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

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

 

TIANIKWA HAYWOOD and §

PAUL-DOUGLAS CELESTINE §

 §

Plaintiffs, §

 §

v. § Case No. 3:22-cv-02174-K-BT

 §

TEXAS REALATOR; MACKIE WOLF §

ZIENTZ MAN P.C. LAW FIRM; §

SANDFORD & KURLAND; §

SONYA LEUCHAUSER; §

DHI MORTGAGE COMPANY, LTD; §

TIM NICHOLSON; SANDRA NASEEF; §

JOHN DOE; JANE DOE; §

PENNYMAC LOAN SERVICES, LLC; §

NO BULL INVESTMENT, LLC; §

 §

Defendants. §

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND 

RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

The Court has under consideration the Findings, Conclusions, and 

Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge dated August 7, 2023. (ECF No. 

34). Plaintiffs filed Objections on August 24, 2023. The Court has made a de novo

review of those portions of the proposed Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation 

to which objections were made. The objections are OVERRULED. 

PennyMac and Mackie Wolfs’ Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 6) pursuant to 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(5) and DHI Mortgage and DHI Titles’ Motion 

to Dismiss (ECF No. 10) pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), are GRANTED.

Case 3:22-cv-02174-K-BT Document 44 Filed 08/29/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID 188
Finally, because Plaintiffs’ claims are frivolous and without merit, the Court 

DISMISSES all of Plaintiffs’ remaining claims and causes of action. 

Plaintiffs’ Petition for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 39), Petition for Mediation 

(ECF No. 41), and Petition for Hearing (ECF No. 42), are DENIED.

SO ORDERED. 

Signed August 29

th

, 2023.

__________________________________

ED KINKEADE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:22-cv-02174-K-BT Document 44 Filed 08/29/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID 189
II

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 390

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

AUGUST 8, 1994

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

OCTOBER 7 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 12), 1994

Committee discharged

JOINT RESOLUTION

Designating September 17, 1994, as ‘‘Constitution Day’’.

Whereas the Constitution of the United States is the cornerstone of the Nation’s system of government under law;

Whereas the Constitution of the United States signifies the

importance of the rule of law and affirms the Nation’s

dedication to the principles of freedom and justice;

Whereas the Constitution of the United States is recognized

by many to be the most significant and important document in history for establishing freedom and justice

through democracy;

Whereas the Constitution of the United States provides the

framework of the Nation’s law, spirit, and beliefs;
2

HJ 390 CDS

Whereas the Constitution of the United States deserves the

recognition, respect, and reverence of all Americans;

Whereas every American should celebrate the freedom and responsibilities of the Constitution of the United States;

and

Whereas the Constitution of the United States was signed on

September 17, 1787: 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 September 17, 1994, is designated as ‘‘Constitution

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 and

7 activities.

Passed the House of Representatives August 5,

1994.

Attest: DONNALD K. ANDERSON,

Clerk.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

Fort Stockton Holdings, L.P., Pecos

County, City of Fort Stockton, Pecos

County Water Control and Improvement

District No. 1, and Brewster County

Groundwater Conservation District

,

Appellant s

,

v.

Middle Pecos Groundwater Conservation

District

,

Appellee

. §

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 1 5

- 00 382

- C V

Appeal from the

83 rd District Court

of Pecos C ounty, Texas

(TC# P

- 7047

- 83

- CV )

O R D E R

The Court has set this case for oral argument on three different dates, but the parties have

filed and the Court has granted a motion to vacate each setting. After further consideration, the

Court has determined that the case should be set for submission without oral argument. Therefore,

the above styled and numbered cause is set for submission without oral argument on June 22,

2017. NO FURTHER MOTIONS TO VACATE THE SUBMISSION SETTING WILL BE

CONSIDER ED BY THIS COURT.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 1 2 th day of April , 20 1 7

.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure , C.J., R odriguez and Palafox , JJ.
103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 236

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Authorizing the 1994 Special Olympics Torch Relay

to be run through the Capitol Grounds.
103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 236

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring),

3 SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF RUNNING OF SPECIAL

4 OLYMPICS TORCH RELAY THROUGH CAPITOL

5 GROUNDS.

6 On May 20, 1994, or on such other date as the

7 Speaker of the House of Representatives and the Presi8 dent pro tempore of the Senate may jointly designate, the

9 1994 Special Olympics Torch Relay may be run through

10 the Capitol Grounds, as part of the journey of the Special

11 Olympics torch to the District of Columbia Special Olym12 pics summer games at Gallaudet University in the District

13 of Columbia.

14 SEC. 2. RESPONSIBILITY OF CAPITOL POLICE BOARD.

15 The Capitol Police Board shall take such action as

16 may be necessary to carry out section 1.
2

•HCON 236 EH

1 SEC. 3. CONDITIONS RELATING TO PHYSICAL PREPARA2 TIONS.

3 The Architect of the Capitol may prescribe conditions

4 for physical preparations for the event authorized by

5 section 1.

Passed the House of Representatives May 18, 1994.

