alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

RIVER MASCARI,

 Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

 State.

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-16-00279-CR

Appeal from the

210th District Court

of El Paso County, Texas 

(TC# 20120D06121)

O R D E R

The trial court judge has verbally informed the Clerk’s Office that Appellant does not 

have a right to appeal. The trial court has not, however, entered a written certification of the 

Appellant’s right to appeal as required by the Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX.R.APP.P.

25.2(d), Appendix D. Accordingly, the trial court is ordered to enter the required certification 

and file it with the trial court clerk within thirty days of the date of this order. See Cortez v. 

State, 420 S.W.3d 803 806-07 (Tex.Crim.App. 2013). If the trial court is unable to obtain the 

defendant’s signature on the certification, the trial court should nevertheless certify whether 

Appellant has a right to appeal and file the certification without the Appellant’s signature. The 

trial court clerk shall provide a copy of the certification to this Court as soon as possible, but not 

later than three days after it is filed. See TEX.R.APP.P. 25.2(e). 

IT IS SO ORDERED this 7

th day of December, 2016.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez and Hughes, JJ.
Summary Translation	Exhibit 4.27


  


Loan Agreement


 


Contract No. : 2012JIYINDAIZIDI12100669


 


Borrower
: Hebei Xuhua Trading Co., Ltd.


Lender :
CITIC Shijiazhuang Branch


Signing
Date : August 30, 2012


Loan Amount
: RMB50,000,000


 


Length of
maturity : From August 30, 2012 to August 29, 2013


Use of Loan
: Working Capital


Loan Interest : 6.90%


Date of
Draft :August 30, 2012


Withdrawal
Amount : RMB50,000,000


Payment Method : The interest should be repaid by monthly. The
principal shall be fully repaid at the maturity date of the loan.


Repayment
Date :August 29, 2013


 


Loan Guarantee : Guaranty of Pledge, Guaranty
of Mortgage


 


- Ganglian Finance Leasing Co., Ltd entered into The Maximum
Pledge Contract with the lender, with the contract no.2012JIYINZUIQUANZHIZIDI12140160.


 


- Ganglian Finance Leasing Co., Ltd entered into The Maximum
Mortgage Contract with the lender, with the contract no.2012JIYINZUIBAOZIDI12120243.
<PAGE>

Exhibit 23.1


                             Consent of Independent Auditors

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
No. 333-42743, 333-62131, 333-73087, 333-83229 and 333-87493 on Form S-8 and
No. 333-86473 on Form S-3 of NCO Group, Inc. of our report dated February 13,
2001, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of
NCO Group, Inc included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended
December 31, 2000.


                                                  /s/ Ernst & Young LLP



Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania
March 15, 2001.
#### Ford et al., Plaintiffs in Error, *vs.*Baird, Assignee of D. Jones & Co., Defendant in Error.

Where Judgment has been obtained by the default of the defendant on the trial, this Court will not entertain a writ of error to reverse such Judgment, on account of the insufficiency of the declaration.

Error to the late District Court of Brown County.

An action of assumpsit was brought against the defendant Ford, as the Receiver of the Green Bay Lumbering Company, and against the other defendants, as members of said Lumbering Company. The declaration counted upon a note given by Ford, as *Receiver,*to D. Jones & .Co., and there were also the common money counts.

A part of the defendants suffered a default for want of a plea, and others of them pleaded the general issue, and one, a special plea. None of the defendants appeared to defend when the suit was called on for trial, and the default of all was taken, and the damages were assessed as against all, for the amount of principal and interest, on the note given by the Receiver. A motion was made in behalf of the defendants below for a new trial, but which was refused by the District Judge, and the cause was brought to this Court for re-adjudication upon the errors alleged.,

*Chandler,*for the plaintiffs in error,

insisted that the count upon the note given by the Receiver of the Lumber Company, could not be enforced as against the members of the company, because they were not parties to it, ñor-as against the Receiver, because it was executed by him *213in his official name; and that there was no allegation in the count that he had funds in his hands as such Receiver, or that he promised other than as Receiver.

That no recovery on the common money counts Could be had, because there was no privity of contract between *4ill*the defendants and Jones & Co. That there had been no amendment of the declaration as to parties or matter, and that the Statute did not presume an amendment to have been made, unless it should be done in fact, and there being no amendment in faet, the judgment could not be sustained.

Collins, for the defendant in error,

claimed that the declaration was sufficient to sustain the judgment, and that *niter*default and judgment, the Court would not disturb it on writ of error.

