alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16

- 40281 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
ARNOLDO MORALES , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 4:13

- CR

- 200

- 5

Before KING, ELROD, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
The attorney appointed to represent Arnoldo Morales has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed brief s in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Morales has filed responses. T he record is not sufficiently de veloped to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Morales’s i ne ffective assistance of counsel

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED August 22, 2017

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 16-40281 Document: 00514126974 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/22/2017No. 16

- 40281

2 claims ; we therefore decline to consider th e claims with out prejudice to
collateral review. See United States v. Isgar , 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014 )

. We have reviewed counsel’s brief s and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein , as well as Morales’s responses

. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, the motion for lea ve to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See
5 TH C IR

. R . 42.2. Morales’s motion to file an out

- of

- time response is GRANTED. His motions to relieve counsel and for the appointment of new counsel are DENIED. Case: 16-40281 Document: 00514126974 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/22/2017
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Erwin W. Vahlsing, Jr., the Chief Financing Officer of 4M Carbon Fiber Corp., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), hereby certify, that, to my knowledge:

 

1. The Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2017 (the “Report”) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)/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.

 

|  

/s/*Erwin W. Vahlsing, Jr.*

 

Erwin W. Vahlsing, Jr.

 

Chief Financial Officer

(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)

Dated: June 4, 2018 |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
III

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 289

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

AUGUST 22 (legislative day, AUGUST 18), 1994

Received

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Providing for an adjournment or recess of the two Houses.

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That when the House is in receipt of a mes3 sage that the Senate has agreed to a concurrent resolution

4 providing for the adjournment of the two Houses to noon

5 on Thursday, September 8, 1994, or until noon on the

6 second day after Members are notified to reassemble pur7 suant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever

8 occurs first, that the House shall stand adjourned in like

9 manner; and that when the Senate recesses or adjourns

10 at the close of business on Monday, August 22, 1994, or

11 any day thereafter, pursuant to a motion made by the ma12 jority leader or his designee, in accordance with this reso13 lution, it stand recessed or adjourned until noon on Thurs-
2

HCON 289 RDS

1 day, September 8, 1994, or until noon on the second day

2 after Members are notified to reassemble pursuant to sec3 tion 2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first.

4 SEC. 2. The Speaker of the House and the majority

5 leader of the Senate, acting jointly after consultation with

6 the minority leader of the House and the minority leader

7 of the Senate, shall notify the Members of the House and

8 the Senate, respectively, to reassemble whenever, in their

9 opinion, the public interest shall warrant it.

Passed the House of Representatives August 21,

1994.

Attest: DONNALD K. ANDERSEN,

Clerk.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 43 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 43

 Expressing the sense of the Congress that no new fee or tax should be 
 levied on oil imported into the United States from foreign countries.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 17, 1993

  Ms. Snowe (for herself, Mr. Boehlert, Mr. Rohrbacher, Mr. Manzullo, 
  Mrs. Johnson of Connecticut, and Mr. Blute) submitted the following 
concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and 
                                 Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
 Expressing the sense of the Congress that no new fee or tax should be 
 levied on oil imported into the United States from foreign countries.

Whereas some areas of the United States are heavily dependent on imported oil, 
        and thus are extremely sensitive to sharp increases in the price of oil;
Whereas an oil import fee is geographically discriminatory because it would 
        place the burden of deficit reduction on import-dependent areas of the 
        United States;
Whereas an oil import fee is an inefficient means of collecting new revenue for 
        deficit reduction, with a large percentage of the revenue generated by 
        the resulting increase in oil prices going to domestic oil producers;
Whereas an oil import fee is regressive in nature, exerting a disproportionate 
        burden on lower income individuals;
Whereas an oil import fee has an especially serious impact on rural citizens, 
        who have few transportation options and must rely on the automobile for 
        travelling long distances to work;
Whereas the United States is recovering from an extended economic recession;
Whereas an oil import fee of $5 per barrel could cost United States consumers 
        $31,000,000,000 more than current prices, raising the cost of many other 
        goods and services; and
Whereas an oil import fee of $5 per barrel (in addition to the current cost per 
        barrel) could cost consumers an average of $319 per home in the New 
        England states, $256 in the Midwestern states, $273 in the Mid-Atlantic 
        states, and $252 in the Southern states: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of the Congress that no tax or fee should be 
imposed on the import of oil from foreign countries unless such tax or 
fee was specifically provided for by statute or regulation in effect on 
the date of the adoption of this resolution.

