alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
III 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 323 

Honoring Edward W. Brooke, III, former United States Senator for the 

Commonwealth of Massachusetts, on the occasion of his 90th birthday. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 27, 2009 

Mr. BURRIS (for himself, Mr. KERRY, and Mr. KIRK) submitted the following 

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

RESOLUTION 

Honoring Edward W. Brooke, III, former United States Senator for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, on the 

occasion of his 90th birthday. 

Whereas Edward W. Brooke, III, served in the United States 

Senate with great dedication, integrity, and professionalism as a trusted colleague from the Commonwealth 

of Massachusetts; 

Whereas Edward Brooke was the first African-American 

elected by popular vote to the United States Senate and 

was the first African-American to serve in the United 

States Senate since the Reconstruction Era; 

Whereas Edward Brooke served on the Commission on Civil 

Disorders under President Lyndon B. Johnson, where his 

work on discrimination in housing served as the basis for 

the Fair Housing Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3601 et seq.); 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 323 IS 

Whereas Edward Brooke was awarded the Presidential Medal 

of Freedom on June 23, 2004; 

Whereas Edward Brooke was awarded the Congressional 

Gold Medal on October 28, 2009; 

Whereas Edward Brooke’s long and distinguished career in 

public service included serving in the United States Army 

during World War II, as Attorney General for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and as chairman of the 

board of the National Low Income Housing Coalition; 

and 

Whereas Edward Brooke celebrated his 90th birthday on October 26, 2009: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) acknowledges and honors the unprecedented 

3 and enduring achievements and contributions made 

4 by Edward W. Brooke, III, during his distinguished 

5 career of public service to the United States; and 

6 (2) congratulates and expresses best wishes to 

7 Edward Brooke on the celebration of his 90th birth8 day. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-19-00006-CR

Benjamin Vasquez Hernandez

v.

The State of Texas

On Appeal from the

398th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas

Trial Cause No. CR-3074-13-I

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed. The Court orders the appeal 

DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

February 14, 2019
No. 11-10204.

#### Mascorro *v.*United States.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
#### State v. Ballou

110,419

08/30/2016

Denied.

Unpublished
Household Vehicles Energy Use Cover Page 

Glossary 

Home > Households, Buildings & Industry >Transportation Surveys > Household Vehicles Energy Use Cover Page 

Contact Us • Feedback • Privacy/Security • Jobs • About Us

file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/LPJ/emeu/rtecs/nhts_survey/2001/images/cover.html12/16/2005 5:58:03 AM
Order entered March 24, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-13-00834-CR

No. 05-13-00836-CR

GREGORY MARTINEZ, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 3

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. F12-60606-J, F12-60605-J

ORDER

The Court ORDERS the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine why appellant’s 

brief has not been filed. In this regard, the trial court shall make appropriate findings and 

recommendations and determine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeals, whether 

appellant is indigent, or if not indigent, whether retained counsel has abandoned the appeals. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(b). If the trial court cannot obtain appellant’s presence at the hearing, the 

trial court shall conduct the hearing in appellant’s absence. See Meza v. State, 742 S.W.2d 708 

(Tex. App.–Corpus Christi 1987, no pet.) (per curiam). If appellant is indigent, the trial court is 

ORDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure effective representation, which 

may include appointment of new counsel.
We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record of the proceedings, which shall include 

written findings and recommendations, to this Court within THIRTY DAYS of the date of this 

order.

The appeals are ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with the above order. The 

appeals shall be reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or when the findings are 

received, whichever is earlier.

/s/ LANA MYERS

JUSTICE
EPA DR # 4023 

April 27, 2010
EPA DR # 4023 

April 27, 2010
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. WALTER NUGENT ENTERPRISES et al., Defendants-Appellants.

No. 73-2202.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

Decided Oct. 22, 1974.

Certiorari Denied March 17, 1975.

See 95 S.Ct. 1413.

*462Walter W. Nugent and Ruth Marie Nugent, pro se.