*By the Court.*

Stow, C. J.

This was a judgment by default in the Court below, and we do not discover any •such error in the record, as will warrant its reversal. Though the special count may perhaps be bad, the common counts are unobjectionable and are sufficient to support the judgment; and after verdict or default, this is <enoogh.

Judgment affirmed.
*This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of

law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the

citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under

the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

F I L E D

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

AUG 21 2002

PATRICK FISHER

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

MARSHALL DEWAYNE WILLIAMS,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v. No. 02-3023

MICKEY E. RAY, Warden,

Respondent - Appellee.

(D.C. No. 01-3270-RDR)

(D. Kansas)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before SEYMOUR, HENRY, and BRISCOE, Circuit Judges.

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined

unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this

appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered

submitted without oral argument.

Petitioner Marshall DeWayne Williams appeals the district court's dismissal of his

28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition for habeas corpus. We affirm.
2

Williams was convicted of three counts related to the planting of a pipe bomb. On

direct appeal, the court affirmed his convictions, but vacated his life sentence and

remanded for resentencing on count one. United States v. Williams, 775 F.2d 1295 (5th

Cir. 1985). On remand, the district court sentenced him to 99 years on count one. 

Williams filed a motion to vacate sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, which was

denied. On June 29, 2001, he filed this § 2241 petition, contending his Fifth Amendment

due process rights were violated because the government failed to present sufficient

evidence. The magistrate court recommended that the petition be dismissed because

Williams was attacking the validity of his conviction and he had failed to show that

§ 2255 was inadequate or ineffective. The district court adopted the magistrate's

recommendation and dismissed the petition.

A § 2241 petition attacks the execution of a sentence rather than its validity. 

Bradshaw v. Story, 86 F.3d 164, 166 (10th Cir. 1996). A § 2255 petition attacks the

legality of detention. Id. The exclusive remedy for testing the validity of a judgment and

sentence, unless it is inadequate or ineffective, is provided in § 2255. Caravalho v. Pugh,

177 F.3d 1177, 1178 (10th Cir. 1999). A prisoner's lack of success in a prior § 2255

motion is insufficient to establish that the remedy is inadequate or ineffective. Bradshaw,

86 F.3d at 166.

We have carefully reviewed Williams' appellate brief and the documents contained

in his appendix filed with this court. We agree with the district court that he has failed to
3

show that the remedy under § 2255 is inadequate or ineffective.

AFFIRMED. The mandate shall issue forthwith.

Entered for the Court

Mary Beck Briscoe

Circuit Judge
TRTM_TYPE FINAL_STATUS 1947 1948 1949

FRAC ABANDONED LOCATION FRAC DRY HOLE, TEMPORARILY ABANDONED 219 259 247 FRAC GAS WELL 273 272 258 FRAC INJ, SRV, CO2, STORAGE, WDW, PSEUDO ORIG, MINING BOREHOLE 25 38 24 FRAC JUNKED AND ABANDONED WELL 6 8 3 FRAC LOCATION 1 FRAC MULTIPLE COMPLETION, GAS 10 5 6 FRAC MULTIPLE COMPLETION, OIL 1 2 4 FRAC MULTIPLE COMPLETION, OIL AND GAS 1 2 FRAC OIL WELL 1470 1966 1787 FRAC SUSPENDED FRAC WELL START 1 REFRAC DRY HOLE, TEMPORARILY ABANDONED REFRAC GAS WELL REFRAC MULTIPLE COMPLETION, GAS REFRAC MULTIPLE COMPLETION, OIL AND GAS REFRAC OIL WELL1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966

343 437 519 713 952 1124 1058 943 886 931 869 857 830 700 729 597 527 367 622 758 1265 1222 1599 1881 1912 1846 17942012 2175 1965 1635 1817 1910 1741 97 155 69 86 234 378 341 348 293 327 205 244 313 250 299 186 159 8 2 3 3 2 3 4 2 2 5 6 2 6 3 2 2 2 1 1 2 3 1 2 13 23 26 44 50 92 192 197 228 198 217 155 131 157 171 147 20 30 75 165 198 209 295 495 507 626 532 808 699 569 513 367 320 9 7 8 28 49 52 61 73 97 108 118 169 162 149 116 125 86 23243678444160608757 10691 108789753826482406201607957775788572658414919 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1

