alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
| (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. |
|-----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |                                                                                                                                       |                                                           |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------|
|        |                                                                                                                                  | /s/ David              F.              Hakala   |
|   | David              F. Hakala                                                                                                               |
|   | Acting              Chief Executive Officer, Chief Operating Officer, Principal Financial              and              Accounting Officer |

----
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 8 (Thursday, January 12, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 1873]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: C1-2011-33253]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2008-0638; FRL-9613-7]

Approval and Disapproval and Promulgation of Implementation 
Plans; Texas; Infrastructure and Interstate Transport Requirements for 
the 1997 Ozone and the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS

Correction

    In rule document 2011-33253 appearing on pages 81371-81393 in the 
issue of Wednesday, December 28, 2011, make the following corrections:

Sec.  52.270 [Corrected]

    1. On page 81392, in Sec.  52.270(c), in the table appearing at the 
bottom of the page, in the entry under the column titled ``EPA approval 
date'', ``12/28/2012'' should read ``12/28/2011''.
    2. On page 81393, in Sec. Sec.  52.270(c) and (e), in both tables 
appearing on this page, in the two entries under the columns titled 
``EPA approval date'', ``12/28/2012'' should read ``12/28/2011''.

[FR Doc. C1-2011-33253 Filed 1-11-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
```
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION

JOHN ANTHONY CASTRO,

Plaintiff,
Case No. 3:18-cv-81

Vv.
JUDGE WALTER H. RICE

THEODORE GUDORF, et a/.,
Defendants.

DECISION AND ENTRY SUSTAINING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO
VACATE PRELIMINARY TELEPHONE PRETRIAL CONFERENCE AND
DISMISS THIS ACTION (DOC. #12); DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT
PREJUDICE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION; JUDGMENT TO ENTER
IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANTS AND AGAINST PLAINTIFF;
TERMINATION ENTRY

On September 17, 2018, the Court issued a Show Cause Order, directing
Plaintiff to show cause in writing why Defendants’ Motion to Vacate Preliminary
Telephone Pretrial Conference and Dismiss this Action, Doc. #12, should not be
granted, and why this action should not be dismissed for want of prosecution.

Plaintiff has wholly failed to respond to the Show Cause Order.

Accordingly, the Court SUSTAINS Defendants’ Motion, Doc. #12, and DISMISSES
the case WITHOUT PREJUDICE for want of prosecution pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.
41(b).

Judgment shall be entered in favor of Defendants and against Plaintiff.


The captioned case is hereby ordered terminated upon the docket records of
the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Western Division,

at Dayton.

- >
Date: September 25, 2018 LAS
WALTER H. RICE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF ELIZABETH BONHAM 

Pursuant to S.D. Ohio Civ. R. 83.4(d), Attorney Elizabeth Bonham hereby gives notice of 

her withdrawal as co-counsel for the Plaintiffs in this matter. Ms. Bonham is ending her 

employment with the ACLU of Ohio on May 28, 2021. 

Attorney Freda Levenson, Legal Director for the ACLU of Ohio, will remain Trial Counsel 

in this matter, and the rest of the undersigned will remain co-counsel for the Plaintiffs. 

Counsel has notified her clients, who authorized this course of action, as well as counsel 

for Defendants in this matter. [Signatures on next page] 

 

STACIE RAY, 

et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

STEPHANIE MCCLOUD, 

et al., 

Defendants. 

Case No. 2:18-cv-00272 

Judge: Michael Watson 

Magistrate Judge: Chelsey Vascura 

)

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case: 2:18-cv-00272-MHW-CMV Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/26/21 Page: 1 of 4 PAGEID #: 3314
2 

Dated: May 26, 2021 Respectfully submitted, 

/s/ Elizabeth Bonham /s/ Freda Levenson 

Elizabeth Bonham (0093733) 

ACLU of Ohio 

4506 Chester Ave. 

Cleveland, OH 44103 

Phone: (614) 469-3200 

Facsimile: (614) 469-3361 

Email: ebonham@acluohio.org 

Freda Levenson (0045916) 

Susan Becker (0010205) 

ACLU of Ohio 

4506 Chester Ave. 

Cleveland, OH 44103 

Phone: (614) 586-1972 

Facsimile: (614) 586-1974 

Email: flevenson@acluohio.org 

Email: sbecker@acluohio.org 

David Carey (0088787) 

ACLU of Ohio Foundation 

1108 City Park Avenue 

Columbus, OH 43206 

Phone: 614-586-1972 

Fax: 614-586-1974 

dcarey@acluohio.org 

John Knight* (Illinois Bar No. 6201433) 

American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois 

180 N. Michigan Ave., Suite 2300 

Chicago, IL 60601 

Phone: (312) 201-9740 

Facsimile: (312) 288-5225 

Email: jknight@aclu-il.org 

Malita Picasso* 

American Civil Liberties Union Foundation 

125 Broad St. 

New York, NY 10004 

Phone: (212) 549-2569 

Facsimile: (212) 549-2650 

Email: mpicasso@aclu.org 

Kara Ingelhart* (Illinois Bar No. 6321949) 

Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, 

Inc. 

105 W. Adams St., 26th Fl. 

Chicago, IL 60603 

Phone: (312) 663-4413 

Facsimile: (312) 663-4307 

Email: kingelhart@lambdalegal.org 

Case: 2:18-cv-00272-MHW-CMV Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/26/21 Page: 2 of 4 PAGEID #: 3315
3 

Peter C. Renn* (California Bar No. 247633) 

Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, 

Inc. 

4221 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 280 

Los Angeles, CA 90010 

Phone: (213) 382-7600 

Facsimile: (213) 351-6050 

Email: prenn@lambdalegal.org 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

*Admitted Pro Hac Vice

 

Case: 2:18-cv-00272-MHW-CMV Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/26/21 Page: 3 of 4 PAGEID #: 3316
4 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

