alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### BATES v. STATE.

No. 22611.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 3, 1943.

T. B. Sisco, of McKinney, for appellant.

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

*973BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant was assessed a fine of $150 on a charge that he possessed intoxicating liquor for sale in a dry area.

We find no bills of exception and no statement of facts in the case, under which condition we are unable to consider the error as complained of in his motion for new trial.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
IA

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 169

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating

to the election of the President and Vice President.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 30, 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 relating to the election of the President and Vice

President.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled

3 (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the fol4 lowing article is proposed as an amendment to the Con5 stitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all

6 intents and purposes as part of the Constitution if ratified

7 by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States
2

HJ 169 IH

1 within seven years after its submission to the States for

2 ratification:

3 ‘‘ARTICLE—

4 ‘‘SECTION 1. The people of the several States and the

5 District constituting the seat of government of the United

6 States shall elect the President and Vice President. Each

7 citizen eligible shall cast a single vote for two persons who

8 shall have consented to the joining of their names as can9 didates for the offices of the President and Vice President.

10 No candidate shall consent to the joinder of his name with

11 that of more than one other person.

12 ‘‘SECTION 2. The citizens eligible to vote for election

13 of President and Vice President in each State shall have

14 the qualifications requisite for voters of the most numer15 ous branch of the State legislature, except that for voters

16 for President and Vice President, the legislature of any

17 State may prescribe less restrictive residence qualifications

18 and for voters for President and Vice President the Con19 gress may establish uniform residence qualifications.

20 ‘‘SECTION 3. The pair of persons having the greatest

21 number of votes for President and Vice President shall

22 be elected.

23 ‘‘SECTION 4. The times, places, and manner of hold24 ing such elections and entitlement to inclusion on the bal25 lot shall be prescribed in each State by the legislature
3

HJ 169 IH

1 thereof; but the Congress may at any time by law make

2 or alter such regulations. The days for such elections shall

3 be determined by Congress and shall be uniform through4 out the United States. The Congress shall prescribe by

5 law the time, place, and manner in which the results of

6 such elections shall be ascertained and declared.

7 ‘‘SECTION 5. The Congress may by law provide for

8 the case of the death or withdrawal of any candidate for

9 President or Vice President before a President and Vice

10 President have been elected, and for the case of the death

11 of both the President-elect and Vice President-elect.

12 ‘‘SECTION 6. This article shall take effect one year

13 after the 21st day of January following ratification.’’.

Æ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

FORT WORTH DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA § 

 § 

VS. § CRIMINAL NO. 4:22-CR-294-Y 

 § 

KEVIN TAQUE (1) § 

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND ADJUDGING DEFENDANT GUILTY 

The Court has reviewed all relevant matters of record in this case, 

including especially (1) the Consent to Administration of Guilty Plea 

and Allocution by United States Magistrate Judge and (2) the Report of 

Action and Recommendation on Plea Before the United States Magistrate 

Judge. No objections to either have been filed within fourteen (14) 

days of service in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Therefore, 

the Court concludes that the report and recommendation of the magistrate 

judge on 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. The defendant’s sentence will be imposed in 

accordance with the Court’s sentencing scheduling order. 

SIGNED November 21, 2022. 

 

 _________________________________ 

 TERRY R. MEANS 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:22-cr-00294-Y Document 27 Filed 11/21/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 68
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

LUIS BENJAMIN LOPEZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, et al.,

Defendants.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 3:22-CV-2380-X-BT

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. [Doc. No. 12]. No objections were filed. The District 

Court reviewed the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation for plain 

error. Finding none, the Court ACCEPTS the Findings, Conclusions, and 

Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. The Court DISMISSES 

WITHOUT PREJUDICE Lopez’s case under Rule 41(b).

IT IS SO ORDERED this 17th day of February, 2023.

____________________________________

BRANTLEY STARR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:22-cv-02380-X-BT Document 15 Filed 02/17/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 253
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

CARBONE’S FINE FOODS AND WINES LLC, 

Plaintiff,

v.