11967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1 487 467 486 443 429 464 558 663 692 796 1048 1048 938 1492 1948 1313 1432 1322 1871 1924212432024226372445185061 7013 7937 7630 9077 10690 9277 157 144 111 114 113 91 105 140 172 165 156 211 269 290 366 245 1 1 1 3 1 2 2 1 6 5 6 8 7 6 1 106 93 102 100 79 98 161 105 126 136 196 229 288 463 421 345 207 124 108 70 55 32 34 63 108 107 105 116 130 233 297 168 72 43 46 40 31 25 26 35 44 32 23 35 48 91 121 88 5097514254415203 529154855363730584179506 10219 10579 12492 2032824895 20018

4 7 5 7 5 5 10 11 8 11 6 2 6 6

11983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 1 1 1 2 1328 1312 1053 490 431 363 329 379 250 198 214 226 212 265 280 224 221 7264 9255 742046025126566868928706574482565867778164377359865885538030 347 322 317 197 370 370 217 253 220 222 156 107 205 236 265 123 138 4 4 4 1 3 1 2 1 2 6 2 1

201 419 401 308 353 346 310 300 259 330 259 339 230 226 263 287 227 142 241 260 162 132 93 64 47 31 35 23 26 28 27 34 10 5 58 99 74 42 28 30 37 21 10 15 12 24 26 18 14 14 14 2024022878 1817877918089596550255721490844004094325038884792553430092459 3 3 1 2 1 1 5

1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1 12000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 1 1 1 4 260 312 244 251 252 283 365 358 357 171 120 10569 13791 11889 14856 1779121186256402753127311 12335 10103 336 261 219 265 215 298 526 700 591 529 607 1 3 2 4 2 4 8 14 6 3 1 328 389 403 471 498 500 604 641 618 372 238 21 19 9 22 14 16 21 14 22 7 12 20 12 6 26 22 17 21 10 11 2 11 4363 4588 3533 4247 5228 6556 7950 7949 10172 6369 10084

1 2 1 4 2 2 2 1 1 2 5 8 8 15 28 96 23 26 2 2 1 1 2 11 21 30 60 66 50 50 58 53 146 1 1 1

1 1 9 8 1 7 9 13 9 9 6 12
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 3185 

To amend the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area Improvement 

Act to extend the exception to the closure of certain roads within the 

Recreation Area for local businesses, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 4, 2021 

Mr. TOOMEY (for himself and Mr. CASEY) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources 

A BILL 

To amend the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation 

Area Improvement Act to extend the exception to the 

closure of certain roads within the Recreation Area for 

local businesses, 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. USE OF CERTAIN ROADS WITHIN THE DELA4 WARE WATER GAP NATIONAL RECREATION 

5 AREA. 

6 Section 4(b) of the Delaware Water Gap National 

7 Recreation Area Improvement Act (Public Law 109–156; 

8 119 Stat. 2948; 131 Stat. 2246) is amended in the matter 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3185 IS

1 preceding paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘Until’’ and all that 

2 follows through ‘‘subsection (a)’’ and inserting ‘‘Until Sep3 tember 30, 2026, subsection (a)’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 32.1
                                                                    ------------



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

I, Jerome R Mahoney, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my
knowledge and belief, 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.


                                            Date:   August 13, 2008



                                            By /s/ Jerome R Mahoney
                                            ---------------------
                                            Jerome R Mahoney
                                            President, Chief Executive Officer
                                            and Principal Financial Officer
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 3150 

To require the United States Postal Service to designate a single, unique 

ZIP code for Swanzey, New Hampshire. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 3, 2021 

Mrs. SHAHEEN (for herself and Ms. HASSAN) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

A BILL 

To require the United States Postal Service to designate 

a single, unique ZIP code for Swanzey, New Hampshire. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SINGLE, UNIQUE ZIP CODE FOR SWANZEY, NEW 

4 HAMPSHIRE. 

5 Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment 

6 of this Act, the United States Postal Service shall des7 ignate a single, unique ZIP code applicable to the area 

8 encompassing only Swanzey, New Hampshire, in its en9 tirety. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

**CERTIFICATIONOF CEO AND CFO PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C.SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K ofLinens Holding Co. for the fiscal year ended December 30, 2006 as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),Robert J. DiNicola, as Chief Executive Officer of Linens Holding Co., andFrancis M. Rowan, as Chief Financial Officer, each hereby certifies, pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:

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

(2) The information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of Linens Holding Co.

 
| /s/ Robert J.  DiNicola |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
| **Name:**               |   | Robert J. DiNicola |
| **Title:**              |   | Chairman and Chief |
|                    |   | Executive Officer |
| **Date:**               |   | March 26, 2007 |
| ** **              |   |   |
| ** **              |   |   |
| /s/ Francis M.  Rowan   |   |
| **Name:**               |   | Francis M. Rowan |
| **Title:**              |   | Senior Vice President and |
|                    |   | Chief Financial Officer |
| **Date:**               |   | March 26, 2007 |
|                         |        |  |  |

 

 

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-6143

STEVE LESTER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

KAREN C. RATIGAN, Assistant Attorney General,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Florence. Timothy M. Cain, District Judge. 

