alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA-24-0037

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

ANDREW DAVID LARSON,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including July 1, 2024, within which to prepare, file, and 

serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

May 23 2024

05/23/2024

Case Number: DA 24-0037
IA

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 298

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to limit

the terms of Representatives and Senators, and to provide for a fouryear term for Representatives.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

NOVEMBER 19, 1993

Mr. ORTON 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 to limit the terms of Representatives and Senators, and to provide for a four-year term for Representatives.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two3 thirds of each House concurring therein), That the follow4 ing article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitu5 tion of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents

6 and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by
2

•HJ 298 IH

1 the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States with2 in seven years after the date of its submission for ratifica3 tion:

4 ‘‘ARTICLE —

5 ‘‘SECTION 1. The term of office of Representatives

6 shall be four years and shall begin at noon on the third

7 day of January of the year in which the term of office

8 of the President begins.

9 ‘‘SECTION 2. No person shall be elected to the office

10 of Representative more than three times, excluding any

11 election of a person to fill a vacancy of an office of a Rep12 resentative if such person has held such office for less than

13 two years. No person shall be elected to the office of Sen14 ator more than twice, excluding any election of a person

15 to fill a vacancy of an office of a Senator if such person

16 has held such office for less than three years. For pur17 poses of this section, an election which occurs before the

18 date of the ratification of this article shall not be included

19 in determining the number of times a person has been

20 elected as a Representative or Senator.’’.

Æ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0000941914
<NAME>                        Smithway Motor Xpress Corp.
<MULTIPLIER>                  1000
<CURRENCY>                    US Dollars

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                  MAR-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>               1.0
<CASH>                        171
<SECURITIES>                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                 23927
<ALLOWANCES>                  65
<INVENTORY>                   1630
<CURRENT-ASSETS>              28689
<PP&E>                        133221
<DEPRECIATION>                40478
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                127228
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>         20924
<BONDS>                       51551
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>         0
<PREFERRED>                   0
<COMMON>                      50
<OTHER-SE>                    39594
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>  127228
<SALES>                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>              50748
<CGS>                         0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                 49229
<OTHER-EXPENSES>              0
<LOSS-PROVISION>              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>            998
<INCOME-PRETAX>               521
<INCOME-TAX>                  283
<INCOME-CONTINUING>           238
<DISCONTINUED>                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>               0
<CHANGES>                     0
<NET-INCOME>                  238
<EPS-BASIC>                   0.05
<EPS-DILUTED>                 0.05



</TABLE>
#### LOVELL v. STATE.

No. 21829.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Jan. 7, 1942.

Clark A. Holloway, of Clarksville, for appellant.

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

KRUEGER, Judge.

The offense is burglary. The punishment assessed is confinement in the state penitentiary for a term of two years.

Appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain his conviction.

The State’s evidence, briefly stated, shows that on or about the 9th day of February, 1941, some one, by force, entered the Rosalie School Building and took therefrom milk, sugar, bacon, potatoes, flour, lard and a flashlight. Appellant and his wife had separated'at the time in question and lived in different houses located about one mile apart. When the burglary was discovered the constable made some investigation with a view of ascertaining who the culprit was. He went to the appellant’s home and found a tow sack in the crack of his log cabin. From there the officer went to where the appellant and his wife were cutting wood and talked to him and then together they went to appellant’s cabin where lie produced a piece of bacon, lard, potatoes, and canned milk, the wrappers of which had been burned off but it had some numbers written thereon with a black lead pencil. The constable also obtained a flashlight from appellant’s wife. The piece of meat which appellant turned over to the constable fitted the piece left at the burglarized premises and showed that it was a part thereof. The canned milk taken from the burglarized premises had a number on the top of the can written with a black pencil. The canned milk which appellant delivered to the constable also had a number written on the top with a black lead pencil. The flashlight was identified by a dent on the end of it. Some of the other commodities returned could not be positively identified.

Appellant did not testify, but offered some evidence to the effect that he had purchased some sugar, potatoes and onions on Sunday afternoon, and had a short time theretofore bought flour, lard, meat, etc.

