alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[PUBLISH]

 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

 ________________________

 No. 11-10255

 ________________________

 D.C. Docket No. 0:06-cv-60370-MGC

MICHAEL GEORGE BRUNO, SR.,

llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

SECRETARY, 

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,

 lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Respondent - Appellee.

________________________

 Appeal from the United States District Court

 for the Southern District of Florida

 ________________________

(October 30, 2012)

Before TJOFLAT, MARTIN and EDMONDSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Michael George Bruno, Sr., a Florida death row inmate, appeals from the

district court’s denial of his first federal habeas corpus petition, brought pursuant

Case: 11-10255 Date Filed: 10/30/2012 Page: 1 of 2 
to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. This case is currently under submission after briefing and

oral argument. 

On October 24, 2012, Mr. Bruno’s counsel filed a motion to dismiss appeal

because he was notified on October 23 that Mr. Bruno died of natural causes. The

Florida Department of Corrections’ website now also indicates that Mr. Bruno is

deceased. See Offender Search, Florida Department of Corrections, (last updated

October 23, 2012).

The death of the habeas petitioner renders a habeas action moot. See Dove

v. United States, 423 U.S. 325, 96 S. Ct. 579 (1976). In light of this, we vacate the

judgment and remand the case to the district court with directions to dismiss the

case as moot. See Knapp v. Baker, 509 F.2d 922, 922–23 (5th Cir. 1975); see 1

also Griffey v. Lindsey, 349 F.3d 1157, 1157 (9th Cir. 2003); McMillin v.

Bowersox, 102 F.3d 987 (8th Cir. 1996); Hillman v. McCaughtry, 14 F.3d 350,

350 (7th Cir. 1994); Hann v. Hawk, 205 F.2d 839, 839–40 (8th Cir. 1953). 

VACATED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.

 In Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206, 1209 (11th Cir.1981) (en banc), we

1

adopted as binding precedent all decisions of the former Fifth Circuit handed down before

October 1, 1981.

2

Case: 11-10255 Date Filed: 10/30/2012 Page: 2 of 2
Case 4:22-cr-00046-Y Document 1 Filed 02/09/22 Page 1 of 3 PageID 1
Case 4:22-cr-00046-Y Document 1 Filed 02/09/22 Page 2 of 3 PageID 2
Case 4:22-cr-00046-Y Document 1 Filed 02/09/22 Page 3 of 3 PageID 3
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATION





S. James
Miller, Chief Executive Officer of ImageWare Systems, Inc. (the “Company”),
and Wayne Wetherell, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby
certifies pursuant to the requirement set forth in Rule 13a-14(b) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and
Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C.
Section 1350) that, to the best of his knowledge:


1. The
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended
June 30, 2008 fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and
 
 2. The
information contained in the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company
for the quarter ended June 30, 2008 fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition of the Company at the end of the period
covered by the Quarterly Report and the results of operations of the Company for
the period covered by the Quarterly Report.





IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the
undersigned have set their hands hereto as of the 18th day of September,
2008.




/s/    S.
      James MillerS.
      James MillerChief
      Executive Officer/s/    Wayne
      WetherellWayne
      WetherellChief
      Financial Officer(Principal
      Financial and Accounting Officer)


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

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 250

Requiring the President to obtain authorization under the War Powers Resolution prior to introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities

in the former Yugoslavia.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

AUGUST 5, 1993

Mr. ROTH introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on Foreign Affairs

JOINT RESOLUTION

Requiring the President to obtain authorization under the

War Powers Resolution prior to introducing United

States Armed Forces into hostilities in the former Yugoslavia.

Whereas the President has stated his intention to commit

United States Armed Forces in the former Yugoslavia

under the auspices of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HJ 250 IH

1 SECTION. 1. REQUIREMENT OF AUTHORIZATION FOR IN2 TRODUCTION OF ARMED FORCES INTO HOS3 TILITIES IN THE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—The President shall obtain spe5 cific statutory authorization from the Congress under the

6 War Powers Resolution prior to introducing United States

7 Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where im8 minent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the

9 circumstances, in the former Yugoslavia.

