alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-1824

HARRY LEE GREEN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MATTHEW D. GATLING; MARTHA MCELVEEN HORNE; PATTY PATTERSON; SUMTER CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (3:05-cv-02604-CMC) Submitted: November 15, 2006 Decided: November 17, 2006 Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Harry L. Green, Appellant Pro Se. Alfred Johnston Cox, ELLIS, LAWHORNE & SIMS, PA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Harry Lee Green seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) action. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. Parties are accorded thirty days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5) or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). This appeal pe riod is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corr. , 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson , 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). The district court’s judgment was entered on the docket on June 14, 2006, and Green filed his notice of appeal on July 17, 2006. Because Green has failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we 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
EX PARTE The QUIKRETE COS.

1160774

Supreme Court of Alabama.

September 22, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. denied.
### IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs J

uly 18, 2001 OUDON PANYANOUVONG v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Direct Appeal from the Criminal Court for Rutherford County

No. F-49500 J. S. Daniel, Judge

No. M2000-03152-CCA-R3-PC - Filed November 16, 2001

J OSEPH M. T IPTON , J., concurring

I concur in

the majority opinion, except I question whether a post-conviction petitioner has a rightto self-representation at his or her will. In this respect, I view this court’s statements in Cole v. State , 798 S.W.2d 261, 263 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1990), regarding a common law right to selfrepresentation as dicta; self-representation was certainly not an issue in the appeal. I do not believe that a trial court must be required t

o administer a post-

conviction case through a petitioner who is im prisoned in a distant county a nd who has no reas

onable means to investigate

the case or to conduct pre-hearing business bef ore the court. The fair and efficient administration of the justice system becomes an important consideration in allowing the trial court the discretion to have counsel involved, even over a petition er’s objecti on. I note that the United States Supreme Court has concluded that the v ario us states are con stitutionally “withi

n their discretion to concl ude that t he government’s interests outweigh an invasion of the appellant’s interest in self-repr esentation ” and to prevent self-representation on appeal. Martinez v. Court of Appeal of Cal. , 528 U.S. 152, 163-64, 120 S. Ct. 684, 692 (2000). I believe that a similar weighing of interests and r

esult exist for post

-conviction case

s at the trial leve

l.

JOSEPH M. TIPTON, JUDGE
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 733 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 733

            Honoring the life and legacy of Patrick Gottsch.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 13, 2024

 Mrs. Hyde-Smith (for herself, Mrs. Fischer, Mr. Ricketts, Mr. Daines, 
Ms. Lummis, and Mr. Barrasso) submitted the following resolution; which 
             was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

                           December 12, 2024

             Committee discharged; considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
            Honoring the life and legacy of Patrick Gottsch.

