alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1Although the magistrate judge prepared initial findings, conclusions, and

recommendation in 2005, because it appeared that petitioner Mighell had not

exhausted state court remedies, and because the state court record was

incomplete, this Court stayed this action pending Mighell’s filing of another

application for writ of habeas corpus in state court. Mighell returned to state

court and filed a subsequent state application. Ex pate Mighell, No. 59,378-02,

at 1-30. A complete record was prepared, and the state trial court issued

thorough and detailed findings of fact and conclusions of law recommending denial

of Mighell’s claims. Based on those findings and conclusions, the Texas Court

of Criminal Appeals denied Mighell’s application. Ex parte Mighell, No. 59,378-02

at 264-327; at Cover. Mighell then refiled an amended petition in this action,

and the magistrate judge prepared the exhaustive amended report that is now

before this Court. 

2The clerk of Court is directed to note on the docket that the December 8,

2006, amended findings, conclusions and recommendation [docket no. 31] VACATES

the March 8, 2005, findings, conclusions and recommendation [docket no. 12]. 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

BARTT KENDRICK MIGHELL, §

Petitioner, §

 §

VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO.4:04-CV-798-Y

 §

NATHANIEL QUARTERMAN, Director, §

T.D.C.J., Correctional § 

Institutions Division, §

Respondent. § 

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S AMENDED FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

 (With special instructions to the clerk of Court)

Before the Court is the petition for writ of habeas corpus

under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 of petitioner Bartt Kendrick Mighell, along

with the December 8, 2006, amended1 findings, conclusions, and

recommendation of the United States magistrate judge.2

 The magistrate judge gave the parties until December 29, 2006, to file

written objections to the amended findings, conclusions, and

recommendation. As of the date of this order, no written objections have been filed. 

The Court has reviewed the pleadings and the record in this

case, and has reviewed for clear error the proposed amended

findings, conclusions and recommendation of the United States

 

 Case 4:04-cv-00798-Y Document 32 Filed 01/18/07 Page 1 of 2 PageID 273
2

magistrate judge filed on December 8, 2006. The Court concludes

that the petition for writ of habeas corpus should be denied for

the reasons stated in the magistrate judge's amended findings and

conclusions.

 Therefore, the amended findings, conclusions and recommendation of the magistrate judge are hereby ADOPTED.

Petitioner's Bartt Kendrick Mighell’s petition for writ of

habeas corpus is DENIED. 

SIGNED January 18, 2007.

 

 Case 4:04-cv-00798-Y Document 32 Filed 01/18/07 Page 2 of 2 PageID 274
H. Res. 22 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

January 9, 2025. 

Resolved, That the following named Members be, and are 

hereby, elected to the following standing committees of the 

House of Representatives: 

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS: Mr. Hoyer, Ms. Kaptur, Mr. Clyburn, Mr. Bishop of Georgia, Ms. McCollum, Ms. 

Wasserman Schultz, Mr. Cuellar, Ms. Pingree, Mr. Quigley, 

Ms. Meng, Mr. Pocan, Mr. Aguilar, Ms. Lois Frankel of 

Florida, Mrs. Watson Coleman, Mrs. Torres of California, 

Mr. Case, Mr. Espaillat, Mr. Harder of California, Ms. 

Underwood, Ms. Lee of Nevada, Mr. Morelle, Mr. Levin, Ms. 

Dean of Pennsylvania, Ms. Escobar, Mr. Mrvan, Ms. Perez, 

Mr. Ivey. 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE: Ms. DeGette, 

Ms. Schakowsky, Ms. Matsui, Ms. Castor of Florida, Mr. 

Tonko, Ms. Clarke of New York, Mr. Ruiz, Mr. Peters, Mrs. 

Dingell, Mr. Veasey, Ms. Kelly of Illinois, Ms. Barraga ́n, Mr. 

Soto, Ms. Schrier, Mrs. Trahan, Mrs. Fletcher, Ms. Ocasio- 
2 

•HRES 22 EH 

Cortez, Mr. Auchincloss, Mr. Carter of Louisiana, Mr. 

Mullin, Mr. Landsman, Ms. McClellan. 

COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES: Ms. Vela ́zquez, 

Mr. Sherman, Mr. Meeks, Mr. David Scott of Georgia, Mr. 

Lynch, Mr. Green of Texas, Mr. Cleaver, Mr. Himes, Mr. 