CARBONE RESTAURANT LLC,

CARBONE FINE FOOD LLC, 

THE MAJOR FOOD GROUP LLC, and

MAJOR INTELLECTUAL LLC,

Defendants et. al.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

Case No. 3:22-cv-01184-E

DECLARATION OF JASON A. BLACKSTONE, ESQ. IN SUPPORT OF

CARBONE’S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO EMERGENCY MOTION TO EXTEND 

DEADLINES

Jason A. Blackstone, having been duly sworn, does hereby depose and state:

1. My name is Jason A. Blackstone. I am over the age of eighteen years old. The facts 

stated in this Declaration are within my personal knowledge unless otherwise noted and are true 

and correct to the best of my knowledge. If called to testify as to the following, I could and would 

testify competently as to the same.

2. I am an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of Texas. I am a Partner 

Attorney at Michelman & Robinson, LLP (“M&R”) and represent Plaintiff CARBONE’S FINE 

FOODS AND WINES LLC (“Carbone’s”) in the above-captioned matter. 

Case 3:22-cv-01184-E Document 19-1 Filed 08/01/22 Page 1 of 3 PageID 707
3. After Plaintiff first filed this lawsuit on June 1, 2022, counsel for Plaintiff (myself 

and Matthew Yarbrough) and Defendants (Johanna Schmitt and Jeremy Fielding) engaged in 

numerous discussions in an attempt to potentially resolve this matter. 

4. Courtesy copies of Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint and Motion for Preliminary 

Injunction were provided to Defendants’ counsel no later than July 14, 2022, and Defendants’ 

counsel officially accepted service thereof on July 18.

5. After Defendants’ receipt of Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction, counsel 

for the parties engaged in meet and confer efforts wherein Plaintiff was willing to stipulate to reset 

the deadlines for Defendants’ responsive pleading and Opposition to Motion for Preliminary 

Injunction to 21 days after the Mediation. 

6. Defendants were sent a draft stipulation that would have stayed the 21 day response 

clock to respond to Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction until August 9, 2020. This 

stipulation was rejected by Defendants.

7. On July 22, 2022, the parties engaged in further discussions regarding the proposed 

schedule and expedited discovery, wherein I stated that “We have no problem making our 

principals available for expedited discovery, but do expect the opposition to be filed with 21 days 

as contemplated by the rules. If MFG believes it needs additional time to respond, then it will 

need to request leave from the court.” 

Case 3:22-cv-01184-E Document 19-1 Filed 08/01/22 Page 2 of 3 PageID 708
My name is Jason A. Blackstone, my date of birth is July 19, 1977, and my address is 100 

Crescent Ct., Suite 700 Dallas, TX 75201. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is 

true and correct. Executed in Dallas, State of Texas, on the 31st day of July, 2022.

 /Jason Blackstone/

Jason A. Blackstone

Case 3:22-cv-01184-E Document 19-1 Filed 08/01/22 Page 3 of 3 PageID 709
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### Administration for Children and Families

          - 45 CFR Parts 1355, 1356 and 1357
          - [RIN 0970-AA97]

# AGENCY:

 Administration on Children, Youth and Families (ACYF), Administration for Children and Families (ACHF), Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS).

# ACTION:

 Final rule; correction.

# SUMMARY:

                         This document corrects the regulatory text of the final rule on Title IV-E Foster Care Eligibility Reviews and Child and Family Services State Plan Reviews published in the                         **Federal Register**                         on January 25, 2000 (65 FR 4019-4093).                    

