alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1 The fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. 405(g) states that the “court shall have

power to enter, upon the pleadings and transcript of the record, a judgment

affirming, modifying, or reversing the decision of the Secretary, with or without

remanding the cause for a rehearing.” See Melkonyan v. Sullivan, 501 U.S. 89

(1991). 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

SALLY E. MARTIN §

§

VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:04-CV-188-Y

§

JO ANNE B. BARNHART §

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S FINDINGS,

CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION

On March 22, 2005, the United States Magistrate Judge issued

his proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation (“findings

and conclusions”) in the above-styled and -numbered cause. An

order issued that same day gave all parties until April 12, 2005,

to serve and file with the Court written objections to the proposed

findings and conclusions of the magistrate judge. The Court has

not received any written objections. As a result, in accordance

with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), de novo review is not required.

Nevertheless, the Court has reviewed the magistrate judge’s

findings and conclusions for plain error and has found none. 

Thus, after consideration of this matter, the Court finds that

the findings and conclusions of the magistrate judge should be and

are hereby ADOPTED as the findings and conclusions of this Court.

It is, therefore, ORDERED that the decision of the

Commissioner is REVERSED and the action REMANDED, pursuant to the

fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g),1 for further administrative

 

 Case 4:04-cv-00188-Y Document 20 Filed 04/21/05 Page 1 of 2 PageID 91
2

proceedings for the reasons set forth in the magistrate judge’s

findings and conclusions.

SIGNED April 21, 2005.

TRM/kat

 

 Case 4:04-cv-00188-Y Document 20 Filed 04/21/05 Page 2 of 2 PageID 92
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS OF CEO  AND COO**

**PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACTOF 2002**

**(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)**

 

Inconnection with the Annual Report of Precision Auto Care, Inc. (the“Registrant”), on Form 10-KSB for the year ended June 30, 2004, as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), Louis M. Brown, Jr.,Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant and Robert R. Falconi, ChiefOperating Officer of the Registrant, respectively, do each hereby certify,pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section1350), that to his knowledge:

 

1.               The Report fully complies with the requirements ofsection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.               The information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of theoperations of the Registrant.

 
| **Signature** | ** **              | **Title**                                 | ** **                     | **Date**                               |
|---------------|-------------------------|-------------------------------------------|--------------------------------|----------------------------------------|
|          |                    |                                      |                           |                                   |
|          | /s/ Louis M. Brown, Jr. |                                      |                           | Chief  Executive Officer               |   | September  28, 2004 |
|          |                    | and Chairman  of the Board                |                           |                                   |
|          | Louis M. Brown, Jr.     |                                      | (Principal  Executive Officer) |                                   |   |
|          |                    |                                      |                           |                                   |
|          | /s/ Robert R. Falconi   |                                      |                           | President  and Chief Operating Officer |   | September  28, 2004 |
|          |                    | (Principal  Financial Accounting Officer) |                           |                                   |
|          | Robert R. Falconi       |                                      |                           |                                   |   |
|               |                         |                                           |                                |                                        |  |  |  |

 

[A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Precision AutoCare, Inc. and will be retained by Precision Auto Care, Inc. and furnished tothe Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.]

 

----
Maikel GALLO-SURERA, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-1395

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed February 20, 2019

Affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 89 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

119th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 89

 Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Agriculture in 
                  the One Hundred Nineteenth Congress.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 31, 2025

Mr. Thompson of Pennsylvania submitted the following resolution; which 
         was referred to the Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Agriculture in 
                  the One Hundred Nineteenth Congress.

    Resolved,

SECTION 1. AMOUNTS FOR COMMITTEE EXPENSES.

    For the expenses of the Committee on Agriculture (hereafter in this 
resolution referred to as the ``Committee''), including the expenses of 
all staff salaries, there shall be paid, out of the applicable accounts 
of the House of Representatives for committee salaries and expenses, 
not more than $14,903,700 for the One Hundred Nineteenth Congress.

SEC. 2. SESSION LIMITATIONS.

    Of the amount specified in section 1--
            (1) not more than $7,231,375 shall be available for 
        expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
        January 3, 2025, and ending immediately before noon on January 
        3, 2026; and
            (2) not more than $7,672,325 shall be available for 
        expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
        January 3, 2026, and ending immediately before noon on January 
        3, 2027.

SEC. 3. VOUCHERS.

    Payments under this resolution shall be made on vouchers authorized 
by the Committee, signed by the Chairman of the Committee, and approved 
in the manner directed by the Committee on House Administration.

SEC. 4. REGULATIONS.