Foster, Mrs. Beatty, Mr. Vargas, Mr. Gottheimer, Mr. 

Vicente Gonzalez of Texas, Mr. Casten, Ms. Pressley, Ms. 

Tlaib, Mr. Torres of New York, Ms. Garcia of Texas, Ms. 

Williams of Georgia, Ms. Pettersen, Mr. Fields, Ms. Bynum, 

Mr. Liccardo. 

COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS: Mr. Doggett, Mr. 

Thompson of California, Mr. Larson of Connecticut, Mr. 

Davis of Illinois, Ms. Sa ́nchez, Ms. Sewell, Ms. DelBene, Ms. 

Chu, Ms. Moore of Wisconsin, Mr. Boyle of Pennsylvania, 

Mr. Beyer, Mr. Evans of Pennsylvania, Mr. Schneider, Mr. 

Panetta, Mr. Gomez, Mr. Horsford, Ms. Plaskett, Mr. Suozzi. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

LUBBOCK DIVISION

TERESA D. COURTNEY, )

)

 Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO.

) 5:04-CV-283-C

JO ANNE B. BARNHART, )

Commissioner of Social Security, )

)

Defendant. )

ORDER

Plaintiff is appealing an adverse decision of the Defendant, Jo Anne B. Barnhart,

Commissioner of Social Security, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The United States Magistrate

Judge filed her Report and Recommendation on July 25, 2005. No written objections have been

filed. It is, therefore,

ORDERED that the findings and conclusions in the Report and Recommendation are hereby

ADOPTED as the findings and conclusions of the Court and that the above-styled and numbered

cause is hereby reversed and remanded to the Commissioner for further proceedings.

Dated August 23, 2005.

_________________________________

SAM R. CUMMINGS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

 

 Case 5:04-cv-00283-C Document 14 Filed 08/23/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 223
**Exhibit 23**

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm 

The Boardof Directors 

OraSure Technologies, Inc.: 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements on Form S-8 (No. 333-118385, No. 333-102235, No. 333-50340, No. 333-48662, No. 333-138814 and No. 333-151077) of OraSure Technologies,Inc. of our reports dated March 15, 2010, with respect to the balance sheets of OraSure Technologies, Inc. as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, and the related statements of operations, stockholders’ equity and comprehensive income(loss) and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2009, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2009, which reports appear in the December 31, 2009annual report on Form 10-K of OraSure Technologies, Inc. 

/s/ KPMG LLP 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

March 15, 2010
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***

|   | (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. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| /s/ Mark                Klein                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 |   |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Name: Mark                KleinTitle:   Chief                Executive Office, President and Director                           (Principal Executive Officer) Date:                August 18, 2008 |
|                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               |   |
| /s/              Michael Solomon                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   |   |
| Name:                 Michael SolomonTitle:   Chief                Financial Officer                           (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) Date:                August 18, 2008   |

----
> -0002

Oe,g,r Coc»r4 of Cf'MM;! Apfpcj j, fP

•

r

1V^ iNc^e,—LI—(3o^^4L^rN Tri-lilllo Qi^cl

ik-o—M-W—Cciry,-r,r.yVS -^ =U*& IkO^

Uirr-V >>f kcU.a f r^cu^A- Fl'UcI r>A ^ ~|^ ^0 15

_&.^s^ai M-\-^o\^ Ear -jrk CoupI

t

-a

y\^-^i^eJlIjH- 4-3-

NJ *<3—Q. U/V\'<>ft "To o >U, d" -\^

yrg,s<^W—U Kj-tk l^k^j ^.^imO

^4

-K—<^&'f o-»fe-—=to—^-7—l^sk-e,^ ^£-fi-*Vi<Ki ?

:&. ~^ ^p.o-^r—r-?oi-^-fr.l ckp^ rv.vHfi'r^l £rj^ ~t^

RECEIVED IN

COURT OFCRIMINAL APPEALS

^K<^£CJ^1

c=v-t-r

APR 23 2015

J_av<4k^-fr-jjMbAdelAcosia,QierR ^Btz^clIS.
Exhibit 10.17
 
  Definitions
        Grant of Units .
 Restricted Unit Account
 Restricted Period .
 Restrictions on Transfer During Restricted Period .




