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

13-16-00699-CV

Service Corporation International and SCI Texas Funeral Services, Inc., d/b/a Buena 

Vista Burial Park and d/b/a Funeraria del Angel Buena Vista

v.

Maria Ruiz

On appeal from the

138th District Court of Cameron County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 2015-DCL-06302

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes the judgment of the trial court should be reversed and the cause 

remanded to the trial court. The Court orders the judgment of the trial court 

REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with its opinion. Costs 

of the appeal are adjudged against appellee.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

January 25, 2018
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert Lee PERNELL, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-6104

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 30, 2017

Decided: June 7, 2017

Robert Lee Pernell, Appellant Pro Se. Oliva L. Norman, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Robert Lee Pernell, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certifícate of ap-pealability. 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.

*710We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Pernell has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED*
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 966 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                 S. 966

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
       For the relief of Nathan C. Vance, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. PAYMENT TO NATHAN C. VANCE.

    (a) Payment.--Subject to subsections (b) and (c), the Secretary of 
Agriculture shall pay $4,850.00 to Nathan C. Vance of Wyoming for fire 
loss arising out of the Mink Area Fire in and around Yellowstone 
National Park in 1988.
    (b) Source of Funds.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall pay the 
amount specified in subsection (a) from amounts made available under 
section 1304 of title 31, United States Code.
    (c) Condition of Payment.--The payment made pursuant to subsection 
(a) shall be in full satisfaction of the claim of Nathan C. Vance 
against the United States, for fire loss arising out of the Mink Area 
Fire, that was received by the Forest Service in August 1990.

            Passed the Senate April 30, 1996.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
104th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                                 S. 966