Whereas Patrick Gene Gottsch was born on June 3, 1953, in Elkhorn, Nebraska;
Whereas Mr. Gottsch was raised on his family's farm and cattle operation, which 
        instilled in him the values of rural America;
Whereas Mr. Gottsch obtained a wide array of career experiences that enabled him 
        to be a trailblazer in the rural and agricultural programming space;
Whereas Mr. Gottsch worked as a commodity broker on the Chicago Mercantile 
        Exchange, in the home satellite dish industry, and as Director of Sales 
        for the Superior Livestock Auction in the Fort Worth Stockyards;
Whereas Mr. Gottsch launched Rural Free Delivery Television (RFD-TV) in 2002;
Whereas Mr. Gottsch was the founder and president of Rural Media Group, Inc., 
        which, in addition to RFD-TV, grew to consist of RFD-TV The Magazine, 
        RFD HD, RURAL TV, RURAL RADIO, and The Cowboy Channel;
Whereas millions of individuals in the United States have benefitted from Mr. 
        Gottsch's innovative approach to educating the populace on rural and 
        agricultural issues through the use of television and other mediums; and
Whereas Mr. Gottsch's work to represent farmers, ranchers, and rural America 
        through television was unprecedented and has left an indelible mark on 
        the hearts of millions of individuals in the United States: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate--
            (1) honors the life and legacy of Patrick Gottsch, 
        particularly the devotion of Mr. Gottsch--
                    (A) to rural America;
                    (B) to espousing the values of rural America 
                through agricultural and rural programming; and
                    (C) to advocating for a greater understanding of 
                the importance of rural America to the economy, 
                culture, and progress of the nation;
            (2) extends its gratitude to Mr. Gottsch for a life well-
        lived, and will continue to remember his legacy; and
            (3) respectfully requests that the Secretary of the Senate 
        transmit an enrolled copy of this resolution to the family of 
        Mr. Gottsch.
                                 <all>
```
Case 3:04-cv-00776-D Document 29 Filed 10/07/04 Page 1 of 20 PageID 227
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00776-D Document 29 Filed 10/07/04 Page 2 of 20 PageID 228
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00776-D Document 29 Filed 10/07/04 Page 3 of 20 PageID 229
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00776-D Document 29 Filed 10/07/04 Page 4 of 20 PageID 230
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00776-D Document 29 Filed 10/07/04 Page 5 of 20 PageID 231
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00776-D Document 29 Filed 10/07/04 Page 6 of 20 PageID 232
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00776-D Document 29 Filed 10/07/04 Page 7 of 20 PageID 233
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00776-D Document 29 Filed 10/07/04 Page 8 of 20 PageID 234
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00776-D Document 29 Filed 10/07/04 Page 9 of 20 PageID 235
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00776-D Document 29 Filed 10/07/04 Page 10 of 20 PageID 236
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00776-D Document 29 Filed 10/07/04 Page 11 of 20 PageID 237
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00776-D Document 29 Filed 10/07/04 Page 12 of 20 PageID 238
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00776-D Document 29 Filed 10/07/04 Page 13 of 20 PageID 239
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00776-D Document 29 Filed 10/07/04 Page 14 of 20 PageID 240
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00776-D Document 29 Filed 10/07/04 Page 15 of 20 PageID 241
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00776-D Document 29 Filed 10/07/04 Page 16 of 20 PageID 242
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00776-D Document 29 Filed 10/07/04 Page 17 of 20 PageID 243
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00776-D Document 29 Filed 10/07/04 Page 18 of 20 PageID 244
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00776-D Document 29 Filed 10/07/04 Page 19 of 20 PageID 245
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00776-D Document 29 Filed 10/07/04 Page 20 of 20 PageID 246
# C_2016305EN.01005201.xml

| 22.8.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 305/52 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.8.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 305/52

---

Action brought on 11 July 2016 — Brunner v EUIPO — CBM (H HOLY HAFERL HAFERL SHOE COUTURE)

(Case T-367/16)

(2016/C 305/70)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Gerd Brunner (Moosthenning, Germany) (represented by: N. Maenz, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: CBM Creative Brands Marken GmbH (Zurich, Switzerland)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant: Applicant

Applicant:

Trade mark at issue: European Union figurative mark containing the word elements ‘H HOLY HAFERL HAFERL SHOE COUTURE’ — Application for registration No 11 988 144

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Procedure before EUIPO

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 10 May 2016 in Case R 2943/2014-5