 I certify that on May 26, 2021, I filed the foregoing electronically. Notice of this filing 

will be sent to all parties for whom counsel has entered an appearance by operation of the 

Court’s electronic filing system. Parties may access this filing through the Court’s system. 

/s/ Elizabeth Bonham 

Elizabeth Bonham (0093733) 

Case: 2:18-cv-00272-MHW-CMV Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/26/21 Page: 4 of 4 PAGEID #: 3317
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 24, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 03-10051

Summary Calendar

 

ROBERT MITCHELL ALEXANDER,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

CARY J. COOK, Assistant Warden; TERRY T. SLITTER,

Defendants-Appellees.

--------------------

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

(1:02-CV-72-C)

--------------------

Before DAVIS, WIENER, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Plaintiff-Appellant Robert Mitchell Alexander, Texas prisoner

No. 830440, appeals the district court’s dismissal as frivolous of

his civil rights complaint. Alexander’s district court complaint

challenged the constitutionality of a prison disciplinary

conviction, asserting that the defendants violated his right to

freedom of speech and subjected him to cruel and unusual punishment

by disciplining him for exercising his First Amendment rights. 
2

On appeal, Alexander has abandoned his argument that his

disciplinary conviction is unconstitutional. Yohey v. Collins, 985

F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993)(28 U.S.C. § 2254 case); FED. R.

APP. P. 28(a)(9)(A). His assertion of a First Amendment violation

is meritless. See Jones v. North Carolina Prisoners’ Labor Union,

Inc., 433 U.S. 119, 125 (1977); Hernandez v. Estelle, 788 F.2d

1154, 1158 (5th Cir. 1986). For the first time on appeal,

Alexander argues that a delay in his receipt of medical treatment

violated the Eighth Amendment. As Alexander did not raise this

claim in the district court, we review it for plain error, and we

perceive none. See Kinash v. Callahan, 129 F.3d 736, 739 n.10 (5th

Cir. 1997). 

AFFIRMED.
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

WESTERN DIVISION

Linda M. Redmond, 

Plaintiff, 

v. Case No. 1:18cv345 

Commissioner of Social Security, Judge Michael R. Barrett 

Defendant. 

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) filed 

by the Magistrate Judge on August 23, 2019 (Doc. 13). 

Proper notice has been given to the parties under 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(1)(C), 

including notice that the parties would waive further appeal if they failed to file 

objections to the Report and Recommendation in a timely manner. United States v. 

Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981). No objections to the Magistrate Judge=s R&R 

(Doc. 13) have been filed. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the R&R (Doc. 13) of the Magistrate Judge is 

hereby ADOPTED. Consistent with the recommendation by the Magistrate Judge, the 

Commissioner’s decision is AFFIRMED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 s/Michael R. Barrett 

Michael R. Barrett, Judge 

United States District Court
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM 

Wehereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (File No.’s 33-19652, 33-44103, 33-49724, 33-64323, 33-53542, 333-38166, 333-39584, 333-135194 and 333-137857) of Unit Corporation of our report datedFebruary 23, 2010 relating to the financial statements, financial statement schedule, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K. 

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP 

Tulsa, Oklahoma

February 23, 2010
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

November 10, 2022

No. 04

- 22

- 00725

- CV

David Gene BECKA

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From the 144th Judicial District Court

, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2019CR1257 Honorable Andrew Wyatt Carruthers , Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

In our November 8, 2022 order, we advised Appellant that his notice of appeal was late

, but it was filed within fifteen days after the notice was due. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 26.3. We implied a motion for extension of time, see Verburgt v. Dorner , 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997) , and we ordered Appellant to file a motion for extension of time that reasonably explains the need for an extension. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 26.3 (citing T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 10.5(b)); In re E.K.C.

, 486 S.W.3d 614, 616 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 2016, no pet.)

. Appellant timely filed a response. Appellant ’ s motion for extension of time to file the notice of appeal is GRANTED ; the notice is deemed timely filed

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 26.3; Garcia v. Kastner Farms, Inc. , 774 S.W.2d 668, 670 (Tex. 1989)

.

_________________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez, JusticeIN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 10th day of November, 2022

.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ

, Clerk of Court
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 20, 2005

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 04-20378

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

EVENCIO RUBIO-RUBIO,

Defendant-Appellant.

--------------------

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:03-CR-170-ALL

--------------------

Before DAVIS, SMITH and DENNIS, Circuit Judges

PER CURIAM:*

Evencio Rubio-Rubio appeals his sentence following his guiltyplea conviction for illegal reentry after deportation, a violation

of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Rubio-Rubio argues that the district court

erred by imposing his sentence under the mandatory guidelines

scheme held unconstitutional in United States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct.

738 (2005). Because Rubio-Rubio did not raise this issue in the

district court, review is limited to plain error. See United

States v. Vonn, 535 U.S. 55, 59 (2002). The district court erred
No. 04-20378

-2-

in imposing Rubio’s sentence under the mandatory Guidelines scheme,

and this error was obvious after Booker. See United States v.

Valenzuela-Quevedo, __ F.3d __, No. 03-41754, 2005 WL 941353 at *4

