alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

JOEL CASTON,

Plaintiff,

v. Civil Action No. 08-1656 (JDB)

JAMES BUTLER, et al.,

 Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Plaintiff, a federal prisoner, brought this action against James Q. Butler, an attorney and

the managing partner of law firm to which plaintiff paid a retainer for legal representation on a

post-conviction in his criminal case. See Caston v. Butler, 629 F. Supp. 2d 20 (D.D.C. 2009). 

On December 4, 2009, the Court granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and entered a

judgment in his favor for $5,000. Cason v. Butler, No. 08-1656, 2009 WL 4730753, at *1

(D.D.C. Dec. 4, 2009). On June 22, 2010, the Court denied plaintiff’s demand for punitive

damages, awarded pre-judgment interest, and determined that there may be a basis for a further

award of compensatory damages. Caston v. Butler, No. 08-1656, 2010 WL 2505591, at *2

(D.D.C. June 22, 2010). Given plaintiff’s pro se status, the Court afforded plaintiff an

opportunity to submit specific documentation of any actual expenditures which would be

recoverable as additional compensatory damages. See id. 

Plaintiff represents that he unable to provide “specific documentation (bills, invoices,

receipts, etc.) of any actual expenditures incurred in attempting to hire another attorney.” Pl.’s

-1-
Resp. to Order of the Court [Dkt. #37]. Defendant Butler has not filed an opposition or any other

response to plaintiff’s submission. It appears, then, that all issues presented in this case have

been resolved, and this civil action will be dismissed. The total judgment in favor of plaintiff as

reflected in the Court’s prior orders will remain at $5,140.30.

An Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

 /s/ 

JOHN D. BATES

DATE: August 19, 2010 United States District Judge

-2-
STATE of Louisiana v. Robert Earl BASS, Jr.

NO. 2018-K-0939

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 6, 2019

Denied.
Sheldon Terrell WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-3019

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 24, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Tommy W. ANDERSON v. STATE

CR-16-1049

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

December 8, 2017

**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

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title
18 of the United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of ClearPoint Business Resources, Inc. (the Company) does hereby certify with respect to the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30,
2007 (the Report) 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: August 14, 2007 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ Michael D. Traina  
|                      |  |  |  |     |  | Michael D. Traina      
|                      |  |  |  |     |  | Chief Executive Officer
|                      |  |  | 
|Date: August 14, 2007 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ Kurt A. Braun      
|                      |  |  |  |     |  | Kurt A. Braun          
|                      |  |  |  |     |  | Chief Financial Officer

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 9 (Wednesday, January 15, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Page 3908]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-00772]

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Indian Affairs

[256A2100DD/AAKC001030/A0A501010.999900]

Indian Gaming; Approval of the Fifth Amendment to the Tribal-
State Class III Gaming Compact Amendment Between Stillaguamish Tribe of 
Indians of Washington and the State of Washington

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs approves the fifth 
amendment to the Tribal-State compact for class III gaming between the 
Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians of Washington and the State of 
Washington governing the operation and regulation of class III gaming 
activities. The amendment allows for the operation of electronic table 
games and removes provisions related to revenue sharing for smoking 
cessation purposes.

DATES: The amendment takes effect on January 15, 2025.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Paula L. Hart, Director, Office of 
Indian Gaming, Office of the Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs, 
Washington, DC 20240, [email protected]; (202) 219-4066.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988, 25 
U.S.C. 2701 et seq., (IGRA) provides the Secretary of the Interior 
(Secretary) with 45 days to review and approve or disapprove the 
Tribal-State compact governing the conduct of class III gaming activity 
on the Tribe's Indian lands. See 25 U.S.C. 2710(d)(8). If the Secretary 
does not approve or disapprove a Tribal-State compact within the 45 
days, IGRA provides the Tribal-State compact is considered to have been 
approved by the Secretary, but only to the extent the compact is 
consistent with IGRA. See 25 U.S.C. 2710(d)(8)(D). The IGRA also 
requires the Secretary to publish in the Federal Register notice of the 
approved Tribal-State compacts for the purpose of engaging in class III 
gaming activities on Indian lands. See 25 U.S.C. (d)(8)(D). As required 
by 25 CFR 293.4, all compacts and amendments are subject to review and 
approval by the Secretary. The Amendment changes the scope of gaming to 
include electronic table games and creates regulations for those games. 
The Amendment is approved.