The most significant incriminating circumstance connecting appellant with the burglary is the fact that Lizzie Hamilton, who cooked for the school, had cut through the middling of the meat and the piece which appellant delivered to the constable was fitted on to that piece of bacon left at the burglarized premises. It was the same kind of bacon and fitted perfectly. In our opinion, the evidence is sufficient to sustain the jury’s finding as to the appellant’s guilt. See Hamilton v. State, 131 Tex.Cr.R. 88, 96 S.W.2d 983.

Finding no error in the record, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the 'Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.
**Exhibit32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

 

Pursuant to section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350,chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer ofNeoPharm, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), does hereby certifywith respect to the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for thequarter ended September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission (the “10-Q Report”) that:

 

(1)                                  the10-Q Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)                                  theinformation contained in the 10-Q Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Dated:   November 8, 2004 | /s/ Gregory P. Young    |   |
|--------------------------------|-------------------------|--------|
|                           | Gregory P. Young,       |
|                           | Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
Exhibit 35.4












2015 Annual Statement of Servicer Compliance
(Item 1123)





Pooling and Servicing Agreement (the “Pooling
and Servicing Agreement”) dated as of March 1, 2015 by and among Deutsche Mortgage & Asset Receiving Corporation as Depositor,
KeyBank National Association as Master Servicer, Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC as Special Servicer, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association
as Trustee, Certificate Administrator, Paying Agent and Custodian and Park Bridge Lender Services LLC as Operating Advisor relating
to the Deutsche Mortgage & Asset Receiving Corporation, COMM 2015-DC1 Mortgage Trust, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates
(COMM 2015-DC1)





The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Rialto Capital Advisors,
LLC, as special servicer (the “Special Servicer”) herein certifies to the following:



| | 1. | All servicing activities and performance of such servicing activities under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement are performed
on behalf of the Special Servicer.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | A review of the servicing activities and performance by the Special Servicer for the period of March 4, 2015 to December 31,
2015 (the “Reporting Period”) in accordance with the Pooling and Servicing Agreement has been conducted under my supervision.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 3. | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Special Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the terms
of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, in all material respects for the Reporting Period and if there has been a failure to fulfill
any such obligations in any material respect, each failure and the nature and status thereof has been specifically identified herein.
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------









|Certified by: | /s/ Adam Singer                |  | Date:  March 1, 2016
|------------- | ------------------------------ |  | --------------------
|              | Adam Singer, Managing Director |  |                     
|              |                                |  |
----

Action brought on 9 January 2004 by ‘Almdudler-Limonade’ A. & S. Klein against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

(Case T-12/04)

(2004/C 106/136)

Language of the case: German

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 9 January 2004 by ‘Almdudler-Limonade’ A. & S. Klein, of Vienna, represented by G. Schönherr, lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Pleas in law and main arguments:

----
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

LUBBOCKDIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

P1aintiff,

NO.5:22-CR-066-01-H

HECTOR GEORGIO MARTINEZ,

Defendant.

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RNCOMMENDATION

OF TIIE UMTED 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

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

having been filed within fourteen (14) days of service in accordance with 28 U.S.C.

$ 636OXl), the undersigled District Judge is of the opinion that the Report and

Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge conceming the Plea of Guilty is correct, and it is

hereby accepted by the Court. Accordingly, the Court accepts the plea of guilty and

Defendant is hereby adjudged guilty.

Sentence will be imposed in accordance with the Court's scheduling order.

SO ORDERED.

Datedoctober Ul ,2022.

JAMES SLEY HENDRIX

STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 5:22-cr-00066-H-BQ Document 24 Filed 10/24/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 42
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

Plaintiff

Defendant

v.

Civil Action No.

CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS/DISCLOSURE STATEMENT

(This form also satisfies Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1)

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1 and LR 3.1(c), LR 3.2(e), LR 7.4, LR 81.1(a)(4)(D), and LR 81.2,

provides the following information:

For a nongovernmental corporate party, the name(s) of its parent corporation and any 

publicly held corporation that owns 10% or more of its stock (if none, state "None"): 

*Please separate names with a comma. Only text visible within box will print.

A complete list of all persons, associations of persons, firms, partnerships, corporations, 

guarantors, insurers, affiliates, parent or subsidiary corporations, or other legal entities that are 

financially interested in the outcome of the case: 

*Please separate names with a comma. Only text visible within box will print.