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the Opposition Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office of 10 May 2016 (Case R 2943/2014-5); |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the Opposition Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office of 10 May 2016 (Case R 2943/2014-5);

| — | dismiss the intervener’s opposition of 12 November 2013 regarding EU trade mark No 11 306 545 and German trade mark No 302 010 023 903 (Case B002269325); |
| --- | --- |

—

dismiss the intervener’s opposition of 12 November 2013 regarding EU trade mark No 11 306 545 and German trade mark No 302 010 023 903 (Case B002269325);

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Plea in law

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.

---
Lucas Energy, Inc. 8-K


 


Exhibit
10.1


 


		
        450 Gears Road

        Suite 860

        Houston, TX 77067

        Phone: (713) 528-1881

        Fax: (713) 337-1510



 


 


 


September 29, 2016


 


	Mr. Richard N. Azar II	VIA EMAIL AT RICHARDA@SEZARENERGY.COM
	Manager	 
	RAD2 Minerals, Ltd.	 
	P.O. Box 6172	 
	San Antonio, Texas 78209	 


 


	 	Re: 	August 25, 2015 Letter Agreement Regarding Deficiency In Assets To be Conveyed Pursuant to December 30, 2015 Asset Purchase Agreement (the “Purchase Agreement”)


 


Dear Richard,


 


Pursuant to our signatures
below, Lucas Energy, Inc. (“Lucas”) and RAD2 Minerals, Ltd. (“RAD2”), agree and confirm that
the Make-Whole Deadline, as defined and described in that certain Letter Agreement between Lucas and RAD2 dated August 26, 2016
(the “Prior Letter Agreement”), is hereby extended until November 15, 2016.


 


This letter agreement sets
forth all of the promises, agreements, conditions, understandings, warranties and representations among the parties with respect
to the transactions contemplated hereby, and supersedes all prior agreements, arrangements and understandings between the parties,
whether written, oral or otherwise, other than the Purchase Agreement and the Prior Letter Agreement, which shall remain in full
force and effect, except as amended hereby, and which are hereby re-confirmed and acknowledged.


 


This letter and the terms
and conditions hereof shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas and applicable laws
of the United States of America.


 


This letter and any signed
agreement or instrument entered into in connection with this letter, may be executed in one or more counterparts, all of which
shall constitute one and the same instrument. Any such counterpart, to the extent delivered by means of a facsimile machine or
by .pdf, .tif, .gif, .peg or similar attachment to electronic mail shall be treated in all manner and respects as an original executed
counterpart and shall be considered to have the same binding legal effect as if it were the original signed version thereof delivered
in person.


 


Regards,





Anthony C. Schnur


Chief Executive Officer


 




    	 



    	 



    

 

		
        450 Gears Road

        Suite 860

        Houston, TX 77067

        Phone: (713) 528-1881

        Fax: (713) 337-1510



 


Agreed, confirmed and acknowledged:


 


RAD2 Minerals, Ltd.


 





		By:    RAD2 Management, LLC, General Partner
	 	 
	 	 	/s/ Richard N. Azar, II
	 	 	Richard N. Azar, II 
	 	 	Manager
	 	 	 
	 	 	Date: 09/29/2016
Exhibit 23.2




Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm





The Board of Directors


Keryx Biopharmaceuticals, Inc.:





We consent to the incorporation by reference in the following registration statements of Keryx Biopharmaceuticals, Inc., of our report dated March 31, 2009, with respect to the consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ (deficiency) equity and comprehensive loss (income), and cash flows of Keryx Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. and subsidiaries for the year ended December 31, 2008, which report appears in the December 31, 2010 annual report on Form 10-K of Keryx Biopharmaceuticals, Inc.:





-      Form S-8 dated February 5, 2001 (File No. 333-55006)


-      Form S-8 dated September 29, 2004 (File No. 333-119377)


-      Form S-8 dated April 6, 2006, as amended (File No. 333-133052)


-      Form S-8 dated July 31, 2007 (File No. 333-145003)


-      Form S-3 dated August 28, 2009 (File No. 333-161607); and


-      Form S-3 dated January 3, 2011 (File No. 333-171517).





Our report dated March 31, 2009 contains an explanatory paragraph that states that the Company has incurred substantial recurring losses from operations, a deficiency in equity, has limited cash, cash equivalents, and short-term securities, and illiquid investments in auction rate securities that raise substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern. The consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of that uncertainty.




/s/ KPMG LLP





New York, New York


March 9, 2011
#### General Electric Company, a Corporation, *Plaintiff in Error,*v. Porter Carroll Hardware Company, a Corporation, *Defendant in Error.*

Division B.

Decision Filed December 5, 1927.

*James H. Finch,*for Plaintiff in Error;

No appearance for Defendant in Error.

*1001Per Curiam.'

The judgment in this case should be reversed on authority of the opinion in the case of Walters & Walker v. Whitlock, 9 Fla. 86, and it is so ordered.

Reversed.

Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.

Ellis, C. J., and Strum and Brown, J. J., concur in the opinion.
April Danielle SHEFFIELD, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-4710

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed February 13, 2019