Ralph B. Guy, Jr., U. S. Atty., Fred M. Mester, Detroit, Mich., for plaintiffappellee.

Before PHILLIPS, Chief Judge, and PECK and LIVELY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

This is a pro per appeal by a husband and wife, d/b/a Walter Nugent Enterprises, from a judgment entered upon a jury verdict for $29,316.29 in favor of the United States. The complaint of the United States was filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1345 and alleged that the defendant-appellants had defaulted on a $25,000 loan from the Small Business Administration. The case has been assigned to this panel pursuant to Rule 3(e), Sixth Circuit Rules.

The appellants’ brief raises numerous issues, some of which are outside the scope of the record. We have carefully considered their brief, their response to the motion of the United States to dismiss and the record as a whole. We conclude that “it is manifest that the questions on which the decision of the cause depends are so unsubstantial as not to need further argument.” Rule 8. Sixth Circuit Rules.

At the trial, the appellants did not deny that they signed the note on which the United States sued or that they received the money in question. Their defense rested on an allegation that a local officer of the Small Business Administration indicated to them that collection on the note would not be attempted, at least until their business became profitable, and this led them to believe that the loan was a grant. Further, the appellants attempted to argue by way of counterclaim at the trial that the United States, through the Small Business Administration and the Food and Drug Administration had conspired with a Detroit bank and others to ruin their business and bankrupt them and thus to prevent them from repaying the note.

Our review of the record convinces us that there is more than sufficient evidence to support the jury’s determination of the appellants’ liability on the note. Further, the District Court correctly ruled that the appellants’ counterclaim was barred. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(a)(2), 2680(h), 2671 et seq. The District Court also correctly denied the appellants’ attempt to appeal the dismissal of the counterclaim. Oak Construction Co. v. Huron Cement Co., 475 F.2d 1220 (6th Cir. 1973); Business Communications, Inc. v. Cahners Publishing Co., 420 F.2d 535 (6th Cir. 1969); Libbey-Owens-Ford Glass Co. v. Sylvania Industrial Corp., 154 F.2d 814 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 328 U.S. 859, 66 S.Ct. 1353, 90 L.Ed. 1630 (1946). The other con*463tentions of the appellants which are relevant to this appeal are equally without merit.

The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.
No. 12-5463.

#### Buschard *v.*Ohio et al.

Ct. App. Ohio, Hamilton County. Certiorari denied.
U.S. Energy Information Administration | Annual Coal Report 2022

Table 17. Recoverable Coal Reserves at Producing U.S. Mines by Mine Production Range and Mine Type, 2022

(million short tons)

Underground Surface Total

Mine Production Range

(thousand short tons)

Recoverable Coal

Reserves

Recoverable Coal

Reserves

Recoverable Coal

Reserves

Over 1,000 4,855 5,746 10,602

Over 500 to 1,000 263 47 309

Over 200 to 500 231 156 387

Over 100 to 200 139 151 290

Over 50 to 100 45 45 90

Over 10 to 50 17 42 60

U.S. Total 5,550 6,188 11,737

s = Absolute percentage less than 0.05 or value is less than 0.5 of the table metric.

Note: Recoverable coal reserves at producing mines represent the quantity of coal that can be recovered (i.e. mined) from existing coal reserves at reporting mines.

Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration Form EIA-7A, 'Annual Survey of Coal Production and Preparation,' and U.S. Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration Form 7000-2, 'Quarterly

Mines Employment and Coal Production Report.'
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 64 (Thursday, April 3, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 15878]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-8445]


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


COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS

Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the New Mexico Advisory 
Committee

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and 
regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, that a meeting of 
the New Mexico Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene at 
12:00 p.m. and adjourn at 5:00 p.m. on April 18, 1997, at the Clovis 
Public Library, Ingram Room, 701 North Main Street, Clovis, New Mexico 
88101. The purpose of the meeting is to receive information about the 
food stamp fraud operation in Clovis, to discuss the project on 
Farmington, and to plan future activities.
    Persons desiring additional information, or planning a presentation 
to the Committee, should contact Committee Chairperson Lynda Eaton, 
505-326-4338, or Philip Montez, Director of the Western Regional 
Office, 213-894-3437 (TDD 213-894-3435). Hearing-impaired persons who 
will attend the meeting and require the services of a sign language 
interpreter should contact the Regional Office at least five (5) 
working days before the scheduled date of the meeting.
    The meeting will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the 
rules and regulations of the Commission.