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

       For the relief of Nathan C. Vance, and for other purposes.
```
Exhibit 32.1

Written Statement of Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to Section 906 of the

Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)

The undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer of the Mohegan Tribal Gaming Authority (the Authority), hereby certifies that,
to his knowledge, on the date hereof:



| | (a) | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Authority for the quarter ended December 31, 2009 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 Exchange Act; and
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (b) | information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Authority.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/    MITCHELL GROSSINGER
ETESSMitchell Grossinger Etess Chief Executive Officer, Mohegan Tribal Gaming
Authority February 12, 2010


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Authority and will be retained by the
Authority and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF SUPERIOR SERVICES, INC.
AS OF AND FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                          27,829
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   36,421
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (1,685)
<INVENTORY>                                      1,237
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                67,178
<PP&E>                                         315,792
<DEPRECIATION>                                (88,916)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 381,747
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           34,508
<BONDS>                                          4,359
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           267
<OTHER-SE>                                     269,277
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   381,747
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                51,753
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   36,183
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   364
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 411
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,671
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,476
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,195
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,195
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .12
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .12
        

</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Wilmer GODOY, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 15-14112 Non-Argument Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

(May 1, 2017)

Sean Paul Cronin, Maureen Donlan, Wi-fredo A. Ferrer, Emily M. Smachetti, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Miami, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Before WILLIAM PRYOR, JORDAN and ROSENBAUM, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Thomas John Butler, appointed counsel for Wilmer Godoy in this direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant and filed a brief pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of Godoy’s appeal is correct, Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Godoy’s convictions and sentences are AFFIRMED.
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15

- 41184 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
OLMAN ALEXI HERRERA

- MARTINEZ , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 1:15

- CR

- 227

- 1

Before REAVLEY, ELROD, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Olman Alexi
Herrera

- Martinez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Herrera

- Martinez h a s not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED April 20 , 2016 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 15-41184 Document: 00513472570 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/20/2016No. 15

- 41184

2 presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2. Case: 15-41184 Document: 00513472570 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/20/2016
No. 76-1513.

#### Czarnecki *v.*United States.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
James Pew < j pew@earthjustice.org> 05/21/2011 12:15 AM To Group A-AND-R-DOCKET@EPA

cc bcc Subject EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0505 1 attachment

Recon Petition.docx

Please submit the attached petition for reconsideration to the above

‐ referenced docket.
Jim Pew (202) 667

‐ 4500
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 663 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to make permanent the 

extension of the Medicare-dependent hospital (MDH) program and the 

increased payments under the Medicare low-volume hospital program. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 2, 2015 

Mr. REED (for himself and Mr. WELCH) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to make 

permanent the extension of the Medicare-dependent hospital (MDH) program and the increased payments under 

the Medicare low-volume hospital program. 

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 ‘‘Rural Hospital Access 

5 Act of 2015’’. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 663 IH

1 SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF THE MEDICARE-DEPENDENT HOS2 PITAL (MDH) PROGRAM. 

3 (a) EXTENSION OF PAYMENT METHODOLOGY.—Sec4 tion 1886(d)(5)(G) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 

5 1395ww(d)(5)(G)) is amended— 

6 (1) in clause (i), by striking ‘‘, and before April 

7 1, 2015’’; and 

8 (2) in clause (ii)(II), by striking ‘‘, and before 

9 April 1, 2015’’. 

10 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.— 

11 (1) EXTENSION OF TARGET AMOUNT.—Section 

12 1886(b)(3)(D) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 

13 1395ww(b)(3)(D)) is amended— 

14 (A) in the matter preceding clause (i), by 

15 striking ‘‘, and before April 1, 2015’’; and 

16 (B) in clause (iv), by striking ‘‘through fis17 cal year 2014 and the portion of fiscal year 

18 2015 before April 1, 2015’’ and inserting ‘‘or a 

19 subsequent fiscal year’’. 

20 (2) PERMITTING HOSPITALS TO DECLINE RE21 CLASSIFICATION.—Section 13501(e)(2) of the Omni22 bus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 

23 1395ww note) is amended by striking ‘‘fiscal year 

24 2000 through the first 2 quarters of fiscal year 

25 2015’’ and inserting ‘‘a subsequent fiscal year’’. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 663 IH

1 SEC. 3. EXTENSION OF THE INCREASED PAYMENTS UNDER 

2 THE MEDICARE LOW-VOLUME HOSPITAL 

3 PROGRAM. 

4 Section 1886(d)(12) of the Social Security Act (42 

5 U.S.C. 1395ww(d)(12)) is amended— 

6 (1) in subparagraph (B), in the matter pre7 ceding clause (i), by striking ‘‘and for discharges oc8 curring in fiscal year 2015 (beginning on April 1, 

9 2015), fiscal year 2016, and subsequent fiscal 

10 years’’; 

11 (2) in subparagraph (C)(i)— 

12 (A) by striking ‘‘fiscal years 2011 through 

13 2014 and fiscal year 2015 (before April 1, 

14 2015)’’ each place it appears and inserting ‘‘fis15 cal year 2011 and each subsequent year’’; and 

16 (B) by striking ‘‘or portion of fiscal year’’ 

17 after ‘‘during the fiscal year’’; and 

18 (3) in subparagraph (D)— 

19 (A) by striking ‘‘fiscal years 2011 through 

20 2014 and fiscal year 2015 (before April 1, 

21 2015),’’ and inserting ‘‘fiscal year 2011 and 

22 each subsequent fiscal year’’; and 

23 (B) by striking ‘‘or the portion of fiscal 

24 year’’ after ‘‘fiscal year’’. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6908 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 6908

 To exempt breastfeeding women from jury duty, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           December 29, 2023

  Ms. Norton introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
    Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on 
     Oversight and Accountability, for a period to be subsequently 
   determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such 
 provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To exempt breastfeeding women from jury duty, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Jury Duty Exemption for 
Breastfeeding Act of 2023''.

SEC. 2. JURY DUTY EXEMPTION FOR BREASTFEEDING WOMEN.

    (a) Courts of the United States.--Section 1866 of title 28, United 
States Code, is amended--
            (1) in subsection (c), by inserting after ``Except as 
        provided'' the following: ``in subsection (h) of this 
        section,''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:
    ``(h) An individual who is a breastfeeding woman summoned for jury 
service shall be excused by the court, or by the clerk under 
supervision of the court if the court's jury selection plan so 
authorizes, upon the individual's request.''.
    (b) Courts of the District of Columbia.--Section 11-1908(b), 
District of Columbia Official Code, is amended--
            (1) by striking ``or (4)'' and inserting ``(4)''; and
            (2) by striking the period at the end of the first sentence 
        and inserting the following: ``; or (5) excluded by the Court 
        upon the request of the individual if the individual is a 
        breastfeeding woman.''.
                                 <all>
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-2030

In re: JOHN DAVID WHITE,

 Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. 

(8:13-cr-00356-GJH-1; 8:17-cv-00047-GJH)

Submitted: January 21, 2020 Decided: January 22, 2020

Before MOTZ, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John David White, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

John David White petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging that the district court 

has unduly delayed acting on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2018) motion. He seeks an order from 

this court directing the district court to act. Our review of the district court’s docket reveals 

that the district court denied the motion on October 23, 2019. Accordingly, because the 

district court has recently decided White’s case, we deny the mandamus petition as moot. 

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. 

PETITION DENIED
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

> 

I, Ben Yan, the President and Chief Executive Officer of Sino Fibre Communications, Inc., certify that;

(1)         I have reviewed this Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2007 of Sino Fibre Communications, Inc.;

(2)         Based on my knowledge, this Report does not contain any untrue statement of a 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 registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

(4)         The registrant's other certifying officers 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 registrant and have:

(a)         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 registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)         evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant'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 

(c)         disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

(5)         The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of the internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a)         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 registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

(b)         any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.  

Date:  April 22, 2008

/s/ Ben Yan

Ben Yan
104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. CON. RES. 36

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives

2 concurring), That in the enrollment of the bill S. 1060,

3 to provide for the disclosure of lobbying activities to influ4 ence the Federal Government, and for other purposes, the

5 Secretary of the Senate shall make the following correc6 tions:

7 (1) In section 6(8), strike ‘‘6’’ and insert ‘‘7’’.

8 (2) In section 9(7), insert ‘‘and’’ after the semi9 colon, in section 9(8), strike ‘‘; and’’ and insert a pe10 riod, and strike paragraph (9) of section 9.

11 (3) In section 12(c), strike ‘‘7’’ and insert ‘‘6’’.

12 (4) In section 15(a)(2), strike ‘‘8’’ and insert

13 ‘‘7’’.

14 (5) In section 15(b)(1), strike ‘‘, 5(a)(2),’’ and

15 in section 15(b)(2), strike ‘‘8’’ and insert ‘‘7’’.

16 (6) In section 24(b), strike ‘‘13, 14, 15, and

17 16’’ and insert ‘‘9, 10, 11, and 12’’.
2

SCON 36 ES

1 (7) In section 12(b)(1), strike ‘‘7’’ and insert

2 ‘‘6’’.

Passed the Senate December 13, 1995.

Attest:

Secretary.
104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. CON. RES. 36

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Directing the Secretary of the Senate to make

technical corrections in the enrollment of S. 1060.