                                 <all>
```
#### McCARTY v. STATE.

No. 24080.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 1, 1949.

For former opinion, see 212 S.W.2d 150.

Harry E. Kain, of Denison, for appel- ' lant.

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

BEAUCHAMP, Judge:

The appeal in this cause' was dismissed on June 9th, 1948, Tex.Cr.App., 212 S.W.2d 150, because the transcript showed no judgment entered in the case and no notice of appeal was found in the record. No motion for rehearing was filed within the fifteen days provided by law. That term of court adjourned the last Saturday of June, 1948, and the case was not brought ■ forward in the docket for the present term of court.

On the 18th of March, 1949, some kind of certified record, claiming to contain supplemental transcript, was filed in this Court. Evidently it was an effort of appellant to perfect the record. It was filed too late to authorize any consideration from this Court. The former order of dismissal -is valid and the Clerk of this Court is authorized and directed to issue . such mandate • as may be necessary, or appropriate, to carry out the judgment of the court below, in the event same has not been done.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED February 24, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-41263 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus FRANCISCO JAVIER SILVA-RODRIGUEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:05-CR-19-ALL

-------------------- Before GARZA, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Francisco Javier Silva-Rodriguez raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that a prior conviction is a sentencing factor under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) and not a separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
##### 



Exhibit 32.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. §1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the Quarterly Report of Endocardial Solutions, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the three month period ended March 31, 2004 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, J. Robert Paulson, Jr., Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company. /s/ J. Robert Paulson, Jr.J. Robert Paulson, Jr.Chief Financial OfficerMay 7, 2004
|                                                                                                               
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                               
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                                 
|View History: Annual                                                                                           
|View History: Annual                                                                                           
|View History:                                                                                                  
|                                                                                                               
|No chart available.                                                                                            
|No chart available.                                                                                            
|                                                                                                               
|                                                                                                               
|North Carolina Refinery Vacuum Distillation Downstream Charge Capacity as of January 1 (Barrels per Stream Day)
|                                                                                                               

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 0      | 0      | 0     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 6/14/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: June 2025
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. §1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Endocardial Solutions, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the three month period ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, J. Robert Paulson,Jr., Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

 

1.          The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.         Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
|   | /s/ J. Robert Paulson, Jr. |   |
|--------|----------------------------|--------|
|   | J. Robert  Paulson, Jr.    |
|   | Chief  Financial Officer   |
|   | August 9,  2004            |

 

1

----
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 198 Agreed to House (ATH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 198

 Providing for an adjournment of the House from Wednesday, January 26, 
                   1994 to Tuesday, February 1, 1994.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 25, 1994

 Mr. Gephardt submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
                        considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
 Providing for an adjournment of the House from Wednesday, January 26, 
                   1994 to Tuesday, February 1, 1994.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That when the House adjourns on Wednesday, January 26, 1994, it stand 
adjourned until noon on Tuesday, February 1, 1994.

                                 <all>
```
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

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.

December 28, 2016

p1212 

# Order

Clerk December 28, 2016

153224(108)

LORILLARD TOBACCO COMPANY,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v SC: 153224

COA: 313256

Court of Claims: 11

- 000093

- MT

DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY,

Defendant

- Appellee.

____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s September 6,

2016 order is considered, and it is DENIE D, because it does not appear that the order was

entered erroneously.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

DALLAS DIVISION 

 JACK WILLIAMS, § 

 § 

Plaintiff, § 

§ 

V. § No. 3:22-cv-990-N 

§ 

USAA FEDERAL SAVINGS BANK, § 

§ 

Defendant. § 

JUDGMENT 

This action came on for consideration by the Court, and the issues having been 

duly considered and a decision duly rendered, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and 

DECREED that this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE under Federal 

Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). 

SIGNED this 16th day of September, 2022. 

 _________________________________________ 

DAVID C. GODBEY 

CHIEF UNITED STATES 

DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 3:22-cv-00990-N-BN Document 10 Filed 09/16/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 70
### Knoppow, Brianna From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments : Categories:
From : Er i k Sch i ll in g Sent : Monday, M To : C hu m b l e , Pr a sad C

c : Ch i p M u r Subject: F o ll o w Ma t er i a Pr a s a d: Chumb l e, P ras ad Mon d ay, May 23, 2016 3:40 P M Knoppow, B r i anna F W : Follow Ma t er i als from our T hursday Meet i nq SGSF Reg i onal B M

P F ramework Protocol publ i cat i on

_ 2007.pdf; We lsc h et al 2006 B MP F

i e l

d Ma nual (USFS - NAAS F).pd f; US F S-NAAS F B MP P rotocol Chec k list (2007) . pd f ; VA B