Affirmed.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE 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 Quarterly Report of HouseValues, Inc. (the “***Company***”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2005 asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “***Form 10-Q***”), Ian Morris, Chief Executive Officer of the Company and John Zdanowski, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

 

(1) The Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and 

 

(2) The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company. 

 

Dated: May 5, 2005
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D17-0718

_____________________________

REGINALD A. WALKER,

Petitioner,

v.

FLORIDADEPARTMENT OF 

CORRECTIONS,

Respondent.

___________________________

Petition for Writ of Certiorari — Original Jurisdiction.

March 13, 2018

PER CURIAM.

DENIED.

ROBERTS,ROWE,and WINOKUR, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________

Reginald A. Walker, pro se, Petitioner.
2

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Kenneth Steely, General 

Counsel, and Beverly Brewster, Assistant General Counsel, 

Department of Corrections, Tallahassee, for Respondent.
Harvey B. DONLEY, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 1D18-3174

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 28, 2019

Harvey B. Donley, pro se, Petitioner.

Ashley B. Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.

Petitioner has filed a pro se petition for belated appeal following his conviction for trafficking in opium. To the extent Petitioner alleges ineffective assistance of appellate counsel on direct appeal, the petition *535is dismissed as untimely. *See* Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(d)(5). To the extent Petitioner complains about actions taken by counsel during postconviction proceedings, the petition is denied. *See**Tompkins v. State* , 994 So.2d 1072, 1088 (Fla. 2008) (noting that claims of ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel are not cognizable).

Roberts, Ray, and Jay, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 99.2

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


     In  connection  with the  Annual  Report  of  Ocean  Resources,  Inc.  (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending June 30, 2002, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Stephen
H. Durland,  Chief Financial Officer (or the equivalent thereof) 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 and belief:

(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 Repor fairly  presents,  in all material
     respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.



                                   /s/ Stephen H. Durland
                                 ------------------------------
                                 Stephen H. Durland
                                 Chief Financial Officer
                                 (or the equivalent thereof)
                                 October 8, 2002
Case 3:04-cv-02321-P Document 38 Filed 09/09/05 Page 1 of 7 PageID 557
 

 Case 3:04-cv-02321-P Document 38 Filed 09/09/05 Page 2 of 7 PageID 558
 

 Case 3:04-cv-02321-P Document 38 Filed 09/09/05 Page 3 of 7 PageID 559
 

 Case 3:04-cv-02321-P Document 38 Filed 09/09/05 Page 4 of 7 PageID 560
 

 Case 3:04-cv-02321-P Document 38 Filed 09/09/05 Page 5 of 7 PageID 561
 

 Case 3:04-cv-02321-P Document 38 Filed 09/09/05 Page 6 of 7 PageID 562
 

 Case 3:04-cv-02321-P Document 38 Filed 09/09/05 Page 7 of 7 PageID 563
# C_2017022EN.01004501.xml

| 23.1.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 22/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.1.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 22/45

---

Action brought on 08 November 2016 — Endoceutics v EUIPO — Merck (FEMIBION)

(Case T-802/16)

(2017/C 022/61)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Endoceutics, Inc. (Quebec, Canada) (represented by: M. Wahlin, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Merck KGaA (Darmstadt, Germany)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue:

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘FEMIBION’ — EU trade mark No 898 924

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before EUIPO: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Procedure before EUIPO

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 July 2016 in Case R 1608/2015-1

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision in part and revoke the EUTM for ‘pharmaceutical preparations for immune system support, for menopause, for menstruation, for treatment and management of pregnancy, for the prevention, treatment and management of stress, for the prevention, treatment and management of stress ill-balanced or deficient nutrition’; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision in part and revoke the EUTM for ‘pharmaceutical preparations for immune system support, for menopause, for menstruation, for treatment and management of pregnancy, for the prevention, treatment and management of stress, for the prevention, treatment and management of stress ill-balanced or deficient nutrition’;

| — | order the EUTM proprietor to pay the Applicant’s costs on the appeal and with regard to the proceedings at the EUIPO. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the EUTM proprietor to pay the Applicant’s costs on the appeal and with regard to the proceedings at the EUIPO.

Plea in law

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009.

---