# DATES:

 Effective November 24, 2000.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

 Kathleen McHugh, Children's Bureau, 202-401-5789.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

## Correction

                    In the final rule, 45 CFR Part 1355 through 1357, beginning on page 4019 in the issue of January 25, 2000, make the following correction. On page 4075 in the second column, instruction 2 currently says, “Section 1355.20 is amended by revising the definition of Foster care and by adding the following definitions in alphabetical order to read as follow:” It is corrected to read, “Section 1355.20 is amended by revising the definitions of                     *Foster care*      ( print page 70508)                        and                     *Foster family home*                     and by adding the following definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows:”                

The existing instruction calls for “adding” a definition, rather than revising the existing definition of a foster family home. This correction is necessary to avoid two conflicting definitions from being codified in the Code of Federal Regulations.

Dated: November 17, 2000.

Brian P. Burns,

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Information Resources and Management.

[FR Doc. 00-29990  Filed 11-22-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4184-01-M
EXHIBIT 10.14.3

	
  
 
  	
  
 
  	
  
April 29,   2005
  
	
  
Rick Kundrat
   NuVim Inc.
   12 Route 17 North
  	
  
 
  	
  
 
  
	
  
Paramus,   NJ  07652
  	
  
 
  	
  
 
  
	
  
 
  	
  
 
  	
  
 
  
	
  
Re:     
  	
  
Amendment to   Services Agreement and Convertible Promissory Note, each dated July 26, 2004;   Second Amendment to Services Agreement and Warrant, each dated September   14, 2004
  




Dear Rick:


                    Under the terms of the above-referenced documents, the passage of the date January 1, 2005 triggers certain rights to me.  By letter date November 3, 2004, I extended such date to March 31, 2005; by letter dated March 28, 2005, I extended such date to April 30, 2005.  By this letter, I hereby agree that as follows:


                    Under Section 2.1(b) of the Convertible Promissory Note, I am entitled to an “Optional Conversion” if NuVim Inc. has not consummated the IPO (as defined therein) before January 1, 2005.  By this letter, I hereby agree to further amend the date January 1, 2005 to May 31, 2005.


                    Under Section 2(b)(ii) of the Warrant, I am entitled to exercise the Warrant in accordance with the terms of the Warrant on or after January 1, 2005.  By this letter, I hereby agree to further amend the date January 1, 2005 to May 31, 2005.


                    Nothing contained in this letter, my letter of November 3, 2004 or my letter of March 28, 2005 shall impact upon the date after which interest begins to accrue at the default rate of interest under the Convertible Promissory Note or under any other note or instrument issued by NuVim Inc. to me.

	
  
 
  	
  
Very truly   yours,
  
	
  
 
  	
  
 
  
	
  
 
  	
  
/s/ DICK CLARK
  
	
  
 
  	
  


  
	
   
  	
  Dick Clark   by Fran La Maina,
  
	
   
  	
  Attorney-in-Fact
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-6055
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus BOBBY SCEAN SANG, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr., District Judge. (CR-94-271, CA-97-831-1) Submitted: March 26, 1998 Decided: April 9, 1998 Before WIDENER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.Bobby Scean Sang, Appellant Pro Se. Clifton Thomas Barrett, 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: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997).We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Appellant alleged that the district court shouldhave reduced his base offense level under the "safety valve" provision, U.S. S ENTENCING G UIDELINES MANUAL § 5C1.2 (1994). Because Appellant failed to raise this nonconstitutional claim in his direct appeal, he may not assert it in this collateral proceeding. See Stone v. Powell , 428 U.S. 465, 477 n.10 (1976). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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
COMMUNITY-BASED 

VIOLENCE PREVENTION

PROGRAM

The Community-Based Violence Prevention (CBVP) program 

provides funding to help localities and States support a coordinated 

and multidisciplinary approach to gang and violence prevention, 

intervention, suppression, and reentry in targeted communities. 

This initiative supports programs that reduce and prevent youth 

violence through a wide variety of activities, such as street-level 

outreach, conflict mediation, and the changing of community norms 

(e.g., public service campaigns and community rallies) to reduce 

violence—particularly shootings.

GOALS & STRUCTURE

The overarching goal is to reduce violence in targeted communities by 

replicating evidence-based programs and strategies to reduce 

violence. Applicants may tailor their proposed intervention to the 

high-risk activities and behaviors of carefully selected community 

members who are likely to be involved in violent activities—

specifically gang and gun violence—in the immediate future. This 

intervention should include improved coordination of existing 

resources and activities that support multiple complementary antiviolence strategies.

Proposed violence reduction approaches must engage faith- and 

community-based organizations/leaders to intervene in conflicts or 

potential conflicts and promote alternatives to violence. These 

approaches must also involve law enforcement in their youth violence 

prevention efforts.

APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS

Applicants are limited to states 

(including territories) and units 

of local government (including 

federally recognized tribal 

governments, as determined by 

the Secretary of the Interior). 

To be eligible, applicants must 

demonstrate a significant crime 

and violence problem affecting 

youth (specifically, high levels 

of aggravated assaults, 

shootings, and killings over an 

extended period of time). 

OJJDP expects applicants to 

have high levels of support 

within local government. 

Specifically, successful 

applicants will be cities, 

counties, states, or tribal 

governments that have 

acquired signed letters of 

support from, at a minimum, 

their mayor or chief executive 

officer, chief of police, and the 

local school superintendent, 

and have proven how the 

implementation of their 

comprehensive, communitybased violence prevention 

strategy fits into their 

jurisdiction’s youth violence 

prevention plan.

JURISDICTIONS WITH 

CBVP AWARDS

FY2010

Washington, DC; Oakland, 

CA; Brooklyn, NY; Denver, 

CO

FY2011

Boston, MA; Baltimore, MD

(also FY2013); Newark, NJ

FY2012

Detroit, MI; Los Angeles, CA; 

Philadelphia, PA; Baton 

Rouge/Parish of East Baton 

Rouge, LA (also FY2013)

FY2013

Camden, NJ; Kansas, MO; 

Syracuse, NY; Newport, VA

THREE MAIN GOALS

1. Change community norms regarding violence.

2. Provide alternatives to violence when gangs and 

individuals in the community make risky behavior 

decisions.

3. Increase awareness of the perceived risks and costs of 

involvement in violence among high-risk young people.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

SEBASTIAN MUNOZ,

Petitioner,

V. Civil No. 4:22-CV-1006-P 

BILL WAYBOURN, Sheriff,

Tarrant County, Texas, 

 Respondent.

 FINAL JUDGMENT

In accordance with the order issued this same day and Federal Rule of

Civil Procedure 58, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that the

petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is DISMISSED

without prejudice for want of prosecution pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

 SO ORDERED on this 22nd day of December 2022.

 

______________________________ 

Mark T. Pittman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 4:22-cv-01006-P Document 6 Filed 12/22/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 23
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1081 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1081

 To amend the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006 to 
 extend the public assistance pilot program through December 31, 2009.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 13, 2009

Mr. Berry (for himself and Mrs. Emerson) introduced the following bill; 
       which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and 
                             Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006 to 
 extend the public assistance pilot program through December 31, 2009.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. PUBLIC ASSISTANCE PILOT PROGRAM.

    (a) In General.--Section 689j(d) of the Post-Katrina Emergency 
Management Reform Act of 2006 (6 U.S.C. 777(d)) is amended by striking 
``December 31, 2008'' and inserting ``December 31, 2009''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
take effect on January 1, 2009.
                                 <all>
```
# Official Journal C 363I/9 Se

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 363I |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 649 September 2021 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 363I

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 649 September 2021

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | Corrigenda |
| 2021/C 363 I/01 | Corrigendum to the call for applications for the selection of the Controller of procedural guarantees in the context of investigations conducted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) – COM/2021/20062 ( OJ C 279 A, 13.7.2021 ) | 1 |

Contents

page

Corrigenda

2021/C 363 I/01

Corrigendum to the call for applications for the selection of the Controller of procedural guarantees in the context of investigations conducted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) – COM/2021/20062 ( OJ C 279 A, 13.7.2021 )

( OJ C 279 A, 13.7.2021 )

1

---

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

EN