    Dated at Washington, DC, March 28, 1997.
Carol-Lee Hurley,
Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.
[FR Doc. 97-8445 Filed 4-2-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
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
 
 Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of
the undersigned officers of RCLC, Inc. (the "Company"), certifies
that:
 
 (1)  the Annual Report on
Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2009 (the "Report")
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78 m or 78 o(d)); and
 
 (2)  the information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 
 Dated:
      April 15, 2010
              /s/ Joel GetzlerJoel
      GetzlerChief
      Restructuring OfficerDated:
      April 15, 2010
              /s/ Daryl K. HolcombDaryl
      K. HolcombVice
      President and Chief Financial
Officer
 
 This certification is made solely for
the purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, subject to the knowledge standard
contained therein, and not for any other purpose.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 10 (Wednesday, January 15, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 2148]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-909]


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


DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Notice of Surrender of Exemption

January 9, 1997.
    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been 
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Type of Application: Surrender of Exemption.
    b. Project No.: 6621-006.
    c. Date Filed: December 12, 1996.
    d. Applicant: Joseph Hydro Company, Inc.
    e. Name of Project: Ferguson Ridge, Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: On Big Sheep Creek near Joseph in Wallowa County, 
Oregon.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. Secs. 791(a)-
825(r).
    h. Contact: Mr. Norman E. Kamp, 111 Broadway, Suite 133, Box 205, 
Boise, Idaho 83702, (208) 338-5173.
    i. FERC Contact: Mr. Lynn R. Miles, (202) 219-2671.
    j. Comment Date: January 31, 1997.
    k. Description of the Proposed Action: The exemptee requests to 
surrender its exemption for the existing project.
    1. This notice also consists of the following standard paragraphs: 
B, C2, and D2.
    B. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene--Anyone may submit 
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the 
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, 
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission 
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who 
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules 
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or 
motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified 
comment date for the particular application.
    C2. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents--Any filings must 
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS,'' ``RECOMMENDATIONS 
FOR TERMS AND CONDITIONS,'' ``NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE COMPETING 
APPLICATION,'' ``COMPETING APPLICATION,'' ``PROTEST,'' or ``MOTION TO 
INTERVENE,'' as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular 
application to which the filing refers. Any of these documents must be 
filed by providing the original and the number of copies provided by 
the Commission's regulations to: The Secretary, Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. A 
copy of a notice of intent, competing application, or motion to 
intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant 
specified in the particular application.
    D2. Agency Comments--Federal, state, and local agencies are invited 
to file comments on the described application. A copy of the 
application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If 
an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing 
comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an 
agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives.

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-909 Filed 1-14-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA Supreme Court Cause No . DA 22 - 0598 TORGER S. OAAS At torney f or Appellant 618 West Main St., Suite 201 Lewistown, MT 59457 (406) 538 - 2338 Fax (406) 538 - 3831 E - ma il oaaslaw@midrivers.com WILLIAM DEE BOYCE Appellant, v. PROPOSED ORDER MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES Appellee. Pursuant to M.R. App. Civ. P. 26, Appellant is hereby granted up to and including January 30, 2023 in which to file his opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Bowen Greenwood Clerk of the Supreme Court December 21 2022

12/21/2022

Case Number: DA 22-0598
Exhibits
**Exhibit 23.2**
**Consent of Registered Independent PublicAccounting Firm**We hereby consent to the incorporation byreference in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No333-7590) of Royal Dutch Petroleum Company and The“Shell” Transport and Trading Company, Public LimitedCompany of our report dated March 29, 2005, relating to theFinancial Statements of The “Shell” Transport andTrading Company, Public Limited Company which is included inthis 2004 Annual Report on Form 20-F.
 