(5th Cir. Apr. 25, 2005). However, Rubio-Rubio has not shown that

the error affected his substantial rights as he has not shown that

the record shows the district court judge would have imposed a

different or lesser sentence under a Booker advisory regime. See

id. at **4-5. Therefore, he has not met the requirements to show

plain error.

AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5                                                         
<LEGEND>
THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF COST PLUS, INC. FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED FEBRUARY
1, 1997 AND THE NINE MONTHS ENDED NOVEMBER 2, 1996.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-01-1997             FEB-01-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-04-1996             FEB-04-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-01-1997             NOV-02-1996
<CASH>                                          14,398                   1,093
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                     42,605                  56,228
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                59,416                  60,802
<PP&E>                                          90,813                  88,636
<DEPRECIATION>                                  30,608                  29,642
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 128,198                 128,286
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           34,609                  42,941
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                            81                      81
<OTHER-SE>                                      73,128                  64,050
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   128,198                 128,286
<SALES>                                        214,814                 124,154
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               214,814                 124,154
<CGS>                                          135,072                  80,356
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  199,774                  80,356
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,451                   1,955
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 12,589                 (2,466)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,162                 (1,011)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              7,427                 (1,455)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,427                 (1,455)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.96                  (0.19)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.92                  (0.19)
        

</TABLE>
Case 1:01-cv-00109-SSB     Document 56-2      Filed 11/11/2003     Page 1 of 4

Case 1:01-cv-00109-SSB     Document 56-2      Filed 11/11/2003     Page 2 of 4

Case 1:01-cv-00109-SSB     Document 56-2      Filed 11/11/2003     Page 3 of 4

Case 1:01-cv-00109-SSB     Document 56-2      Filed 11/11/2003     Page 4 of 4
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                          42,766
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  430,004
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     20,521
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               556,494
<PP&E>                                         393,036
<DEPRECIATION>                                 125,054
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,890,400
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          311,847
<BONDS>                                        561,501
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       865,718
<OTHER-SE>                                      22,172
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,890,400
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,102,632
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,127,766
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              24,169
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (49,303)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (16,438)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (43,028)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (43,028)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.61)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.61)
        

</TABLE>
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

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Da-Lite Screen Company, Inc. (the Company) for the period ending September 28,
2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Richard E. Lundin, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to and for purposes of 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted
pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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.



/s/ Richard E. LundinRichard E. LundinChief Executive OfficerOctober 29, 2007
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.                  

###### Federal Maritime Commission

          - [Docket No. 22-03]

Notice is given that a complaint has been filed with the Federal Maritime Commission (Commission) by One Banana North America Corp, hereinafter “Complainant,” against Hapag-Lloyd AG and Hapag-Lloyd (America) LLC, hereinafter “Respondents.” Complainant is a Florida corporation that ships fresh bananas from Central and South America to the United States, where it sells them to various wholesalers and retailers. Complainant alleges that Respondent Hapag Lloyd AG is a German company, Respondent Hapag-Lloyd (America) LLC is a Delaware company, and that Respondents are common carriers.

                    Complainant alleges that Respondents violated 46 U.S.C 41102(c), 46 CFR 545.4 and 545.5, and 46 U.S.C. 41104(a)(10) with regard to the movement of refrigerated containers. The full text of the complaint can be found in the Commission's Electronic Reading Room at                     *https://www2.fmc.gov/​readingroom/​proceeding/​22-03/​.*

This proceeding has been assigned to Office of Administrative Law Judges. The initial decision of the presiding office in this proceeding shall be issued by January 24, 2023, and the final decision of the Commission shall be issued by August 7, 2023.

William Cody,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2022-01598 Filed 1-26-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6730-02-P