Bryan Newland,
Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2025-00772 Filed 1-14-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4337-15-P
```
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 9 (Wednesday, January 15, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Page 3870]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-00777]

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

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION

Notice of Agreements Filed

    The Commission hereby gives notice of filing of the following 
agreements under the Shipping Act of 1984. Interested parties may 
submit comments, relevant information, or documents regarding the 
agreement to the Secretary by email at [email protected], or by mail, 
Federal Maritime Commission, 800 North Capitol Street, Washington, DC 
20573. Comments will be most helpful to the Commission if received 
within 12 days of the date this notice appears in the Federal Register, 
and the Commission requests that comments be submitted within 7 days on 
agreements that request expedited review. Copies of these agreements 
are available through the Commission's website (www.fmc.gov) or by 
contacting the Office of Agreements at (202)-523-5793 or 
[email protected].
    Agreement No.: 201444.
    Agreement Name: ONE to HMM AL5 Space Charter Agreement.
    Parties: HMM Co. Ltd.; Ocean Network Express Pte. Ltd.
    Filing Party: Joshua Stein, Cozen O'Connor.
    Synopsis: The Agreement authorizes ONE to charter space to HMM in 
the trade between ports on the U.S. East Coast/Gulf and the U.S. West 
Coast on the one hand and ports in the United Kingdom, Germany, France, 
The Netherlands, Belgium, Colombia, and Dominican Republic on the other 
hand.
    Proposed Effective Date: 01/08/2025.
    Location: https://www2.fmc.gov/FMC.Agreements.Web/Public/AgreementHistory/88590.
    Agreement No.: 201445.
    Agreement Name: ONE to YML AL5 Slot Charter Agreement.
    Parties: Ocean Network Express Pte. Ltd.; Yang Ming Joint Service 
Agreement (``YML'').
    Filing Party: Joshua Stein, Cozen O'Connor.
    Synopsis: The Agreement authorizes ONE to charter space to YML in 
the trade between ports on the U.S. East Coast/Gulf and the U.S. West 
Coast on the one hand and ports in the United Kingdom, Germany, France, 
The Netherlands, Belgium, Colombia, and Dominican Republic on the other 
hand.
    Proposed Effective Date: 01/08/2025.
    Location: https://www2.fmc.gov/FMC.Agreements.Web/Public/AgreementHistory/88591.

    Dated: January 10, 2025.
Jennifer Everling,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2025-00777 Filed 1-14-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-02-P
```
STATE of Louisiana v. Anthony CINQUEMANO

NO. 2018-K-1872

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 29, 2019

Denied.
1 The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, Chief Judge, United States District Court for

the District of Nebraska.



## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________ No. 00-2232NE

_____________ Robert J. Prokop, M.D., * * Appellant, * * On Appeal from the United v. * States District Court * for the District of USDA, United States of America, * Nebraska. acting by and through the United * States Department of Agriculture and * [Not To Be Published] Farm Service Agency, * * Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: April 30, 2001 Filed: May 10, 2001

___________ Before MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, RICHARD S. ARNOLD, and FAGG, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Robert Prokop appeals from the District Court’s 1 decision affirming the United States Department of Agriculture’s classification of his property as “farmed wetland pasture.” For the reasons explained in the District Court’s thorough opinion, we-2-

conclude substantial evidence in the record supports the agency’s finding that the property met the criteria for farmed wetland pasture. The agency’s decision was not arbitrary or capricious. See 7 C.F.R. § 12.2(a) (2001) (definition of farmed wetland pasture); Downer

v. United States , 97 F.3d 999, 1002 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam) (court looks to whether agency considered all factors Congress intended it to consider, whether agency considered factors Congress did not intend it to consider, and whether there is lack of rational connection between facts found and decision made). We have consideredProkop’s due process arguments and conclude that they fail, also for the reasons laid out in the District Court’s opinion. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8thCir. R. 47B. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
# C_2021481EN.01002501.xml

| 29.11.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 481/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.11.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 481/25

---

Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2021 — Global Translation Solutions v Commission

(Case T-404/20) (1)

(Public service contracts - Tendering procedure - Translation services - Rejection of a tenderer’s bid - Award of the contract to another tenderer - Award criteria - Method of evaluation - Manifest error of assessment - Equal treatment - Transparency - Obligation to state reasons - Duty of diligence - Principle of sound administration)

(2021/C 481/35)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Global Translation Solutions ltd. (Valletta, Malta) (represented by: C. Mifsud-Bonnici, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Katsimerou, L. André and M. Ilkova, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of the Commission’s decision contained in the letter of 17 April 2020 rejecting the tender submitted by the applicant for Lot 22 (EN>MT) in tendering procedure TRAD 19 and awarding that lot to another tenderer, and for annulment of ‘all related decisions’.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Global Translation Solutions ltd. to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Global Translation Solutions ltd. to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 297, 7.9.2020.

---
I 

119TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 148 

To prohibit Federal agencies from restricting the use of convertible virtual 

currency by a person to purchase goods or services for the person’s 

own use, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 3, 2025 

Mr. DAVIDSON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To prohibit Federal agencies from restricting the use of 

convertible virtual currency by a person to purchase 

goods or services for the person’s own use, and for 

other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Keep Your Coins Act 

5 of 2025’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 148 IH

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON RESTRICTING USE OF CONVERT2 IBLE VIRTUAL CURRENCY BY A PERSON TO 

3 RETAIN FULL CONTROL OVER CONVERTIBLE 

4 VIRTUAL CURRENCY. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—The head of a Federal agency 

6 may not prohibit, restrict, or otherwise impair the ability 

7 of a covered user to— 

8 (1) use convertible virtual currency or its equiv9 alent for such user’s own purposes, such as to pur10 chase real or virtual goods and services for the 

11 user’s own use; or 

12 (2) self-custody digital assets using a self13 hosted wallet or other means to conduct transactions 

14 for any lawful purpose. 