 
**/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP**--------------------------------------------------------------------**PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP****London –United Kingdom**
 
March 29, 2005 **E 4 **RoyalDutch/Shell Group of Companies
<PAGE>


                                                                      Exhibit 32



THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT IS BEING MADE TO THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSES OF SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18
U.S.C. 1350), WHICH CARRIES WITH IT CERTAIN CRIMINAL PENALTIES IN THE EVENT OF A
KNOWING OR WILLFUL MISREPRESENTATION.


Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street NW
Washington, DC  20549

      Re: Perrigo Company

Ladies and Gentlemen:

      In accordance with the requirements of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 (18 USC 1350), each of the undersigned hereby certifies that:

      (i)   this Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)
            or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or
            78o(d)); and

      (ii)  the information contained in this report fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of Perrigo Company.

Dated as of this 1st day of February, 2007.


/s/ Joseph C. Papa                             /s/ Judy L. Brown
---------------------------                    --------------------------------
Joseph C. Papa                                 Judy L. Brown
President and                                  Executive Vice President and
Chief Executive Officer                        Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32

                               Color Imaging, Inc.
                 Form 10-Q - Second Quarter Ended June 30, 2003


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


I, Sueling Wang, certify that:

     The Form 10-Q of Color  Imaging,  Inc.  for the period  ended June 30, 2003
     fully  complies  with the  requirements  of  Section  13(a) or 15(d) of the
     Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and

     The information  contained in such report fairly presents,  in all material
     respects,  the  financial  condition  and  results of  operations  of Color
     Imaging, Inc. for the periods presented.

This   certification  is  being  furnished   pursuant  to  Section  906  of  the
Sarbanes-Oxley   Act  of  2002  and,  except  to  the  extent  required  by  the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act,  shall not be  deemed  to be filed as part of the  periodic
report described herein nor shall it be deemed filed by Color Imaging,  Inc. for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.




                                        /S/ SUELING WANG
                                        ---------------------------------------
                                        Sueling Wang
Date: July 28, 2003                     President (principal executive officer)






<PAGE>


                               Color Imaging, Inc.
                Form 10-QSB - Second Quarter Ended June 30, 2003


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


I, Morris E. Van Asperen, certify that:

     The Form 10-Q of Color  Imaging,  Inc.  for the period  ended June 30, 2003
     fully  complies  with the  requirements  of Section  13(a) and 15(d) of the
     Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and

     The information  contained in such report fairly presents,  in all material
     respects,  the  financial  condition  and  results of  operations  of Color
     Imaging, Inc. for the periods presented.

This   certification  is  being  furnished   pursuant  to  Section  906  of  the
Sarbanes-Oxley   Act  of  2002  and,  except  to  the  extent  required  by  the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act,  shall not be  deemed  to be filed as part of the  periodic
report described herein nor shall it be deemed filed by Color Imaging,  Inc. for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.




                                        /S/ MORRIS E. VAN ASPEREN
                                        ---------------------------------------
                                        Morris E. Van Asperen
Date: July 28, 2003                     Chief Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-7418

TRAVIS WAYNE ENTSMINGER,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior

District Judge. (CA-04-750-7)

Submitted: January 26, 2006 Decided: February 2, 2006

Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Travis Wayne Entsminger, Appellant Pro Se. Joel Christopher Hoppe,

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Travis Wayne Entsminger seeks to appeal the district

court’s order granting Respondent’s motion for summary judgment and

denying relief on Entsminger’s petition filed under 28 U.S.C.

§ 2254 (2000). The order is not appealable unless a circuit

justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1) (2000). 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) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this

standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that

his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive

procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or

wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003);

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d

676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the

record and conclude that Entsminger 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 the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

DISMISSED