alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

July 24, 2019

No. 04-19-00396-CV

IN RE John M. DONOHUE

Original Mandamus Proceeding1

ORDER

On June 13, 2019, relator filed a “Request for Extension of Time to File Petition for Writ 

of Mandamus.” On June 17, 2019, this court ordered relator to file a petition no later than July 8, 

2019. Relator has not filed a petition; therefore, we DISMISS this original proceeding for want of 

prosecution.

It is so ORDERED on July 24, 2019.

_____________________________

Irene Rios, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 24th day of July, 2019.

_____________________________

Keith E. Hottle, Clerk of Court

 1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. CV-19-0000010, styled John M. Donohue Ex Parte, pending in the 198th 

Judicial District Court, Bandera County, Texas, the Honorable M. Rex Emerson presiding.
III

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 21

Providing for an adjournment of both Houses.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

FEBRUARY 13, 1997

Received

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Providing for an adjournment of both Houses.

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That when the House adjourns on the legisla3 tive day of Thursday, February 13, 1997, it stand ad4 journed until 12:30 p.m. on Tuesday, February 25, 1997,

5 or until noon on the second day after Members are notified

6 to reassemble pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent res7 olution, whichever occurs first; and that when the Senate

8 adjourns or recesses at the close of business on Thursday,

9 February 13, 1997, pursuant to a motion made by the

10 Majority Leader, or his designee, in accordance with this

11 concurrent resolution, it stand recessed or adjourned until

12 11:30 a.m. on Monday, February 24, 1997, or such time
2

HCON 21 RDS

1 on that day as may be specified by the Majority Leader

2 or his designee in the motion to recess or adjourn, or until

3 noon on the second day after Members are notified to reas4 semble pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution,

5 whichever occurs first.

6 SEC. 2. The Speaker of the House and the Majority

7 Leader of the Senate, acting jointly after consultation with

8 the Minority Leader of the House and the Minority Lead9 er of the Senate, shall notify the Members of the House

10 and the Senate, respectively, to reassemble whenever, in

11 their opinion, the public interest shall warrant it.

Passed the House of Representatives February 13,

1997.

Attest: ROBIN H. CARLE,

Clerk.

Æ
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 185 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 185

  To express the sense of the Senate regarding repayment of loans to 
                                Mexico.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

             October 19 (legislative day, October 18), 1995

Mr. Faircloth submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
                   the Committee on Foreign Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  To express the sense of the Senate regarding repayment of loans to 
                                Mexico.

Whereas the United States has provided Mexico with approximately $12,500,000,000 
        in loans to Mexico;
Whereas these loans were not authorized by the United States Congress;
Whereas the taxpayers of the United States should not be responsible for any 
        losses incurred from these loans; and
Whereas certain loans to Mexico will become due and payable on October 30, 1995: 
        Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That, it is the sense of the Senate that no further loans 
should be made to Mexico without specific authorization from the United 
States Congress, that all loans made to Mexico should be repaid in full 
and on time, and that such debts should not be extended, rescheduled, 
or reduced in any manner.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 14 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 14

             A resolution amending paragraph 2 of rule XXV.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 4, 1995

   Mr. Dole submitted the following resolution; which was considered

                            January 5, 1995

                        Considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
             A resolution amending paragraph 2 of rule XXV.