Attest:

Clerk.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-7494

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

EMMETT ALVIN MONSON, a/k/a Timothy Lee Barr,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Winston-Salem. Frank W. Bullock, Chief

District Judge. (CR-93-42-WS, CA-97-610-6)

Submitted: March 11, 1999 Decided: March 17, 1999

Before WIDENER and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Emmett Alvin Monson, Appellant Pro Se. Lisa Blue Boggs, Assistant

United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Emmett Alvin Monson seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 &

Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s

opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability, deny Monson’s motion for appointment of counsel, and

dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See

United States v. Monson, Nos. CR-93-42-WS; CA-97-610-6 (M.D.N.C.

Aug. 25, 1998). We 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.

DISMISSED
# Official Journal C 327A/29 S

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 327A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6029 September 2017 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 327A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6029 September 2017

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | V   Announcements |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | European Parliament |
| 2017/C 327 A/01 | Selection procedure PE/191/S — Temporary staff member — Management administrator (AD 7) — List of suitable candidates | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Parliament

2017/C 327 A/01

Selection procedure PE/191/S — Temporary staff member — Management administrator (AD 7) — List of suitable candidates

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
| Subsidiaries                            | Country of Incorporation       | Voting Interest |
|-----------------------------------------|--------------------------------|-----------------|
| Subsidiaries of Midatech Pharma PLC     |                           |            |
| Midatech Pharma (Wales) Limited         | England and Wales              | 100%            |
| Midatech Limited                        | England and Wales              | 100%            |
| Midatech Pharma US Inc.                 | United States (Delaware)       | 100%            |
| Midatech Pharma Pty Limited             | Australia                      | 100%            |
| Joint Ventures with Midatech Limited    |                           |            |
| MidaSol Therapeutics GP (1)(3)          | Cayman Islands                 | 50%             |
| Syntara LLC (2)(3)                      | United States (Delaware)       | 50%             |
| Subsidiaries of Midatech Limited        |                           |            |
| Midatech Pharma España SL          | Spain                          | 100%            |
| Pharmida AG (3)                         | Switzerland                    | 100%            |
| Subsidiaries of Midatech Pharma US Inc. |                           |            |
| DARA Therapeutics, Inc.                 | United States (North Carolina) | 100%            |
| (1) | Joint venture between Midatech Limited and MonoSol.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        |
|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (2) | Joint venture between Midatech Limited and Immunotope Inc. The percentage ownership of the entity is determined by reference to the partnership agreement and varies from time to time depending on capital committed. While 50% is the economic interest, Midatech Limited can currently direct 49% of the voting rights. |
| (3) | Dormant entity or entities in the process of being wound-down.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             |

----
1 The Honorable Catherine D. Perry, United States District Judge for the Eastern

District of Missouri. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 98-3311

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Missouri. James J. Kavanagh, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: July 7, 1999 Filed: July 19, 1999

___________ Before WOLLMAN, Chief Judge, RICHARD S. ARNOLD, and BEAM, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM.
Atwo-count information charged James Kavanagh with unlawfully occupying lands located in a water resource development project, without the written permission of the District

Engineer of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), in violation of 36 C.F.R. § 327.22(a) (1998); and with failing to comply with a lawful order of Corps personnel engaged in the performance of their official duties, in violation of 36 C.F.R. § 327.24(b) (1998). Following a bench trial, the district court 1 found that a lease-2-

Kavanagh had entered into with the Corps was lawfully terminated because of his failure to comply with applicable regulations, and that to the extent there was a factual dispute concerning Kavanagh’s refusal to leave his property at the request of Corps personnel, the government had proven beyond a reasonable doubt that he had refused an order to leave.

On appeal, counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), suggesting the evidence was insufficient to support Kavanagh’s convictions. After evaluating the record in the light most favorable to the government, see United States v. Walcott , 61 F.3d 635, 638 (8th Cir. 1995), cert. denied , 516 U.S. 1132 (1996), we conclude the government’s evidence was sufficient to convict Kavanagh of bot h offenses: the evidence showed Kavanagh continued to maintain his full-time residence on the property subject to the lease after his lease was terminated, and then refused to leave the site when ordered to do so by Corps personnel. See 36 C.F.R. §§ 327.22(a), 327.24(b) (1998); cf. UnitedStates v. Arbo , 691 F.2d 862, 865-66 (9th Cir. 1982).
We have reviewed the record for any nonfrivolous issues, see Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), and have found none.
Accordingly, we affirm.
A true copy.

Attest:
CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
IA

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 403

To designate October 1, 1994, as ‘‘National Incest and Sexual Abuse Healing

Day’’.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

AUGUST 18, 1994

Ms. MOLINARI (for herself, Mr. BAKER of California, Mr. CAMP, Mr.

HOEKSTRA, Mr. KING, Mr. LEVY, Mr. MALONEY, Mr. MCCRERY, Mrs.

MORELLA, Mr. QUINN, Mrs. ROUKEMA, Mr. SUNDQUIST, Mr.