10 (b) FORMER YUGOSLAVIA DEFINED.—For purposes

11 of this joint resolution, the term ‘‘former Yugoslavia’’

12 means the territory, airspace, or waters of any state that

13 was a part of the former Socialist Federal Republic of

14 Yugoslavia.

Æ
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

FREDERICK HERROD, §

 Petitioner, §

§

v. § No. 3:22-cv-320-K (BT)

§

DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID, et al.,

 Respondents.

§

§

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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

case, and the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States 

Magistrate Judge filed March 29, 2022, and Petitioner’s Objections filed on April 8, 

2022, the Court finds that the Findings and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge 

are correct, and they are accepted as the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation 

of the Court. Petitioner’s Objections are OVERRULED.

It is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that the petition for writ of 

habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 be TRANSFERRED to the United States Court 

of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit pursuant to In re Epps, 127 F.3d 364, 365 (5th Cir. 

1997).

SO ORDERED.

Signed April 12th, 2022.

 ________________________________ 

ED KINKEADE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:22-cv-00320-K-BT Document 19 Filed 04/13/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 201
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

WICHITA FALLS DIVISION

DAVID BAUMGARTNER, §

 §

Plaintiff, §

 §

v. § Civil Action No. 7:22-cv-00081-O-BP

 §

MARSHALL THOMAS, et al., §

 §

Defendants. §

 

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

The United States Magistrate Judge made Findings, Conclusions, and a Recommendation 

in this case. No objections were filed, and the Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation is ripe for 

review. The District Judge reviewed the proposed Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation 

for plain error. Finding none, the undersigned District Judge believes that the Findings and 

Conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct, and they are accepted as the Findings and 

Conclusions of the Court.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 8) is 

GRANTED. Plaintiff’s claims under federal law are dismissed with prejudice and his claims 

asserting violations of Texas law are dismissed without prejudice.

SO ORDERED on this 22nd day of May, 2023. 

Case 7:22-cv-00081-O-BP Document 18 Filed 05/22/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 165
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.2


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ENACTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Valrico Bancorp, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jerry
L. Ball, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss. 1350, as enacted 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.




/s/ Jerry L. Ball



Jerry L. Ball
Chief Financial Officer
August 12th , 2002
### I N THE UNI TED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FI F TH CI RCUI T

No. 12-50039 Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

v. ROLANDO EULALIO GUERRA, Defendant-Appellant

A ppeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 5:10-CR-564-1
Before JONES, DENNIS, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The attorney a ppointed to represent R o l a n do Eulalio G uerra has moved for leave to wit h d r a w a n d has filed a brief i n accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and U n ited States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Guer r a has n ot filed a response. We have reviewed c o unsel’s brief and the relevan t p ortions 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 May31, 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: 12-50039 Document: 00512259472 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/31/2013No. 12-50039

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: 12-50039 Document: 00512259472 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/31/2013
APPA Follow up to EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234 and EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0044, RFL 

9286-1 

Pugh, Theresa 

to: Dom Mancini (dmancini@omb.eop.gov), Echols, Mabel E. 

11/16/2011 05:46 PM 

Cc: Group A-AND-R-DOCKET, Gina McCarthy, LisaP Jackson, RobertJ Wayland, 

Janet McCabe, "Nipper, Joe", Bill Maxwell, "Sholars, Forrest" 

Dear Mr. Mancini 

 

This is a letter from Mark Crisson, APPA’s President & CEO, following our 

meeting with OMB on November 3, 2011. I regret that we did not get cards 

from many of the attendees at the meeting and we do not have all of their 

e mail addresses. I hope that a member of your staff will forward this 

thank you letter to them. 

 

I am copying the EPA Air Docket with this letter. We note that the 

handouts from our meeting are already in the OMB Docket. 

 

Thank you again for the meeting. 