    Resolved, That paragraph 2, of rule XXV of the Standing Rules of 
the Senate is amended for the One Hundred Fourth Congress as follows:
            Strike ``18'' after ``Agriculture, Nutrition, and 
        Forestry'' and insert in lieu thereof ``17''.
            Strike ``29'' after ``Appropriations'' and insert in lieu 
        thereof ``28''.
            Strike ``20'' after ``Armed Services'' and insert in lieu 
        thereof ``21''.
            Strike ``21'' after ``Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs'' 
        and insert in lieu thereof ``16''.
            Strike ``20'' after ``Commerce, Science, and 
        Transportation'' and insert in lieu thereof ``19''.
            Strike ``20'' after ``Energy and Natural Resources'' and 
        insert in lieu thereof ``18''.
            Strike ``17'' after ``Environment and Public Works'' and 
        insert in lieu thereof ``16''.
            Strike ``19'' after ``Foreign Relations'' and insert in 
        lieu thereof ``18''.
            Strike ``13'' after ``Governmental Affairs'' and insert in 
        lieu thereof ``15''.
            Strike ``14'' after ``Judiciary'' and insert in lieu 
        thereof ``18''.
            Strike ``17'' after ``Labor and Human Resources'' and 
        insert in lieu thereof ``16''.
                                 <all>
```
J ' 

### SERVED: February 12, 2015 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASHINGTON, DC

IN THE MATTER OF RIDAN INVESTMENTS. INC. FAA DOCKETNO.!TO BEASSIUNEDJ (Civil Penalty Action) FDMS NO. l''AA 2013

- I082


### CORRECTED AMENDED PROCEDURAL ORDER In responseto the Federal Aviation Administration (hereinafter "FAA"), Motion for Continuance dated December 9, 2014, Paragraphs#2 and #3 ofthe Amended Procedural Orderare amended as follows: Unless specifically changed herein all prior orders remain in etTect. We do not anticipate schedulingthis case priorto June 1, 2015. WHEREFORE, the parties be and are hereby ORDEREDto adhere to the following procedural schedule: 

### I. On orbefore June L 2015, the parties shall conclude all discovery including. hut not limited to, depositions, documentproduction. responses to production requests and/or interrogatories. lfthe parties cannot resolve a discovery dispute they shall submitthe dispute to the undersigned for resolution in a timely manner: 2. The parties shall be prepared to present this case at a hearing on or after June 1. · 2015, subject to the availability ofcourtroom facilities. The specific date and time'forthe hearing will be forthcoming in a separate Order.

Richard C. Goodwin U.S. Administrative Law Judge Attachment- Service ListSERVICE LIST ORIGINAL & ONE COPY Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite2W I000 1
President Ridan Investments, Re.\j)(mdenl 18540 Minthorn Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 TEL: NOT PROVIDED FAX: NOT PROVIDED Lawrence M. Burek, Respondent's Counsel 550 North Parkcenter Drive, Suite 204 Santa Ana, CA 92705 TEL: 7I4-564-9033 FAX: NOT PROVIDED Tammy Leach P.O. Box 891324 Temecula, CA 92589 TEL: 95 I-970-6762 FAX: NOT PROVIDED Courtney Adolph, Complainant's ( 'mmsel ONE COPY

Office ofthe Regional Counsel, Western-Pacific Region Federal Aviation Administration P.O. Box 92007 Los Angeles, CA 90009-2007 TEL: 3I0-725-7I28 FAX: 310-725-6816 The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative LawJudge Office ofHearings. M-20 U.S. Depmiment ofTransportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (EI 1-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-5121 StaffAssistant FAX: 202-366-7536 FOMS No. F/\/\-:2013-t082 (Civil Penalty Action)

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building---Suite 2WIOOO, Washington. DC 2059I: Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
2
```

[Federal Register: November 29, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 228)]
[Notices]               
[Page 73158]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr29no10-152]                         

[[Page 73158]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

 
Executive Committee of the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory 
Committee; Meeting

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a 
meeting of the Executive Committee of the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory 
Committee.

DATES: The meeting will be held on December 16, 2010, at 10 a.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will take place at the Federal Aviation 
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591, 
10th floor, MacCracken Room.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Renee Butner, Federal Aviation 
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591, 
telephone (202) 267- 5093; fax (202) 267-5075; e-mail 
Renee.Butner@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under section 10(a)(2) of the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App. 2), we are giving notice of a 
meeting of the Executive Committee of the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory 
Committee taking place on December 16, 2010, at the Federal Aviation 
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC, 20591. 
The Agenda includes:

1. Updates on:
    a. Commercial Air Tour Maintenance (CATM) Working Group
    b. Process Improvement Working Group (PIWG)
    c. Charter Renewal
    d. ``One Stop Shopping'' Web Site
    e. Committee Manual Revisions
2. Issue Area Status Reports from Assistant Chairs
3. Remarks from other EXCOM members