15 (b) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

16 (1) CONVERTIBLE VIRTUAL CURRENCIES.—The 

17 term ‘‘convertible virtual currency’’ means a medium 

18 of exchange that— 

19 (A) has an equivalent value as currency (as 

20 defined in section 1010.100 of title 31, Code of 

21 Federal Regulations (or successor regulations)); 

22 or 

23 (B) acts as a substitute for currency but 

24 may not possess all the attributes (including 

25 legal tender status) specified under such section 

26 1010.100 (or successor regulations). 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•HR 148 IH

1 (2) COVERED USER.—The term ‘‘covered user’’ 

2 means a person that obtains convertible virtual cur3 rency to purchase goods or services on that person’s 

4 own behalf, without regard to the method in which 

5 such covered user obtained such convertible virtual 

6 currency. 

7 (3) SELF-HOSTED WALLET.—The term ‘‘self8 hosted wallet’’ means a digital interface— 

9 (A) used to secure and transfer convertible 

10 virtual currency; and 

11 (B) under which the owner of convertible 

12 virtual currency retains independent control 

13 over such convertible virtual currency that is se14 cured by such digital interface. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
Farris MCELREATH, Appellant, v. Anna Almeida GONZALEZ, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-303

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 22, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUTPUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

VICTOR ROSAS

, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

, Appellee

.

No. 4D 17

- 2586

[ October 19, 2017 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.85 0 motion from the Circuit Court for

the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; Michael A. Robinson

, Judge; L.T. Case No. 03

- 6987CF10A

.

Terrence Moons, Jr. of the Law Office of Terrence Moons, Jr., P.A.,

Sunrise, for appellant.

No appearance required for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

T

AYLOR

, L EVINE and K UNTZ

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Cedric HOUSTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-3996

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed April 17, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
EX PARTE Charlie Joe WILSON, Jr.

1160744 (CR-16-0380)

Supreme Court of Alabama.

July 7, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Cert. denied.
Case 3:05-cv-00545-L Document 6 Filed 06/13/05 Page 1 of 2 PageID 25
 

 Case 3:05-cv-00545-L Document 6 Filed 06/13/05 Page 2 of 2 PageID 26
Margaret MCLEAN, Appellant, v. WINN-DIXIE STORES, INC., Appellee.

No. 1D17-5362

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 2, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUTPUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
# C_2019035EN.01000601.xml

| 28.1.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 35/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.1.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 35/6

---

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 29 November 2018 — Alcohol Countermeasure Systems (International) Inc. v European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

(Case C-340/17 P) (1)

((Appeal - EU trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Invalidity proceedings - Declaration of invalidity on the basis of an earlier United Kingdom trade mark - Genuine use - Proof - Effects of the procedure for the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union on the proceedings before the General Court and the lawfulness of the decision at issue - None))

(2019/C 35/07)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Alcohol Countermeasure Systems (International) Inc. (represented by: E. Baud and P. Marchiset, avocats)

Other party to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Botis and S. Hanne, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: C. Brodie and Z. Lavery, acting as Agents, and by N. Saunders, Barrister)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders Alcohol Countermeasure Systems (International) Inc. to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO); |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Alcohol Countermeasure Systems (International) Inc. to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO);

| 3. | Orders the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 347, 16.10.2017.

---
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         January 16, 2025.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on January 7, 2025, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract                               ( print page 4810)                            1251 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-1069, K2025-1068.                

Sean C. Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2025-00877 Filed 1-15-25; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
* 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 June 24, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-60148 Conference Calendar

DENNIS DOBBS, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus STATE OF MISSISSIPPI; MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; WILLIAM BILL BLAND; LEE ROY BLACK, Defendant-Appellee.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 1:92-CV-71-B-D

-------------------- Before DeMOSS, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Dennis Dobbs, Mississippi prisoner # 96145, has filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal. The district court denied Dobbs’ F ED . R. C IV . P. 60(b) motion for relief from the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The district court denied Dobbs’ motion to appeal IFP and certified that the appeal was not taken in good faith. By moving for IFP,No. 03-60148 -2- Dobbs is challenging the district court’s certification. See Baugh v. Taylor , 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997). Dobbs has failed to show that the district court abused its discretion by denying his F ED . R. C IV . P. 60(b) motion. Seven Elves, Inc. v. Eskenazi , 635 F.2d 396, 402 (5th Cir. 1981). The instant appeal is without arguable merit and is thus frivolous. Accordingly, Dobbs’ request for IFP status is DENIED, and his appeal is DISMISSED. Howard v. King , 707 F.2d 215, 219-220 (5th Cir. 1983); 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2. Dobbs is cautioned that the dismissal of this appeal as frivolous counts as a strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons , 103 F.3d 383, 385-87 (5th Cir. 1996). Dobbs is also cautioned that if he accumulates three strikes under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), he may not proceed IFP in any civil action or appeal filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury.
See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). IFP MOTION DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.