MPs- Imp - Mo n i tor ing-20 1 4

_ pub . pd f ; F

lor i da 20 1 5

_

B

M

P

_

Survey

_ R

eport

_

FI NA L. pd f Wo rd Docs or P DFs

App r eci a te the o pp o r h m ity to m eet wit h y'all o n Thms d ay a fte m oo n . P e r o m disc u ssio n I h a ve attac h ed two doc ume n ts o n th e m o nitor ing p r otoco l s u sed by the Sout h e m Gro up of Sta te F o r es t e r s. As yo u m ay r ecall fr o m o m d i sc u ssio n , th e r e a r e so m e s li g h t v a r i a ti o n s in t h e questio n s as k ed by th e sout h e m sta tes , but, overall , th e questio n s a r e qui t e s imil a r. I h a ve a l so a tta c h ed sta te B M P m o ni to rin g rep 01is fr o m F lor ida a n d Vir g ini a th at h ave the q u estio n s a s k ed d min g fie l d a u dits. P lease le t m e kn ow i f yo u n eed so m e additio n a l exam p les of the q u estio n s as k ed by sta tes d min g their field in spectio n s . I h ave a l so att ac h ed a n d t h e p r otoco l be ing u sed by the N01i h e a s t e m A r e a Associ a tio n o f Sta te For es t e r s . The NEAA of Sta t e F orester s protoco l was deve l oped in pru ine r s hi p wi th th e US F S. I h ave att ac h ed th e m o ni to rin g c h eck li st f o r the protoco l as well. P lease l e t m e kn ow w h a t additio n a l inf o nn atio n I can provi de . B est r egru· d s, E rik E rik B . Sch i lling , Ph . D . Se ni o r R eseru·ch Scie n tis t N a tio n a l Coun cil for Air and St r eam Im provem ent, Inc . 

### 8270 McN a tt Ro a d 

### T X 76227

ouncil for Air and Stream Impr ovement , Inc . All rights reserved . P . O. Box 13 318 , Research Triangle, North Carolin a 27709 U.S.A. (919) 941 - 6400 1
(logo) PACIFIC LIFE

 

# **MANAGEMENT'S REPORT ONASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH SEC**

# **REGULATION AB SERVICINGCRITERIA**

 

 

Pacific Life Insurance Company (the"Asserting Party") isresponsible for assessing compliance, as of and for the year ended December 31, 2017,with the Relevant Servicing Criteria setforth in Item 1122 (d) of the SEC's Regulation AB, excluding the criteria setforth in Item 1122 (d)(1)( iii), (d)(2)(ii), (d)(3)(i), (d)(3)(ii), (d)(3)(iii),(d)(3)(iv), (d)(4)(ii), (d)(4)(iv), (d)(4)(v),(d)(4)(ix), (d)(4)(x), (d)(4)(xi), (d)(4)(xii), (d)(4)(xiii), (d)(4)(xiv), and(d)(4)(xv), which the Asserting Party has concluded are not applicable to the activities itperforms, withrespect to the asset-backed securitiestransactions covered by this report (such criteria, after giving effect tothe exclusions identified above, the "ApplicableServicing Criteria"). The transactionscovered bythisreportincludeallassetbackedtransactions underthe SecuritizedCommercial Mortgage Loans Platform (the “Platform”), as listed in AppendixA.

 

The Asserting Party has used the criteriaset forth in paragraph (d) of item 1122 of RegulationAB inorder to assess the effectiveness of Pacific Life Insurance Company'scompliance with the ApplicableServicing Criteria as of and for the yearended December 31, 2017 The Asserting Patty has concluded that it has complied, in all material respects, withthe Applicable Servicing Criteria as of and for the yearended December 31, 2017, with respect to the Platform taken as awhole.

 

Deloitte & Touche LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, has issued an attestation reportfor the Platform on the assessment of compliance with the Applicable ServicingCriteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2017, as set forth in thisassertion.

 

 

Pacific Life InsuranceCompany

 

 

/s/ John Waldeck

John Waldeck

Vice**President, Underwriting& Portfolio Management

February 28, 2018

 

 

# **APPENDIXA**

 

 

**SECURITIZED COMMERCIALMORTGAGE LOANS PLATFORM**

 

 

| **Trust********Name** | **Loan********Name**            |
|-----------------------|---------------------------------|
| COMM 2014-277P        | 277 Park Avenue                 |
| HGMT 2015-HGLR        | Houston Galleria Mall           |
| DBJPM 2016-SFC        | Westfield San Francisco  Center |
| JPM 2015-WPG          | Scotsdale Quarter               |

 

 

**PACIFICLIFE INSURANCE COMPANY**

700Newport Center Drive, Newport Beach, California 92660-6397 Tel (949)219-3011