    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to the 
space available. The FAA will arrange teleconference service for 
individuals wishing to join in by teleconference if we receive notice 
by December 7. Arrangements to participate by teleconference can be 
made by contacting the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT section. Callers outside the Washington metropolitan area are 
responsible for paying long-distance charges.
    The public must arrange by December 7 to present oral statements at 
the meeting. The public may present written statements to the executive 
committee by providing 25 copies to the Executive Director, or by 
bringing the copies to the meeting.
    If you are in need of assistance or require a reasonable 
accommodation for this meeting, please contact the person listed under 
the heading FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Issued in Washington, DC on November 22, 2010.
Dennis Pratte,
Acting Deputy Director, Office of Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2010-29922 Filed 11-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```
#### Sundari K. PRASAD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Viviene B. CHEEK; Vivian B. Cheek; Carolyn D. Nelson; Reginald Cheek; Toya Cheek; Clenford Cheek, Uncle; Khem Cheek; Sarah Cheek, Cousin; Chris Cheek, Cousin; Cathina Cheek, Cousin; Clenford Cheek, Jr., Cousin; Jonathan D. Headlee; Fern Cheek; Reverend Ricardo Brown, Jr.; Reginald Cheek, Jr.; Gail Nelson, Lawyer; Booker Walker-Washington, Musician; Sally Nelson, Nurse; Charlotte Nelson; Z-Baby Nelson; Frieda Nelson, Nurse; Brent Nelson, Lawyer; Beverly Nelson, Lawyer; Brandy Nelson, Doctor; Lisa Nelson; Cynthia Nelson, Journalist; Donna Nelson; Al Nelson, II; Clarence Nelson, Jr.; Pouncee Nelson; Adrienne Nelson; Horace Nelson Steward; The Estate & Inheritance of Pauly O. Pauls & Family; The Estate & Inheritance of Jim So*205vell & Family; The Estate & Inheritance of Ashton Hendrix; The Estate & Inheritance of Tracy Bosley & Family; The Estate & Inheritance of Kelly/karen & Family; The Estate & Inheritance of Larry Flynt & Family; The Estate & Inheritance of Ocean E. River Clark & Family; The Estate & Inheritance of Jonathan D. Headlee & Family; The Estate & Inheritance of David Arnold Carpenter *&*Family; The Estate & Inheritance of Monica Kristy and Vick E. Stones; The Estate & Inheritance of Katherine Flynt, Defendants-Appellees. Sundari Karma Prasad, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Arista Records; Virgin, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-7083, No. 17-7164

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: December 21, 2017

Decided: December 28, 2017

Sundari K, Prasad, Appellant Pro Se.

Before WILKINSON and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

In these consolidated cases, Sundari Karma Prasad seeks to appeal the district court’s orders dismissing without prejudice two of Prasad’s pending 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) actions for failure to adequately comply with the magistrate judge’s orders to further particularize her complaints. This court may exercise jurisdiction only, over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); *Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp.,*337 U.S. 541, 545-47, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). Because the deficiencies identified by the district court may be remedied by the filing of amended complaints, we conclude that the orders Prasad seeks to appeal are neither final orders nor appeal-able interlocutory or collateral orders. *Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, Inc.,*807 F.3d 619, 623-24 (4th Cir. 2015); *Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392,*10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, we dismiss these appeals for lack of jurisdiction.* 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*

*

 We do not remand either of these matters to the district court, though, because the court previously afforded Prasad the chance to amend her complaints, and she failed to do so. *Cf. Goode,*807 F.3d at 629-30.
# Official Journal C 302/2021

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 302 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6428 July 2021 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 302

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6428 July 2021

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2021/C 302/01 | Commission Decision of 29 June 2021 instructing the Central Administrator of the European Union Transaction Log to enter the national allocation tables of Belgium, Bulgaria, Czechia, Denmark, Germany, Estonia, Ireland, Greece, Spain, France, Croatia, Italy, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Hungary, Netherlands, Austria, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia, Finland and Sweden into the European Union Transaction Log | 1 |

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2021/C 302/01

Commission Decision of 29 June 2021 instructing the Central Administrator of the European Union Transaction Log to enter the national allocation tables of Belgium, Bulgaria, Czechia, Denmark, Germany, Estonia, Ireland, Greece, Spain, France, Croatia, Italy, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Hungary, Netherlands, Austria, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia, Finland and Sweden into the European Union Transaction Log

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
#### Byron RODAS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. FAMILY SERVICES, INCORPORATED, Kelly Blunt, Shannon Tait, Relapse Intervention for Sex Crimes, Program, (RISC), Defendants-Appellees.

16-4123

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

January 19, 2018

FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT: Byron Rodas, pro se, Dannemora, NY.

