alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Juan ORGANES-ESPINO, a/k/a Johnny Organes, a/k/a Johnny Two Braids, a/k/a Paisa, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-6348

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 25, 2017

Decided: May 31, 2017

Jose Juan Organes-Espino, Appellant Pro Se. Sandra Jane Hairston, Robert Michael Hamilton, Angela Hewlett Miller, Assistant United States Attorneys, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before MOTZ, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Jose Juan Organes-Espino seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion and his motion for reconsideration. The orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court' denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Organes-Espino has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appeala-bility and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED*
### Exhibit 31.1

### Certification under Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) of

### Rick L. Hurt, Secretary, Treasurer, Director

I, Rick L. Hurt, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of
Intermountain Refining Co., Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any
untrue statement of material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to
make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such
statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other
financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;
4. The small business issuer's other certifying officer and I
are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the
small business issuer and have:

> Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused
> such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
> ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, is made
> known to us by others within the entity, particularly during the period in which
> this report is being prepared;
> Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's
> disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions
> about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end
> of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;
> and
> Disclosed in this report any change in the small business
> issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the
> small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or
> is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's control
> over financial reporting; and

1. The small business issuer's other certifying officer and I
have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the small
business issuer's board of directors:

> All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
> design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
> reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to
> record, process, summarize and report financial information;
> and
> Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management
> or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's
> internal control over financial
> reporting.

Date: May 17,
2006/s/ Rick L.
Hurt________Rick L. Hurt, Treasurer, Secretary,
Director
J.S. v. BALDWIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES

2160346

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

June 23, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
KPMG (LOGO)

12 Fountain Plaza, Suite 601
Buffalo, NY 14202

Independent Accountants' Report

The Board of Directors
HSBC Bank USA:

We have examined management's  assertion about HSBC Mortgage Corporation (USA)'s
compliance  with the  minimum  servicing  standards  set  forth in the  Mortgage
Bankers Association of America's Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage
Bankers  (USAP) as of and for the year ended  December 31, 1999  included in the
accompanying  Management Assertion.  Management is responsible for HSBC Mortgage
Corporation  (USA)'s  compliance  with those minimum  servicing  standards.  Our
responsibility  is to express an opinion  on  management's  assertion  about the
Company's compliance based on our examination.

Our  examination  was  made in  accordance  with  standards  established  by the
American  Institute of Certified Public Accountants and,  accordingly,  included
examining,  on a test basis,  evidence about HSBC Mortgage  Corporation  (USA)'s
compliance  with the  minimum  servicing  standards  and  performing  such other
procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances.  We believe that our
examination  provides a reasonable  basis for our opinion.  Our examination does
not  provide  a  legal  determination  on  HSBC  Mortgage   Corporation  (USA)'s
compliance with the minimum servicing standards.

In our opinion,  management's assertion that HSBC Mortgage Corporation (USA) has
complied in all material  respects  with the  aforementioned  minimum  servicing
standards as of and for the year ended  December 31, 1999 is fairly  stated,  in
all material respects.

Buffalo, New York
February 8, 2000

KPMG LLP
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 97-10107

Conference Calendar

__________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JAMES STANLEY LUKE, also known

as Stanley Luke,

 Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:96-CR-037-1-J

- - - - - - - - - -

August 14, 1997

Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

James Stanley Luke appeals his conviction for retaliating

against a witness under 18 U.S.C. § 1513(b)(2), arguing that the

statute is vague. Luke waived this challenge by not raising it

in the district court. FED. R. CRIM. P. 12(b)(1), (2); (f); see

United States v. Chavez-Valencia, 116 F.3d 127, 130 (5th Cir.

1997) (failure to raise motion to suppress in the district court
No. 97-10107

-2-

waives appellate review). Luke also contends that the district

court abused its discretion by ordering that he receive

substance-abuse testing and treatment while on supervised

release. The district court did not plainly err by requiring

drug testing during Luke's period of supervised release. See

United States v. Calverley, 37 F.3d 160, 162-64 (5th Cir. 1994)

(en banc). 

AFFIRMED.
Timothy JONES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D15-3244

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 18, 2018

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Glen P. Gifford, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Trisha Meggs Pate, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

Timothy Jones appeals his convictions for possession of cocaine and paraphernalia. We reject his argument that the trial court erred in denying a motion to suppress. However, because Jones was found incompetent to proceed a year and a half before his trial, and the record does not contain a subsequent order finding him competent, we reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this Court's opinion in *Cotton v. State* , 177 So.3d 666, 668-69 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015).

REVERSED and REMANDED .

Ray, Makar, and Winsor, JJ., concur.
Carla CAILLIER, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and State of Florida, Appellees.