 

Theresa Pugh 

 

 

Theresa Pugh 

Director, Environmental Services 

APPA 

1875 Connecticut Ave, NW 

Suite 1200 

Washington, D. C. 20009 

202 467 2943 (direct) 

202-495-7443 personal fax number 

Note new e-mail address: TPugh@publicpower.org 

 

omb thank you FINAL Version 11-16-2011.pdf
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.3

                            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 Image Sensing System, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Arthur
J. Bourgeois, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:

         1.       The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
                  13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; 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/ Arthur J. Bourgeois
                                                ------------------------------
                                                Arthur J. Bourgeois
                                                Chief Financial Officer
                                                August 14, 2002
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 315 Received in Senate (RDS)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 315

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

            October 7 (legislative day, September 12), 1994

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
       Providing for an adjournment or recess of the two Houses.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That when the House adjourns on the legislative day of Friday, October 
7, 1994, pursuant to a motion made by the majority leader, or his 
designee, in accordance with this concurrent resolution, it stand 
adjourned until noon on Tuesday, November 29, 1994, or until noon on 
the second day after Members are notified to reassemble pursuant to 
section 3 of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first; and 
that when the Senate adjourns or recesses at the close of business on 
any day from Friday, October 7, 1994 through Friday, October 14, 1994, 
pursuant to a motion made by the majority leader, or his designee, in 
accordance with this concurrent resolution, it stand recessed or 
adjourned until 9 a.m. on Wednesday, November 30, 1994, or such time on 
that day as may be specified by the majority leader or his designee in 
the motion to recess or adjourn, or until noon on the second day after 
Members are notified to reassemble pursuant to section 3 of this 
concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first.
    Sec. 2. When the House adjourns on the legislative day of Tuesday, 
November 29, 1994, pursuant to a motion made by the majority leader, or 
his designee, in accordance with this concurrent resolution, it stand 
adjourned sine die, or until noon on the second day after Members are 
notified to reassemble pursuant to section 3 of this concurrent 
resolution; and that when the Senate adjourns at the close of business 
on Thursday, December 1, 1994, it stand adjourned sine die, or until 
noon on the second day after Members are notified to reassemble 
pursuant to section 3 of this concurrent resolution.
    Sec. 3. The Speaker of the House and the majority leader of the 
Senate, acting jointly after consultation with the minority leader of 
the House and the minority leader of the Senate, shall notify the 
Members of the House and the Senate, respectively, to reassemble 
whenever, in their opinion, the public interest shall warrant it.

            Passed the House of Representatives October 7, 1994.

            Attest:

                                           DONNALD K. ANDERSON,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
Case 4:22-cr-00295-P Document 18 Filed 11/02/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 19
Case 4:22-cr-00295-P Document 18 Filed 11/02/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 20
Order filed June 25, 2013 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-13-00288-CR

____________

KENYATTA WESLEY FREDERICK, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 413th Judicial District

Johnson County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F46217

ORDER

The clerk’s record in this appeal was filed March 18, 2013. A relevant item 

has been omitted from the clerk’s record. See Tex. R. App. P. 34.5(c). The record 

does not contain the motion for new trial filed March 19, 2013.

The Johnson County District Clerk is directed to file a supplemental clerk=s 

record on or before July 8, 2013, containing the motion for new trial filed March 

19, 2013.
If the omitted item is not part of the case file, the district clerk is directed to 

file a supplemental clerk’s record containing a certified statement that the omitted 

item is not a part of the case file.

PER CURIAM
#### HOGG v. STATE.

No. 21471.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 5, 1941.

Thomas & Thomas, of Big Spring, for appellant.

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

HAWKINS, Presiding Judge.

The conviction is for theft of an automobile, and punishment assessed at two years in the penitentiary.

Appellant was convicted upon a plea of guilty on September 22, 1939, and granted a suspended sentence. Fie was thereafter convicted in Tom Green County, Texas, on the 29th day of November, 1939, of another felony, whereupon the suspension of his sentence in the present case was revoked and the judgment of conviction herein made final, and sentence pronounced against him on September 23, 1940.

There are no bills of exception and no statement of facts brought forward. Nothing is presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed.
Exhibit 12.1

---

ESSEX PORTFOLIO, L.P.