---



##### 



Change in Control During Restricted Period .
    Termination of Employment During Restricted Period
   2




---



##### 



provided
 Dividends
 3




---



##### 



No Right to Continued Employment .
 No Rights as a Stockholder
 Adjustments Upon Change in Capitalization
 General Restrictions
 Issuance of Shares provided
 Tax Withholding
 4




---



##### 



Subsidiary
 Plan Governs .
 Modification of Agreement
 Severability
 Governing Law
 Successors in Interest
 Administration
 Resolution of Disputes
 5




---



##### 



Data Privacy Consent
 Limitation on Rights; No Right to Future Grants; Extraordinary Item of
Compensation
 Award Administrator
 Section 409A
 6




---



##### 



Book Entry Delivery of Shares
 Acceptance
 By:
    
    L-3 COMMUNICATIONS HOLDINGS, INC./s/ Michael T. Strianese

Michael T. StrianesePresident and Chief Executive Officer/s/ Steven M. Post

Steven M. PostSenior Vice President, General Counsel and
     Corporate SecretaryAcknowledged and Agreed
as of the date first written above:Participant Signature
 7
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 6 (Friday, January 10, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Page 2056]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-00338]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-071, OMB Control No. 3235-0058]

Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Extension: Form 12b-25--
Notification of Late filing

Upon Written Request Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange 
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 
20549-2736

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction 
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange 
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collection of 
information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this 
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and 
Budget for extension and approval.
    The purpose of Form 12b-25 (17 CFR 249.322) is to provide notice to 
the Commission and the marketplace that a registrant will be unable to 
timely file a required periodic report or transition report pursuant to 
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C 78a et seq.) or the 
Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a et seq.). If all the 
filing conditions of the form are satisfied, the registrant is granted 
an automatic filing extension. There are approximately 2,849 annual 
Form 12b-25 filings and it takes approximately 2.5 hours per response 
for a total of 7,123 burden hours.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) whether this proposed 
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of 
the functions of the agency, including whether the information will 
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of 
the burden imposed by the collection of information; (c) ways to 
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; 
and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on 
respondents, including through the use of automated collection 
techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will 
be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60 
days of this publication by March 11, 2025.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid control number.
    Please direct your written comment to Austin Gerig, Director/Chief 
Data Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Tanya Ruttenberg, 
100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 or send an email to: 
[email protected].