Case No. 5D18-27

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed May 8, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Teddy Bruce POLSTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D16-4583

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 28, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Exhibit 32.1

                           CERTIFICATIONS 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 of Chromcraft Revington, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended October 2, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, Michael E. Thomas, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
of the Company, and Frank T. Kane, Vice President - Finance and Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 1934; and

     2.   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of
          the Company.


/s/ Michael E. Thomas
-------------------------------
Michael E. Thomas
Chairman, President and
Chief Executive Officer
November 5, 2004


/s/ Frank T. Kane
-------------------------------
Frank T. Kane
Vice President-Finance and
Chief Financial Officer
November 5, 2004


     This certification is furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350
and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure
document or for any other purpose.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 620 

To require an annual budget estimate for the initiatives of the National 

Institutes of Health pursuant to reports and recommendations made 

under the National Alzheimer’s Project Act. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 30, 2023 

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey (for himself, Mr. TONKO, and Ms. WATERS) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy 

and Commerce 

A BILL 

To require an annual budget estimate for the initiatives 

of the National Institutes of Health pursuant to reports 

and recommendations made under the National Alzheimer’s Project Act. 

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 ‘‘Alzheimer’s Account5 ability and Investment Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF PROJECT. 

7 Section 2 of the National Alzheimer’s Project Act (42 

8 U.S.C. 11225) is amended— 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 620 IH

1 (1) by redesignating subsection (h) as sub2 section (i); and 

3 (2) by inserting after subsection (g) the fol4 lowing: 

5 ‘‘(h) PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT BUDGET.—For fis6 cal year 2024 and each subsequent fiscal year, the Direc7 tor of the National Institutes of Health shall prepare and 

8 submit, directly to the President for review and trans9 mittal to Congress, after reasonable opportunity for com10 ment, but without change, by the Secretary of Health and 

11 Human Services and the Advisory Council, an annual 

12 budget estimate for the initiatives of the National Insti13 tutes of Health pursuant to the reports and recommenda14 tions made under this Act, including an estimate of the 

15 number and type of personnel needs for the National In16 stitutes of Health.’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
A.S. v. STATE

CR-16-0331

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

April 21, 2017 Reh. denied May 5, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Opinion filed February 21, 2020

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals 

__________

No. 11-20-00049-CR

__________

IN RE BILLY CHARLES WILKINS

Original Mandamus Proceeding

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Relator, Billy Charles Wilkins, filed this original petition for writ of 

mandamus in which he requests that we instruct the Justice of the Peace for Precinct 

No. 4 in Brown County to dismiss an arrest warrant that was issued on June 13, 

1995, in Cause Number 4226.

Article V, section 6 of the Texas Constitution, which delineates the appellate 

jurisdiction of the intermediate courts of appeals, provides that the courts of appeals 

have original jurisdiction as prescribed by law. TEX. CONST. art. V, § 6. 

Section 22.221(a) of the Government Code authorizes this court to issue a writ of 

mandamus in order to enforce our jurisdiction. TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 22.221(a) 

(West Supp. 2019). We may also issue a writ of mandamus against “a judge of a 

district, statutory county, statutory probate county, or county court”; “a judge of a 
2

district court who is acting as a magistrate at a court of inquiry”; or “an associate 

judge of a district or county court appointed by a judge under Chapter 201, Family 

Code,” so long as those judges are in our district. Id. § 22.221(b).

Relator’s petition seeks mandamus relief against a justice of the peace. We 

do not have jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus against a justice of the peace. 

Easton v. Franks, 842 S.W.2d 772, 773 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, orig. 

proceeding) (per curiam); see also In re Garcia, No. 13-18-00651-CV, 2018 WL 

6219254, at *2 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi–Edinburg Nov. 28, 2018, orig. 

proceeding) (mem. op.). Further, Relator’s petition does not demonstrate that the 

relief that he requests is necessary to enforce our appellate jurisdiction. See In re 

Smith, 355 S.W.3d 901, 901–02 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2011, orig. proceeding) (per 

curiam) (holding that the court of appeals did not have jurisdiction to issue writ of 

mandamus against justice of the peace where relators did not argue or show that writ 

was necessary to enforce the court’s jurisdiction).

Therefore, we dismiss the petition for writ of mandamus for lack of 

jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM

February 21, 2020

Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J.,

Stretcher, J., and Wright, S.C.J.1

Willson, J., not participating.