FOR DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES: Brendan T. Fitzpatrick, Goldberg Segalla LLP, Garden City, NY.

PRESENT: ROBERT A. KATZMANN, Chief Judge, JOHN M. WALKER, JR., GUIDO CALABRESI, Circuit Judges.

SUMMARY ORDER

Appellant Byron Rodas appeals from *a*judgment *sua sponte*dismissing his suit brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Rodas was enrolled in a Relapse Intervention for Sex Crimes (“RISC”) program run by Ap-pellees. He was discharged from that program, which resulted in his imprisonment. In 2014, Rodas sued Appellees, asserting due process and equal protection claims stemming from his discharge from the program. The district court dismissed his complaint for failure to allege state action, and we dismissed his appeal as untimely. In 2016, Rodas again sued Appellees based on his discharge from the program. The district court *sua sponte*dismissed his complaint as barred by. claim preclusion. This appeal followed. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history of the case, and the issues on appeal.

We review a district court’s *sua sponte*28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) dismissal *de novo, Giano v. Goord,*250 F.3d 146, 149-50 (2d Cir. 2001), *abrogated on other grounds by Porter v. Nussle,*534 U.S. 516, 122 S.Ct. 983, 152 L.Ed.2d 12 (2002), and conclude that the district court properly dismissed the complaint as claim precluded. A claim is precluded when “(1) the previous action involved an adjudication on the merits; (2) the previous action involved the plaintiffs or those in privity with them; (3) the claims asserted in the subsequent action were, or could have been, raised in the prior action.” *Monahan v. N.Y.C. Dept. of Corr.,*214 F.3d 275, 285 (2d Cir. 2000). Pursuant to this three-prong test, the district court properly found that Rodas’ 2014 action ended in an adjudication on the merits; that the 2014 action and the current one involved the same parties; and that both the 2014 action and the current one asserted constitutional claims under § 1983 based on Rodas’ discharge from the RISC program.

*92Moreover, the Appellees’ refusal to provide certain documents to Rodas following the termination of his 2014 action does not transform his present action into a “new” claim. Rodas argues in both actions that he had a liberty interest in staying in the RISC program — and thus out of jail — and Appellees deprived him of that interest without due process. Rodas has not established that he has a separate liberty interest in the documents he later tried to obtain from them.

We have considered Rodas’ remaining arguments and find them to be without •merit. Accordingly, we AFFIRM the district court’s judgment.
EXHIBIT 32





CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL AND EXECUTIVE FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 on Form 10-K of Bering Growth Corporation, (the Company) for the period ended June 30, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Karl Brenza, President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge that:



1.

The Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 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: October 3, 2011



/s/ Karl Brenza

Karl Brenza

President

(Principal Executive Officer)





In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Bering Growth Corporation, (the Company) for the period ended June 30, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Joseph Rozelle, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge that:



1.

The Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 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: October 3, 2011



/s/ Joseph Rozelle

Joseph Rozelle

Chief Financial Officer

(Principal Financial Officer)





The foregoing certification is being furnished as an exhibit to the Report pursuant to Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K and Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) and, accordingly, is not being filed as part of the Report for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not incorporated by reference into any filings of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.
# Official Journal C 241/30 S

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 241 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 4830 September 2005 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 241

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 4830 September 2005

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Information |
| | Commission |
| 2005/C 241/1 | Summary of Community decisions on marketing authorizations in respect of medicinal products from 1 August 2005 to 31 August 2005 (Published pursuant to Article 12 or Article 34 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2309/93) | 1 |
| 2005/C 241/2 | Summary of Community decisions on marketing authorizations in respect of medicinal products from 1 August 2005 to 31 August 2005 (Decisions taken pursuant to Article 34 of Directive 2001/83/EC or Article 38 of Directive 2001/82/EC) | 6 |

Notice No

Contents

page

I   Information

Commission

2005/C 241/1

Summary of Community decisions on marketing authorizations in respect of medicinal products from 1 August 2005 to 31 August 2005 (Published pursuant to Article 12 or Article 34 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2309/93)

o

1

2005/C 241/2

Summary of Community decisions on marketing authorizations in respect of medicinal products from 1 August 2005 to 31 August 2005 (Decisions taken pursuant to Article 34 of Directive 2001/83/EC or Article 38 of Directive 2001/82/EC)

6

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN