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

 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

 DALLAS DIVISION 

IVOR JALLAH, ) 

 #19460509 ) 

Petitioner, ) 

vs. ) No. 3:22-CV-2449-L (BH) 

 ) No. 3:21-CR-380-L 

 ) 

C. RIVERS, ) 

Respondent. ) Referred to U.S. Magistrate Judge 1

 

RECOMMENDATION REGARDING REQUEST TO PROCEED 

IN FORMA PAUPERIS ON APPEAL 

 Before the Court is the petitioner’s Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis with 

accompanying certificate of inmate trust account, received on March 10, 2023 (doc. 11), which is 

liberally construed as a request to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. 

 (X) The request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal should be DENIED 

because the Court should certify under Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3) and 28 U.S.C. § 

1915(a)(3) that the appeal is not taken in good faith, and that it presents no legal 

points of arguable merit and is therefore frivolous for the reasons set forth in the 

findings, conclusions, and recommendation, and the order filed in this case on 

December 1, 2022, and January 19, 2023, respectively (docs. 5, 9). 

 

If the Court denies the request to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal, the 

petitioner may challenge the denial by filing a separate motion to proceed in 

forma pauperis on appeal with the Clerk of Court, U.S. Court of Appeals for 

the Fifth Circuit, within thirty days after service of the notice required by 

Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(4). See Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(5).

 SIGNED this 14th day of March, 2023. 

1

 By Amended Miscellaneous Order No. 6 (adopted by Special order No. 2-59 on May 5, 2005), requests to proceed 

in forma pauperis on appeal are automatically referred. 

Case 3:22-cv-02449-L-BH Document 12 Filed 03/14/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID 54
Case 3:22-cv-02449-L-BH Document 12 Filed 03/14/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID 55
EX-10.10



 






Exhibit 10.10




CENTURY ALUMINUM COMPANY




SUMMARY OF CERTAIN 2004 COMPENSATION FOR NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS




     The following is a summary of certain compensation paid to each person who will be designated
a named executive officer (“NEO”) of Century Aluminum Company (the “Company”) in
the proxy statement for the Company’s 2005 annual meeting of shareholders (“2005 Proxy”).
For additional information regarding the compensation of the NEOs, please read the 2005 Proxy,
which will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Regulation 14A of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.



     The following table summarizes: (i) the performance share payouts received by each NEO based
on the vesting of performance shares previously awarded under the Company’s 1996 Stock Incentive
Plan for the 2002 – 2004 performance period, and (ii) cash bonuses awarded to the NEOs under the
Company’s incentive compensation plan for the year ended December 31, 2004 based on the Company’s
performance and the Compensation Committee’s subjective evaluation of each NEO’s performance. The
vesting levels of the performance shares and cash bonuses were determined by the Compensation
Committee of the Company’s Board of Directors on March 21, 2005.



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Name	 	Title	 	2004
Salary	 	Vested Performance Shares	 	2004 Bonus
	Craig A. Davis

	 	Chairman and Chief
Executive Officer
	 	$	809,167	 	 	 	38,291	 	 	$	1,810,000	 
	Jack E. Gates

	 	Executive Vice President
and Chief Operating Officer
	 	 	310,417	 	 	 	6,176	 	 	 	511,250	 
	Gerald J. Kitchen

	 	Executive Vice President,
General Counsel, Chief
Administrative Officer and
Secretary
	 	 	279,083	 	 	 	10,131	 	 	 	497,775	 
	David W. Beckley

	 	Executive Vice President
and Chief Financial Officer
	 	 	281,292	 	 	 	10,023	 	 	 	431,200	 
	Daniel J. Krofcheck

	 	Vice President and Treasurer
	 	 	195,292	 	 	 	5,166	 	 	 	341,700
| (logo)  WELLS FARGO | **Commercial  Mortgage Servicing**D1050-084,  8th Floor  401 South Tryon Street  Charlotte, NC 28202  1-800-326-1334 |
|---------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

**ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE**

 

 

ReferenceisherebymadetothatcertainPooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of August 1, 2015, by and amongCITIGROUP COMMERCIAL MORTGAGESECURITIESINC, as Depositor, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Master Servicer,LNR PARTNERS, LLC, as Special Servicer, PARK BRIDGE LENDER SERVICES LLC, asOperating Advisor, CITIBANK, N.A., as Certificate Administrator and DEUTSCHEBANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS, as Trustee , and WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONALASSOCIATION as Custodian with respect to Commercial Mortgage Pass-ThroughCertificates, Series 2015-P1 (the "Agreement"). Capitalized termsused herein not otherwise defined shall have the meanings assigned in theAgreement.

 

Pursuantto Section 10.08 of this Agreement, I, Daniel Bober, Executive Vice Presidentof Commercial Mortgage Services do hereby certify that:

 

1.A review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the period fromJanuary 1, 2017 through December 31, 2017 (the “Reporting Period”), and of itsperformance per the Agreement during such period has been made under my supervision,and

 

2. To the best of my knowledge, based onsuch review, the Master Servicer, has fulfilled all of its obligations underthe Agreement in all material respects throughout the ReportingPeriod.

 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned hasexecuted this Certificate as of the 28th day ofFebruary2018.

 

 

/s/ Daniel Bober

Daniel Bober

Executive Vice President

Wells Fargo Bank

 

 

WellsFargo Bank,N.A.                                                        (logo)Together we’ll go far
**Exhibit 99.1**

 

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,****AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO****SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of SITEL Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for theperiod ending March 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, James F. Lynch, ChiefExecutive 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 tomy knowledge:

 

(1)          The Report fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and

 

(2)          The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 

 

 
| /s/  James F. Lynch |   |
|--------------------------|--------|
| James F.  Lynch          |
| Chief  Executive Officer |
|                     |
|                     |
| May 15, 2003             |

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                           2,533
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  122,413
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               124,966
<PP&E>                                       7,174,936
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,680,917
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,618,985
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           30,133
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,618,985
<SALES>                                        176,335
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               177,440
<CGS>                                           51,801
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  138,425
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 39,015
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             39,015
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    39,015
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
• FOLEY FOLEY
& LARDNER LL P

UL SEC August 25, 2014 U .S. En vironmental Prot ect ion Agency-Re gio n6 Attn: Dayana Medina 1445 Ross A venue# 1 200 Da ll as,TX 7 5 202- 2 7 33

A TT ORNEYS AT LAW 777 EAS T WISC O NS IN A V E II.U E MI L W AUK EE. W I 532 0 2· 530 6 4 1 4
.271

.2 4 00 T EL 414

.297

.4900
F AX WWW

.FOLEY

.COM WRI T ER"S DIRECT
LI NE 414.297 5832 mth imk e@fo

l ey.com EMAIL C LIENT

/ MATTER NUMB ER 105230·0103 Re: Domtar A.W. LLC's
S uppl emental Respon seto Request to P rovid eIn fo rmati on Pursuant to Clean Air Act Dear M s. Medina: Enclo sed please find the signed and notari zed Affida vit of Anna beth Reitter for the fo llow

-upres p onses sub mitt ed to U.S. EPA on Aug ust 29,2014. If you have any questions

,pl ease call. Enclosure cc: Anna beth Reitter BOS TON BR U SSELS C H
I C AGO DETROI T

JA C K SO NVI LLE L O S A N G E LES MA D
I SON M

I AM

I Very truly your s, **~4/Lt:_** M ILWAUKEE NEW YORK ORLANDO SACRA M E N TO Mark A. Thirhke SAN DIEGO S AN FRANC

I SCO SHANGHAI SILICON VALLEY

T ALLAHASSEE TAM P A TOKYO W AS HINGTON

.D .C. 4841-9435-958

1. 1AFFIDAVIT OF ANNABETH REITTER STATE OF WISCONSIN

) ) ss. COUNTY OF WOOD

) Annab
eth Reitter, being fir st duly sworn on oath,

stat esas follow s: (1)

I am Corporate Manager, Environmental Regulation for Domtar Corporation ("Domtar ") located at 301 Pointe Bas se Avenue, Neko osa, Wisconsin 54457. (2)

I make this affidav it in s upport of Domtar'

sres ponse to the questi ons raised by the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("U.S. EPA") during the Aug ust 2 1 ,20 1 4 webinar prese ntation and follow-up di scussion of the an swers provided pursuant to Section

1 1 4 of the C l ean Air Act for information regarding Domt ar' s Ashdown, Arkansas mill dated Ju ne 4, 2014, and rece
i ved by Domtar on Jun e 9, 2014

( the "Response"). (3) The objections asserted in the Response are authorized by Domtar. (4) Domtar has completed

a diligent record search and a diligent interviewing proces

s with employee

s who may ha ve relevant know led ge of the operations and activitie

sat the As hdo wnmill tha t are the sub ject of the Re spo nse. (5) To the best of my knowledge, based upon the information currently avai lable to Domtar and subject to the objection

s asserted in the Response, this Response
is true, correct and accurate. Domtar reserves the righ
t to revise, amend and/or update the Response in the future if Domtar obt ai ns additional relevant or responsive information. Annabeth Reitter Corporate Manager, Environmental Regu

l ation Subscribed and sworn to before me **this ~** day of **~g~:ts~**2014 **rdlt:t:_~~ N~l:State** 

of WJ;,"llin My Commission

i s/exp ire s: **/~3**15 4850-550 0-342 1.1
#### WARREN v. STATE.

No. 21115.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 16, 1940.

A. H. Gist, of Dallas, for appellant.

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

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant was convicted in the county court of Dallas County on a charge of aggravated assault on the person of Mrs. A. E. Thornton by, “willfully and with negligence”, operating a motor vehicle upon Highway No. 1-B. The jury assessed a penalty of 365 days in the county jail of Dallas County. The evidence properly admitted before the jury amply sustains the verdict.

A motion to quash the complaint and information was. overruled by the court and this action seems to be the chief ground upon which this court is asked to reverse the case.

The motion sets out that the complaint and information are ambiguous and uncertain in that they allege the defendant did, “unlawfully and with negligence”, collide with the person involved. The form of this complaint has been approved in Young v. State, 120 Tex.Cr.R. 39, 47 S.W.2d 320; Carlton v. State, 120 Tex.Cr.R. 12, 48 S.W.2d 273; Huff v. State, 123 Tex.Cr.R. 238, 58 S.W.2d 113, and Clifton v. State, 138 Tex.Cr.R. 258, 135 S.W.2d 115.

It is further argued in appellants brief that there is a variance between the allegation and the proof in that the proof shows that appellant’s car struck another car in which the injured party was riding, instead of striking the person. This contention will not be sustained, as it is permissible to show under the form of the allegation in this case that the defendant struck another car causing the injury to the party alleged. Schultz v. State, 137 Tex.Cr.R. 164, 128 S.W.2d 36; Guajardo v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 139 S.W.2d 85.

Further argument is made on bills of exception, complaining of the admissibility of testimony, which we consider thoroughly settled questions of law.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
BALANCE SHEET AND STATEMENTS OF LOSS AND ACCUMULATED DEFICIT AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH 10KSB FOR THE YEAR
ENDED JUNE 30, 1997.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           14044
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 14044
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   14044
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              308
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           290
<OTHER-SE>                                       13446
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     14044
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   314
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  4319
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 (4005)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (4005)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (4005)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.001)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.001)
        

</TABLE>
#### HUMPHREY et al. v. MIRIKE.

No. 2085.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Eastland.

Jan. 17, 1941.

Fred Humphrey, of Tyler, for plaintiff in error.

Don Mirike, of Houston, for defendant in error.

GRISSOM, Justice.

Appellee instituted this suit in the County Court of Gregg County against appellants. Thereafter, appellant Humphrey filed his plea of privilege to be sued in the county of his residence, to-wit, Smith County. Humphrey’s plea of privilege was overruled and from the judgment overruling his plea of privilege Humphrey appealed to the Court of Civil Appeals at Texarkana. Thereafter, pending the disposition of said appeal, a final judgment on the merits of the case was rendered in the trial court. From the judgment on the merits Humphrey has prosecuted this appeal.

In Humphrey v. Mirike, 134 S.W.2d 749, the Court of Civil Appeals at Texarkana reversed the .judgment of the trial court overruling Humphrey’s plea of privilege and remanded said cause with instructions to transfer the cause to Smith County.

The trial and judgment on the merits was subject to the reversal of the judgment on the plea of privilege. The judgment overruling the plea of privilege having been reversed and the cause ordered transferred to Smith County, it becomes our duty to reverse this judgment on the merits with directions to transfer the cause to Smith County in accordance with the judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals at Texarkana in Humphrey v. Mirike, supra. It is so ordered.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.3


                              PRATOR BETT, L.L.C.
                              PETROLEUM ENGINEERS
                              --------------------
                          712 MAIN STREET, SUITE 1830
                              HOUSTON, TEXAS 77002
                               TEL (713)224-1350
                               FAX (713)224-1351

                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PETROLEUM ENGINEERS

We hereby consent to the reference to our firm and to our report dated February
13, 2004, presenting estimated reserves and future revenue for the oil and gas
properties of NEG Operating, LLC, in National Energy Group Inc.'s Annual Report
on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003.