1

Jim R. Wright, Senior Chief Justice (Retired), Court of Appeals, 11th District of Texas at Eastland, 

sitting by assignment.
Ruben MALONE, Jr. v. BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, AND FIREARMS, Larry Amerson, Jeremy Penny, and Randy Cobb

2160626

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

June 15, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-8224

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,

v. DANIEL ORIAKHI, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Marvin J. Garbis, Senior District Judge. (1:92-cr-00283-MJG-1; 1:05-cv-02317-MJG)

Submitted: April 16, 2009 Decided: May 7, 2009

Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Daniel Oriakhi, Appellant Pro Se. Lynne Ann Battaglia, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Robert Reeves Harding, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Daniel Oriakhi seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion for reconsideration of the denial of his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2008) motion. The notice of appeal was received in the district court after expiration of the appeal period. Because Oriakhi is incarcerated, the notice is considered filed as of the date it was properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack , 487 U.S. 266 (1988). The record does not conclusively reveal when Oriakhi gave the notice of appeal to prison officials for mailing. Accordingly, we remand the case for the limited purpose of allowing the district court to obtain this information from the parties and to determine whether the filing was timely under Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1) and

Houston v. Lack . The record, as supplemented, will then be

returned to this court for further consideration.

REMANDED
Exhibit 23



                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to the  incorporation by reference in the Registration  Statement on:
(a) Form S-8 (333-94995)  pertaining to the 1996 CSI Stock Option Plan, the 1999
Section 3(i) Share Option Plan,  the 1999 Employee  Stock  Purchase Plan and the
1999  Non-Employee  Directors Stock Option Plan of Commtouch  Software  Ltd.;(b)
Form F-3  (333-89773)  pertaining to the resale of 2,052,051  ordinary shares of
Commtouch  Software Ltd. by Vulcan Ventures  Incorporated,  InfoSpace  (formerly
"Go2Net,  Inc.")  and  Microsoft  Corporation  and  a  warrant  exercisable  for
1,136,000 ordinary shares of Commtouch Software Ltd. by InfoSpace;  and (c) Form
F-3  (333-46192)  pertaining  to the  sale by  Commtouch  Software  Ltd.  of its
4,000,000  ordinary shares of our report dated February 14, 2001 with respect to
the consolidated  financial  statements and schedule of Commtouch  Software Ltd.
included in its Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2000.

Tel-Aviv, Israel
May 15, 2001


                                                   KOST, FORER & GABBAY
                                         A member of Ernst & Young international
FIRST PROTECTIVE INSURANCE COMPANY d/b/a Frontline Insurance, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Sergio L CUTIE, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-1142

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

March 29, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

April 28, 2009 

s0420 

Order 

 

April 28, 2009 

137746 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 137746 

 COA: 286699 

Kent CC: 01-004370-FC 

JENDRI MALDONADO-ZAPON, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 10, 2008 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
**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 Annual Report of Luna Technologies International, Inc.
      (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB/A for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 as
      filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”), I, Kimberly Landry, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
      certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
      of
      the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:





(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:  March 1, 2006
            /s/
                Kimberly
                Landry
              Kimberly
                Landry
              Chief
                Financial Officer
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
  (a)
    
    the Form 10-K of the Registrant for the year ended December 31, 2008, filed
on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 (as amended); and(b)
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.
  /s/ Lidio V. SorianoLidio V. Soriano, CPA
Chief Financial Officer
October 28, 2009
MEMORANDUM

DATE: March 23, 2015

TO: Carbon Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket ID: OAR-2013-0602

FROM: Rob Lawrence

EPA/Region 6/PD

SUBJECT: January 28, 2015 Presentation to a meeting of 7 Texas cities’ representatives 

interested in Climate Change issues at the municipal level. Part of the 

presentation discussed the Proposed Carbon Power Plan for Existing Power 

Plants.

SUMMARY

A panel presentation was made by EPA at a meeting of 7 Texas cities’ representatives 

interested in Climate Change issues at the municipal level. Part of the presentation discussed 

the Proposed Carbon Power Plan for Existing Power Plants, which was proposed on June 2, 

2014. The meeting was in Dallas, Texas.

ATTENDEES

Participants: Representatives were from Austin, Dallas, Denton, El Paso, Houston, 

Plano, and San Antonio

EPA Participant: Rob Lawrence (Region 6 Energy Policy Advisor)
Brian K. JOHNSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-2928

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed March 6, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS**

 

The Board of Directors 

Ariba, Inc.:

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in theregistration statements (Nos. 333-107864, 333-61064, 333-73458, 333-81773, 333-89119, 333-95665, 333-33544, 333-46820, and 333-84916) on Form S-8 of Ariba, Inc. of our report dated October 22, 2003 except as to note 12, which is as of November 14,2003, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Ariba, Inc. and subsidiaries as of September 30, 2003 and 2002, and the related consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for eachof the years in the three-year period ended September 30, 2003, which report appears in the September 30, 2003 annual report on Form 10-K of Ariba, Inc. 

 

/s/    KPMG LLP 

 

Mountain View, California 

December 5, 2003
Adelmo ROSALES, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D17-1153

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

OCTOBER 24, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.