                (a)(2) of such matter and insert in lieu thereof 
                ``subsection (b)''; and
                    (B) strike out ``subsection (a)'' in subsection (b) 
                of such matter and insert in lieu thereof ``subsection 
                (a)(2)''.
            (4) In the matter proposed to be added at the end of the 
        Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act by section 8003, 
        strike out ``subsections (a)'' in subsection (c) of such matter 
        and insert in lieu thereof ``subsections (a)(2)''.
            (5) In subsection (c) of section 10001, strike out ``and 
        7207'' and insert in lieu thereof ``and 7206''.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 20, 1994.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
103d CONGRESS

  2d Session

                            H. CON. RES. 291

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

   Directing the Secretary of the Senate to make corrections in the 
                         enrollment of S. 1587.
```
UNITED STATES
                SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                        Washington, D.C.  20549


                            Form 10-QSBA


(Mark One)

[X]     Quarterly report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities
        Exchange Act of 1934 For the period ended March 31, 1996
        OR
[ ]     Transition report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities
        Exchange Act of 1934 Commission File Number: 0-25678


                          MUSTANG SOFTWARE, INC.
        (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

                              California
                        (State of incorporation)

                              77-0204718
                           (I.R.S.  employer
                        identification number)

                         6200 Lake Ming Road
                    Bakersfield, California 93306
              (Address of principal executive offices)

                           (805) 873-2500
         (Registrant's telephone number, including area code)

	Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports
        required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
        Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period
        that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has
        been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days:

                        Yes       [ X ]        No    [ ]            

        As of May 5, 1996, there were 3,358,200 shares of the Registrant's
        Common Stock outstanding.





===============================================================================

<PAGE>




                                SIGNATURES

	In accordance with the requirements of the Securities Act of 1934, the
        Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by
        the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.  

    Signature                   Title                           Date

   /s/ James A. Harrer
   -------------------------
    James A. Harrer             President and Chief Executive
                                Officer (Principal Executive 
                                Officer) and a Director         August 13, 1996
   /s/ Donald M. Leonard
   -------------------------
   Donald M. Leonard            Vice President Finance and
                                Chief Financial Officer
                                (Principal Financial and
                                Accounting Officer)             August 13, 1996