TORRICELLI, Mr. TRAFICANT, and Ms. VELA ́ZQUEZ) introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service

JOINT RESOLUTION

To designate October 1, 1994, as ‘‘National Incest and

Sexual Abuse Healing Day’’.

Whereas child abuse occurs in alarming proportions, with

2,900,000 reported cases in 1992, increasing by 50 percent between 1985 and 1992;

Whereas sexual abuse of children, including abuse by family

members, is a crime crossing all social or economic

boundaries in the United States;
2

•HJ 403 IH

Whereas child abuse is frequently perpetuated, as one generation of victims becomes the next generation of abusers,

creating a vicious cycle of violence;

Whereas opportunities to speak out publicly and truthfully

about child sexual abuse are deemed of value by numerous survivors and victims’ advocates, as a means to promote public awareness and understanding and to foster

a sense of support for and among victims;

Whereas open and honest dialogue is a prerequisite for

progress in combating child abuse; and

Whereas October 1, 1994, will be the first nationwide ‘‘speak

out’’ by survivors of incest and child sexual abuse: 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 October 1, 1994, is designated as ‘‘National Incest

4 and Sexual Abuse Healing Day’’, and the President is au5 thorized and requested to issue a proclamation calling

6 upon the people of the United States to observe such day

7 with appropriate ceremonies and activities.

Æ
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-6502

PHILIP CORSO; ROBERT J. ROMITO; GEORGE H.

VAN WAGNER, III,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

versus

DENNIS R. BIDWELL, Warden; MARIE GRAHAM,

Director of Health Services; SANDRA HOWARD,

M.D.; A. VICTORIA; M. RONGO, All in their

individual and official capacities,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CA96-4070-PJM)

Submitted: August 14, 1997 Decided: August 21, 1997

Before NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge, and BUTZNER and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Philip Corso, Robert J. Romito, George H. Van Wagner, III, Appellants Pro Se. Earle Bronson Wilson, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES

ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court’s orders denying his motion for United States Marshals to personally serve the Defendants

and directing the Marshals to serve the Defendants by certified

mail return receipt requested. We dismiss the appeal for lack of

jurisdiction because the order is not appealable. This court may

exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291

(1994), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C.

§ 1292 (1994); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus.

Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order here appealed is neither

a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order.

We dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. We 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.

DISMISSED
# Maryland Department of the Environm ent Mobile Sources Control Program Cecil County MOBILE6 Modeling Emission Analysis R.O.P Runs using the 2002 - based MD - EMIS System

Cecil Ar ea Step Modeling Scenario VOC NOx R emarks 1 2002 RFP Base - Year Inventory 4.0 14.2 All 2002 control programs in place, 2002 VMT 2 2002 RFP Adjusted Year Inventory 5.4 16.1 CAA Off, 7.8 RVP, 1990 I/M, 2002 Eval Yr & 2002 VMT 3 2008 RFP Adjusted Year Invento ry 4.7 13.9 CAA Off, 7.8 RVP, 1990 I/M, 2008 Eval Yr & 2002 VMT 4 2009 RFP Adjusted Year Inventory 4.7 13.8 CAA Off, 7.8 RVP, 1990 I/M, 2009 Eval Yr & 2002 VMT 7 2008 Projected Emission Inventory 2.3 7.9 All 2008 control programs in place 8 2009 Projected Emission Inventory 2.2 7.2 All 2009 control programs in place 9 2010 Projected Emission Inventory 2.03 6.4 All 2010 control programs in place

2008 RFP Analysis 2008 Non - Credita bles (Step 2 m inus Step 3) 0.7 2.2 2008 Adjstd Base - Year minus Non - Creditables 3.0 10.8 2008 Target Em issions (w/15% Reductions) 2.5 9.2 2008 Target Em issions (w/18% Reductions) 2.4 8.9 2008 Projctd Em issions (14% Projctd VMT G rowth) 2.6 9.4 Note: The New MD - EMIS system with 2005 updates may show a similar trend buth the absolute numbers will be different Prepared by: MDE's Mobile Sources Control Program, Phone (410) 537 - 4183 Nov. 27, 2006
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

ERIC JACKSON, et. al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

ALEJANDRO N. MAYORKAS, 

Secretary of Homeland Security, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 4:22-cv-0825-P

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING 

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS

Upon consideration of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 69, and the parties’ related 

submissions, it is hereby

ORDERED that Defendants’ motion is GRANTED; and

ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ complaint, ECF No. 1, is dismissed as moot.

SIGNED and ORDERED in chambers on this ___ day of __________, 2023.

____________________________________

Hon. Mark T. Pittman

United States District Judge

Case 4:22-cv-00825-P Document 69-1 Filed 03/10/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 1459
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
STATEMENTS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION, OPERATIONS, AND CHANGES IN TRUST
CAPITAL AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                       1,994,461
<SECURITIES>                                30,956,136
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            30,636,377
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              30,636,377
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,023,179
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  29,613,198
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                30,636,377
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            (5,007,377)
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  697,157
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                89,108
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (1,570,091)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (1,570,091)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (46.80)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (46.80)


</TABLE>