Case 4:22-cv-00691-O Document 100 Filed 10/20/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 1332
Date:

Signature:

Print Name:

Telephone:

Address:

City, State, Zip:

Bar Number:

Fax:

E-Mail:

NOTE: To electronically file this document, you will find the event in our Case Management (CM/ECF) system, under Civil => Other 

Documents => Certificate of Interested Persons/Disclosure Statement.

Case 4:22-cv-00691-O Document 100 Filed 10/20/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 1333
IA

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 305

Designating April 28, 1994, as ‘‘Exercise Tiger Day’’.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 25, 1994

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts introduced the following joint resolution; which

was referred to the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service

JOINT RESOLUTION

Designating April 28, 1994, as ‘‘Exercise Tiger Day’’.

Whereas the D-Day invasion of Normandy on June 6, 1944,

was one of the most critical and heroic battles leading to

the Allied victory over Nazi Germany in World War II;

Whereas, on April 28, 1944, during the Exercise Tiger training mission for D-Day, the soldiers and sailors of Exercise Tiger were unexpectedly attacked by a flotilla of German torpedo boats off the coast of Slapton Sands, England;

Whereas 749 American soldiers were killed in the attack;

Whereas the heroic efforts of these soldiers have not been

sufficiently recognized in American history and the soldiers of Exercise Tiger have not been appropriately honored for their great sacrifice in defending the Nation; and
2

•HJ 305 IH

Whereas April 28, 1994, will be the 50th anniversary of the

tragedy of Exercise Tiger: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That April 28, 1994, is designated as ‘‘Exercise Tiger

4 Day’’, and the President is authorized and requested to

5 issue a proclamation calling on the people of the United

6 States to observe the day with appropriate ceremonies, ac7 tivities, and programs.

Æ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, §

Plaintiff, §

§ CRIMINAL ACTION NO.

v. §

§ 4:22-CR-036-Y

JOSEPH MICHAEL DUPREE, § ECF

Defendant. §

 §

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE AND NOTICE OF SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL

Defendant, JOSEPH MICHAEL DUPREE, hereby notifies this Court of the substitution 

of counsel on the above-captioned matter. LOUI ITOH, Assistant Federal Public Defender, was 

assigned to handle this case in the district court. Gabriela Vega, Assistant Federal Public 

Defender, will be handling the appeal on this case.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Gabriela Vega

Gabriela Vega

Assistant Federal Public Defender

Northern District of Texas

Texas Bar # 24084014

525 Griffin Street, Suite 629

Dallas, Texas 75202

Phone (214) 767-2746

Fax (214) 767-2886

gabriela_vega@fd.org

Case 4:22-cr-00036-Y Document 44 Filed 08/12/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 120
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Gabriela Vega, hereby certify that on August 12, 2022, this notice was served on the 

Office of the United States Attorney through the Electronic Case Filing (ECF) System. Pursuant 

to Rule 9 of the Miscellaneous Order No. 60, this constitutes service of this document to the 

United States Attorney for the Northern District of Texas, who is an ECF user. 

/s/ Gabriela Vega

Gabriela Vega

Case 4:22-cr-00036-Y Document 44 Filed 08/12/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 121
#### TURNER *v.*COMMONWEALTH.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Oct. 19, 1951.

■ J. B. Carter, Astor Hogg, Harlan, for appellant.

A. E. Funk, Atty. Gen., Zeb *A:*Stewart, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

CAMMACK, Chief Justice.

Joe Turner was sentenced to prison for one year on a charge of seducirig Stella Taylor. lie is asking that the judgment be. reversed -because the indictment did not charge an offense.

One of the elements of the offense of seduction covered by KRS 436.010 is that the female be under 21 years of age. Since the indictment against Turner did not charge that Stella Taylor was under 21 years of age, it stated no offense.

Judgment reversed.
Exhibit 33.2



MANAGEMENT’S
ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE



Management of the Trust & Securities Services department
of Deutsche Bank National Trust Company and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas (collectively the “Company”) is responsible
for assessing the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of Regulation AB promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission
to determine which criteria are applicable to the Company in respect of the servicing platform described below. Management has
determined that the servicing criteria are applicable in regard to the servicing platform for the period as follows:



Platform: The Honda Auto Receivables 2012-2 Owner Trust
asset-backed securities transaction, the Honda Auto Receivables 2013-3 Owner Trust asset-backed securities transaction and the
Honda Auto Receivables 2015-2 Owner Trust asset-backed securities transaction (the “Platform”).