             Schedule of computation of Ratio and Earnings to Fixed Charges and Preferred Stock Dividends

               (Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)



`Years ended December 31
                                         -----------------------------------------------------
                                           2002       2001       2000       1999       1998
                                         ---------  ---------  ---------  ---------  ---------
Earnings:
Income from continuing operations       $  68,583  $  72,038  $  67,228  $  60,425  $  39,538
Gain on sales of real estate                   --     (3,788)    (4,022)    (9,524)        (9)
Minority interests                            135        196        372        549        462
Interest expense                           35,012     38,746     30,044     20,970     19,107
Amortization of deferred financing costs      605        657        639        566        718
                                         ---------  ---------  ---------  ---------  ---------
Total earnings                          $ 104,335  $ 107,849  $  94,261  $  72,986  $  59,816
                                         =========  =========  =========  =========  =========


Fixed charges:
Interest expense                        $  35,012  $  38,746  $  30,044  $  20,970  $  19,107
Amortization of deferred financing costs      605        657        639        566        718
Capitalized interest                        6,139      3,917      2,906      5,172      3,494
Convertible preferred stock dividends          --         --        245      1,333      3,500
Perpetual preferred unit distributions     18,319     18,319     18,319     12,238      5,595
                                         ---------  ---------  ---------  ---------  ---------
Total fixed charges and preferred
    stock dividends                     $  60,075  $  61,639  $  52,153  $  40,279  $  32,414
                                         =========  =========  =========  =========  =========

Ratio of earnings to fixed charges
    (excluding preferred stock dividends)    2.50 X     2.49 X     2.81 X     2.73 X     2.57 X
                                         =========  =========  =========  =========  =========


Ratio of earnings to combined fixed
    charges and preferred dividends          1.74 X     1.75 X     1.81 X     1.81 X     1.85 X
                                         =========  =========  =========  =========  =========`

---
14910-13-P] 

# _c ANM-1I4 

# ~~. IU·Hc.d~V1 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTA nON
14 CFR Part 39 "n [Docket No. FAA-2009-0865; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-023-AD; Amendment 11-

## l'l-P,,! llo IlP

### g UTlNe;S""","L 

### 39-**; AD 

## **1 201 D

# -ol-ro - '1 )lITi>\Ul'iKi Federal Aviation Administration

RlN 2120-AA64 

### U, U-- tt Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747-100, 747-100B, 747-100B SUD, 

## I z... 

## /0IJ1 _c 747-200B, 747-200C, 747-200F, 747-300, 747SR, and 747SP Series Airplanes Equippe
- 

### 1110\- with General Electric CF6-45 or -50 Series Engines, or Equipped with Pratt & Whitney JT9D-3 or -7 (Excluding -70) Series Engines AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FM), Department ofTransportation 

### (DOn. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding an existing airworthiness directive (AD), which •......... , t:7t) applies to certain Boeing Model 747-100, 747-100B, 747-100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-200C, 747-200F, 747-300, 747SR, and 747SP series aiIplancs. That AD currently
o requires repetitive inspections to detect cracks and fractures ofthe strut front spar chord assembly (including the forward side) ateach strut location, and repair ifnecessary. Thi l~jTI"'l."I"{] new AD adds a one-time inspection for cracking ofthe forward side ofthe front spar chord assembly on the inboard and outboard struts, installation ofacap skin doubler for certain airplanes, and repair ifnecessary. These actions terminate the repetitive inspections ofthe forward side ofthe strut front spar chord assembiy~ the inspections of the aft side assembly continue as specified in the existing AD. This AD results from a OUTING SYMIlOL report ofafractured front spar assembly for strut No.3, which resulted inthe loss ofthe strut upper link loadpath. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracks and fractures ofthe nacelle strut front spar chord assembly. Fracture ofthe front spar chord NITIA'.5IS'G

'ATE
Page 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA §

§

VS, § CASE NO.: 3:22-CR-194-K (01)

§

FRANCISCO HUERTA-RAMIREZ §

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

CONCERNING PLEA OF GUILTY

After reviewing all relevant matters of record, including the Notice Regarding Entry 

of a Plea of Guilty, the Consent of the defendant, and the Report and Recommendation 

Concerning Plea of Guilty of the United States Magistrate Judge, and no objections thereto 

having been filed within fourteen days of service in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), 

the undersigned District Judge is of the opinion that the Report and Recommendation of 

the Magistrate Judge concerning the Plea of Guilty is correct, and it is hereby accepted by 

the Court. Accordingly, the Court accepts the plea of guilty and the Defendant is hereby 

adjudged guilty. Sentence will be imposed in accordance with the Court’s scheduling order.

SO ORDERED.

Signed October 6th, 2022.

_____________________________

ED KINKEADE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:22-cr-00194-K Document 23 Filed 10/06/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 35