(4:11-cv-02995-TMC)

Submitted: April 26, 2012 Decided: May 1, 2012

Before GREGORY, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Steven Lester, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Steve Lester appeals the district court’s order 

denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. The 

district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant 

to 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(b)(1)(B) (West 2006 & Supp. 2011). The 

magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised

Lester that failure to timely file specific objections to this 

recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court 

order based upon the recommendation.

The timely filing of specific objections to a 

magistrate judge’s recommendation is necessary to preserve 

appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when 

the parties have been warned of the consequences of 

noncompliance. Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th 

Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Lester

has waived appellate review by failing to file specific 

objections after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we 

affirm the judgment of the district court.

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.

AFFIRMED
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.14

                       Executive Officers who are Parties
                     to an Incentive Stock Option Agreement

                                        Number of Shares of Mariner
                                        Energy LLC, Common Stock
Executive Officer                     Subject to Stock Option Agreement
-----------------                     ---------------------------------

Robert E. Henderson                                5,000
Richard R. Clark                                   5,000
Michael W. Strickler                               5,000
L.V. McGuire                                       1,714
Frank A. Pici                                      5,000
Christopher E. Lindsey                             1,429
Gregory K. Harless                                 3,570
W. Hunt Hodge                                      5,000
                                                   -----

Totals                                            31,713
                                                  ======
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 31 

To limit the establishment or extension of national monuments in the State 

of Utah. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 22, 2021 

Mr. LEE (for himself and Mr. ROMNEY) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources 

A BILL 

To limit the establishment or extension of national 

monuments in the State of Utah. 

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 ‘‘Protect Utah’s Rural 

5 Economy Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OR EXTEN7 SION OF NATIONAL MONUMENTS IN THE 

8 STATE OF UTAH. 

9 Section 320301 of title 54, United States Code, is 

10 amended by adding at the end the following: 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 31 IS

1 ‘‘(e) LIMITATION ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OR EX2 TENSION OF NATIONAL MONUMENTS IN THE STATE OF

3 UTAH.—Notwithstanding any other provision of this sec4 tion, the President may not establish or extend a national 

5 monument in the State of Utah (referred to in this sub6 section as the ‘State’) unless— 

7 ‘‘(1) the extension or establishment has been 

8 authorized by an Act of Congress; and 

9 ‘‘(2) the President has received from the Gov10 ernor of the State notice that the State legislature 

11 has enacted legislation approving the proposed es12 tablishment or extension.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 61 (Tuesday, March 31, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 17045]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-07340]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Cancer Institute; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Cancer Institute Special Emphasis 
Panel Development of Informatics Technology.
    Date: April 15-16, 2015.
    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Cancer Institute Shady Grove, 9609 Medical 
Center Drive, Room 7W538, Rockville, MD 20850, (Telephone Conference 
Call).
    Contact Person: Nicholas Kenney, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Officer, Research Technology and Contract Review Branch, Division of 
Extramural Activities, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical 
Center Drive, Room 7W246, Rockville, MD 20850, 240-276-6374, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#dbb5b2b8b3b4b7baa8f5b0beb5b5bea29bb5b2b3f5bcb4ad"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="99f7f0faf1f6f5f8eab7f2fcf7f7fce0d9f7f0f1b7fef6ef">[email protected]</span></a>.
    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and 
funding cycle.
    Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home 
page: http://deainfo.nci.nih.gov/advisory/sep/sep.htm, where an 
agenda and any additional information for the meeting will be posted 
when available.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.392, 
Cancer Construction; 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Research; 
93.394, Cancer Detection and Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer 
Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Research; 93.397, Cancer 
Centers Support; 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, Cancer 
Control, National Institutes of Health, HHS)


    Dated: March 26, 2015.
Melanie J. Gray,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-07340 Filed 3-30-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>