    Dated: January 6, 2025.
Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2025-00338 Filed 1-8-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
```
Daniel Eric COBBLE v. Chris MAY, Circuit Clerk of Randolph County

2160786

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

September 13, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
# ?he Attorney General ofTexas
December 8, 1977

Honorable Felipe Reyna District Attorney 3rd Floor, McLennan County Courthouse Annex Waco, Texas 76701 Opinion **No.** H-1101 Re: Use ofmisdemeanor convict laborers.

Dear Wr. Reyna: you have requested our opinion concerning the use convict laborers under articles 43.09 and 43.10 of the of Texas Code of .Criminal,Prdcedure. You ask whether itwould be necessary to establish a county workhouse orcounty farm in order for a commissioners court to utilize the,labor or persons convicted ofmisdemeanors on public roads, bridges and other projects of the county; Article 43.09 provides 'inpart:

When a defendant is convicted of a misdemeanor
. . .hemay~. .~.be put towork in **the** workhouse, or on'the county farm, or public improvements of the county . . . . Article 43.10provides inpart:

1. Each commissioners court may provide for the erection of aworkhouse and the establishment of a county farm in connection therewith for the purpose of utilizing the labor of said parties so convicted;

. . . . **5.** They shall be put to labor upon the public roads, bridges or other public works of the'county when their labor cannot be utilized in the county workhouse or county farm.

p. 4514Honorable Felipe Reyna -Page 2 (~-1101)

InAttorney General Opinion O-3260 (1941)this office ruled that itwould not be necessary to establish aworkhouse or county farm in order tousemisdemeanor convict labor upon public improvements. The statutes involved therein were identical inpertinent respects to articles 43.09 and 43.10. In light of the unchanged language of the statute, the article 43.09provision that such labormay be used "in the workhouse, or on the county farm, orpublic improvements of the county," and the language of axicle 43.10(5), we believe Attorney General Opinion O-3260 (1941)is controlling. added). (Emphasis

you have also asked about the nature of liability of the county to a convict laborer injured while performing~such labor. Wemust decline to answer thisquestion since the issues involved are in litigation. Garcia v:Texas Department of Corrections, No. 31,691-D, District Court of Fort.Bend County, 130th Judicial District ofTexas.,Richmond, Texas 11469. Opinion H-139 (1973). SeeAt~torneyGeneral - SUMMARY It is not necessary to establish a county workhouse or county farm in order to utilizemisdemeanor convict laborupon public improvements of the county underarticles 43.09 and 43.10 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

General of Texas APPROVED:

Opinion Committee jst

p. 4515
Exhibit 12.1**Kendle International Inc.****RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES**                           **Year Ended December 31,**  **2007** **2006** **2005** **2004** **2003** **2002**   **Earnings (in thousands):**                        Pre-tax income from continuing operations  30,442   13,373   17,815   6,053   884   (61,095)Fixed Charges  23,871   10,469   3,009   3,123   2,965   3,405    Total earnings (deficiency)  54,313   23,842   20,824   9,176   3,849   (57,690)                            **Fixed Charges (in thousands):**                        Interest expense  13,618   6,781   460   776   1,039   1,219 Amortization of expenses related to indebtedness  5,404   355   41   37   45   74 Interest component of rent expense  4,849   3,333   2,508   2,310   1,881   2,112    Total Fixed Charges  23,871   10,469   3,009   3,123   2,965   3,405                             Ratio of earnings to fixed charges  **2.28**   **2.28**   **6.92**   **2.94**   **1.30**   **—******   For the year ended December 31, 2002 earnings were insufficient to cover fixed charges by $61.1 million.Interestcomponent of rent expense is assumed to be 33% of total rentalexpense.
Lynn Anne POIRIER, Petitioner, v. Laurier POIRIER, III, AS TRUSTEE OF the POIRIER FAMILY TRUST, Respondent.

Case No. 5D19-394

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Opinion filed March 15, 2019

Christie Mitchell, of The CLM Law Firm, P.A., Orlando, for Petitioner.

Margaret A. Wharton and Lisa C. McCrystal, of Wharton Law Group, P.A., Oviedo, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner, Lynn Anne Poirier, petitions this Court for a writ of prohibition to quash the trial court's February 11, 2019 "Order Denying Defendant's Verified Motion to Disqualify Trial Judge." We find that the facts alleged in Petitioner's motion would place a reasonably prudent person in fear of not receiving a fair and impartial hearing. *See* *MacKenzie v. Super Kids Bargain Store, Inc.* , 565 So.2d 1332, 1335 (Fla. 1990). Furthermore, we find that the trial court's statement that the allegations in the motion were factually baseless went beyond a determination of the legal sufficiency of the motion, contrary to the procedure set forth in Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.330(f). *See* *Messianu v. Pigna* , 180 So.3d 229, 230 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015). Accordingly, we grant the petition, quash the February 11, 2019 order denying Petitioner's motion to disqualify, and remand the case with directions that the underlying case be reassigned to a different judge.

PETITION FOR WRIT OF PROHIBITION GRANTED.

EVANDER, C.J., WALLIS and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.
#### Lang *v.*Shaw.

Appeal, from Gordon superior court — Judge Fite. February 24, 1909.

Submitted July 20, —

Decided October 5, 1909.

*J. M. Lang, J. O. B. Erwin,*for plaintiff in error.

O. *N. Starr,*contra.

Powell, J.

While ordinarily notes, checks, due-bills, and other similar instruments given to evidence an indebtedness are not payment until they themselves are paid, yet the contract between the parties may make them so. Where a creditor holding an indebtedness against a single debtor takes the joint due-hill of this debtor and a third person, with a recital therein that it is in' settlement of the account out of which the indebtedness arose, the creditor can not thereafter sue the original debtor upon the account. The taking of the due-bill under such circumstances amounts to a novation; and if both the joint makers are alive and within the jurisdiction of the court, they are subject to suit only in a joint action upon the due-bill. *Judgment reversed.*
Semie ROBINSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D17-3164

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

March 21, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 32

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 quarterly report of Pharmasset, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the
period ending March 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of our knowledge, that:



| | 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: May 15, 2008 |  |  |  | /s/ P. SCHAEFER PRICE        
|                   |  |  |  | P. Schaefer Price            
|                   |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer      
|                   |  |  |  | (principal executive officer)
|                   |  | 
|Date: May 15, 2008 |  |  |  | /s/ KURT LEUTZINGER          
|                   |  |  |  | Kurt Leutzinger              
|                   |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer      
|                   |  |  |  | (principal financial officer)
Katrina Sylvan PORTER v. STATE

CR-16-0225

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

December 8, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Edward KEELER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D18-3043

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[February 21, 2019]

Affirmed.