                                             /s/ M. DAYTON PRATOR III
                                             ------------------------------
                                             PRATOR BETT, L.L.C.


Houston, Texas
March 25, 2004
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1340

To provide funding for the resolution of failed savings associations, and

for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 16, 1993

Mr. GONZALEZ (for himself, Mr. LEACH, Mr. NEAL of North Carolina, Mrs.

ROUKEMA, Mr. SCHUMER, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. FLAKE, and Mr. FRANK

of Massachusetts) (all by request) introduced the following bill; which was

referred to the Committee on Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs

A BILL

To provide funding for the resolution of failed savings

associations, and for other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Thrift Depositor Pro5 tection Act of 1993’’.

6 SEC. 2. THRIFT RESOLUTION FUNDING PROVISIONS.

7 Section 21A(i)(3) of the Federal Home Loan Bank

8 Act (12 U.S.C. 1441a(i)(3)) is amended to read as follows:
2

•HR 1340 IH

1 ‘‘(3) ADDITIONAL FUNDING.—In addition to

2 amounts provided under paragraph (2), the Sec3 retary of the Treasury shall pay to the Corporation,

4 out of moneys in the Treasury not otherwise appro5 priated, such amounts as may be necessary, not to

6 exceed $28 billion, to carry out the purposes of this

7 section.’’.

8 SEC. 3. SAVINGS ASSOCIATION INSURANCE FUNDING PRO9 VISIONS.

10 Section 11(a)(6) of the Federal Deposit Insurance

11 Act (12 U.S.C. 1821(a)(6)) is amended—

12 (1) by amending subparagraph (E) to reads as

13 follows:

14 ‘‘(E) TREASURY PAYMENTS TO FUND.—To

15 provide sufficient funding for the Savings Asso16 ciation Insurance Fund to carry out the pur17 poses of this Act, the Secretary of the Treasury

18 shall pay to such Fund, out of moneys in the

19 Treasury not otherwise appropriated, such

20 amounts as may be necessary, not to exceed

21 $17,000,000,000.’’;

22 (2) in subparagraph (H), by striking ‘‘oversight

23 Board of the Resolution Trust Corporation’’ and in24 serting ‘‘Thrift Depositor Protection Oversight

25 Board’’;
3

•HR 1340 IH

1 (3) by striking subparagraphs (F), (G), and

2 (J); and

3 (4) by redesignating subparagraphs (H) and (I)

4 as subparagraphs (F) and (G), respectively.

Æ
Zimbra 

### Zimbra

Parcel Question From :Barry Hammer <Barry.Hammer@faa.gov> 

### Subject: Parcel Question 

### To: rmaguire@norwoodma.gov Russ, Page 1 of 1 

### rmaguire@norwoodma.gov

Thu, Jul 26, 2012 02:46 PM @ 1 attachment

I took a look at the parcel that you requested the release for and I believe it's a different parcel (though in the same vicinity) as the one the town inquired about.

I've attached a plan highlighting the parcel the town asked about selling. Let me know if you think it's airport property? Again, it doesn't appear so by the Exhibit 'A', but I want to make sure you know what's going on. I'm traveling tomorrow, but will be available Monday and Tuesday next week if you'd like to talk. Regards, Barry J. Hammer, P.E. FAA Airports Division 12 New England Executive Park Burlington, MA 01803 781.238.7625 

### Norwood Parcel.pdf**~** 302 KB

https ://ncs.norwoodma.gov/h/printmessage?id=3501&tz=America/New_York 4/26/2015
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

     In  connection  with the  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q of WNC Housing Tax
Credit  Fund V,  L.P.,  Series  3 (the  "Partnership")  for the  quarters  ended
December  31,  2005,  September  30 2005  and June  30,  2005 as filed  with the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof (the  "Report"),  and
pursuant to 18 U.S.C.,  section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, I, Thomas J. Riha, Senior  Vice-President and Chief
Financial Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc., general partner of the Partnership,
hereby certify that:

     1.   The Report fully  complies with the  requirements  of section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the  Securities  Exchange  Act of 1934,  except to the extent
          that  such  provisions  require  the  audit  report  of Local  Limited
          Partnership financial statements to refer to the auditing standards of
          the Public Company  Accounting  Oversight Board for the  Partnership's
          annual financial statements and except that the Report is a cumulative
          report  covering each of the quarters ended December 31,  September 30
          and June 30, 2005 and

     2.   The  information  contained  in the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
          material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of
          the Partnership.




/s/Thomas J. Riha
-----------------
Thomas J. Riha
Senior Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc.
October 5, 2009