Applicable Servicing Criteria: All servicing criteria
set forth in Item 1122(d), except for the following criteria: 1122(d)(1)(i)-1122(d)(1)(v), 1122(d)(2)(i), 1122(d)(2)(iii)-1122(d)(2)(vii),
1122(d)(3)(i) and 1122(d)(4)(i)-1122(d)(4)(xv), which management has determined are not applicable to the activities the Company
performs with respect to the Platform (the “Applicable Servicing Criteria”). With respect to the Platform, servicing
criterion 1122(d)(3)(ii) is applicable only as it relates to remittances.



Period: Year ended March 31, 2016 (the “Period”).



With respect to the Platform as of and for the Period, the Company’s
management provides the following assessment of compliance with respect to the Applicable Servicing Criteria:



1. The Company’s management is responsible for assessing
the Company’s compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria as of and for the Period.



2. The Company’s management has assessed the Company’s
compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria as of and for the Period. In performing this assessment, management used the
criteria set forth by the Securities and Exchange Commission in paragraph (d) of Item 1122 of Regulation AB.



3. Based on such assessment as of and for the Period, the Company
has complied, in all material respects with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.



KPMG LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm,
has issued an attestation report with respect to management’s assessment of compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria
as of and for the Period.













| | DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY
| | ------------------------------------
| |                                     
| | By:                                 
| |                                     
| |                                     
| |                                     
| | DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS
| |                                     
| | By:                                 
| |                                     
| |                                     



Dated: May 27, 2016
Jayme Evans

6400 NE Hwy 99, Suite G

PMB 350

Vancouver, WA 98665

October 16, 2015

U.S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System 

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE 

Washington, DC 20590

RE: Amendment to Petition for Exemption under Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform 

Act and 14 C.F.R. Part 11

To Whom it May Concern,

I wish to amend my Petition for Exemption dated June 10, 2015 to indicate how granting my petition 

would be in the public interest.

Granting of my petition for exemption would be in the public interest for several reasons.

Granting of my petition for exemption and allowing me to use UAVs for aerial data collection is in the 

public interest because it is far safer, far more economical and much easier to conduct UAV flights than

manned operations. Advances in UAV technology mean new generations of sensors will be developed, 

allowing UAVs to conduct a growing number of inspection and monitoring operations that would put 

human beings at risk of severe injury or death.

My UAS carries no fuel, pilot, crew or passengers. Given its size, weight, payload capacity and 

operating limits, granting my petition is in the public interest because – while performing some of the 

same operations of manned aircraft- my UAS does not pose a risk to public safety due to fire, 

explosion, crash or mechanical failure that often results in property damage and death in the case of 

manned operations. Voluntary restrictions, as well as FAA regulations will further augment safety by 

ensuring that operations are conducted safely and legally, in permitted airspace and sufficient distance 

from non-participants to ensure both safety and privacy.

Granting my petition to use UAVs to conduct aerial data collection and photography is in the public 

interest because it is far friendlier to the environment and pumps no pollutants into the atmosphere due 

to the burning of fuel that would occur in a manned operation of similar scope. 

Granting my petition is in the public interest because use of UAVs to conduct operations previously 

conducted by manned aircraft also reduces congestion of the National Airspace, by virtue of its small 

size. If the FAA's goal is to integrate UAVs -which it defines as aircraft- into the airspace, the very act 

of integration itself is in the public interest. Petitioning for exemption means I am willing to adhere to 

FAA mandates, which upholds the public interest far more than simply flying “below the radar” of 

regulations governing commercial use of UAVs.

Finally, using UAVs to capture aerial video and still photos for real estate listings, construction 

development, search and rescue, inspection, private weddings and many other applications is also in 
the public interest because UAVs provide a unique visual perspective that we were unable to obtain just

a few short years ago. They will lower the cost of image acquisition, provide new avenues of artistic 

expression and provide economic and technological benefits for years to come.