    Amounts made available under this resolution shall be expended in 
accordance with regulations prescribed by the Committee on House 
Administration.
                                 <all>
```
----

**EXHIBIT      32.1**

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

|                                                                               |                                   |                                   |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------|----------------------------------------|
|                                                                               | **OCCULOGIX,                INC.**     |
|                                                                          |                              |                              |
| Date:     November                10,                2005 | By:                          | /s/ Elias                Vamvakas |
|                                                                               | Chief                Executive Officer |
|                                                                               |                                   |

----
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D18-3992

_____________________________

JACK D. BERGSTRESSER, JR.,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Alachua County.

Mark W. Moseley, Judge.

July 11, 2019

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

B.L. THOMAS, C.J., and KELSEY and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

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

9.331.

_____________________________

Jack D. Bergstresser, Jr., pro se, Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
IA 

119TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 5 

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to limit 

the number of terms an individual may serve as a Member of Congress. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 3, 2025 

Mr. FITZPATRICK (for himself and Mr. KHANNA) submitted the following joint 

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United 

States to limit the number of terms an individual may 

serve as a Member of Congress. 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives 

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled

3 (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the fol4 lowing article is proposed as an amendment to the Con5 stitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all 

6 intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 

7 ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several 

8 States within seven years after the date of its submission 

9 for ratification: 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HJ 5 IH 

1 ‘‘ARTICLE— 

2 ‘‘SECTION 1. No person shall serve as a Representa3 tive for more than six two-year terms. Service as a Rep4 resentative for more than one year of any two-year term 

5 shall be treated as a complete term for purposes of this 

6 section, without regard to whether the service was com7 pleted by the individual originally elected to the term. 

8 ‘‘SECTION 2. No person shall serve as a Senator for 

9 more than two six-year terms. Service as a Senator for 

10 more than three years of any six-year term shall be treated 

11 as a complete term for purposes of this section, without 

12 regard to whether the service was completed by the indi13 vidual originally elected to the term. 

14 ‘‘SECTION 3. This article shall not apply to any per15 son who served as a Representative or as a Senator during 

16 any Congress occurring before the One Hundred Eight17 eenth Congress.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
Anthony D. RILEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-2479

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

February 8, 2019 Rehearing Denied April 5, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUTPUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Exhibit 13.1














PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER CERTIFICATION


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350








In connection with this Annual Report of Golden State Petro (IOM I-A) PLC (the "Company") on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") on or about the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Tor Olav Troim, Principal Executive 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, 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.





A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon request.








Date: June 18, 2010








/s/ Tor Olav Troim


Tor Olav Troim


Principal Executive Officer
1 No. CV-02073-13-02

LUFKIN INDUSTRIES, INC., Plaintiff,

v.

INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORP., et al., Defendant. § § § § § § § § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF

ANGELINA COUNTY, TEXAS

159TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NOTICE OF APPEAL

Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Pr ocedure 25.1, defendant International Business

Machines Corporation (“IBM”) hereby gives notice of its intent to appeal. IBM desires to appeal

the trial court’s Final Judgment signed on Sept ember 10, 2015, together with all written orders,

rulings, and rulings by operation of law adverse to IBM, including but not limited to the denial of

IBM’s motions for directed verdict, IBM’s overr uled charge objections, IBM’s denied requests

for inclusion in the charges, denials of IBM’s moti ons to strike expert witnesses, and denials of

IBM’s motions to disregard jury answers and for judgment notwith standing the verd ict. This

appeal is taken from the 159th District Court of Angelina County, Texas, the Honorable Paul

White presiding, and is taken to the Twelfth Court of Appeals in Tyler, Texas and to the Texas

Supreme Court, if necessary. Filed 9/10/2015 11:00:21 AM Reba Squyres, District Clerk Angelina County, Texas By: Robin Crain, Deputy Clerk ACCEPTED 12-15-00223-CV TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS

TYLER, TEXAS 9/10/2015 2:47:22 PM

Pam Estes CLERK2 Respectfully submitted,

YETTER COLEMAN LLP

By: ____________________________ Reagan W. Simpson State Bar No. 18404700 Marc Tabolsky State Bar No. 24037576 909 Fannin, Suite 3600 Houston, Texas 77010 (713) 632-8000 (713) 632-8002 (Fax) rsimpson@yettercoleman.com mtabolsky@yettercoleman.com

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT IBM

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that, on September 10, 2015, this document was served on the following counsel

for plaintiff by electronic means:

Murry B. Cohen mcohen@akingump.com Jim Wetwiska jwetwiska@akingump.com Holli Pryor-Baze hpryorbaze@akingump.com AKIN GUMP STRAUSS HAUER & FELD LLP 1111 Louisiana, 44th Floor Houston, Texas 77002

Scott C. Skelton sskelton@skeltonslusher.com SKELTON SLUSHER BARNHILL WATKINS WELLS 1616 South Chestnut Street Lufkin, Texas 75901

______________________________________ Reagan W. Simpson
Tyrone GRIMES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-1663

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed February 15, 2019

Affirmed.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

BENJAMIN JORDAN, # 878209, )

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) No. 3:04-CV-0949-R

) ECF

GARY JOHNSON, et al., )

Defendants. )

ORDER ACCEPTING THE FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND

RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

The United States Magistrate Judge made findings, conclusions and recommendation in this

case. (Doc. 11.) Plaintiff filed objections, and the District Court has made a de novo review of those

portions of the findings, conclusions and recommendation to which objections were made. The

objections are overruled, and the Court accepts the findings, conclusions and recommendation of

the United States Magistrate Judge. Therefore, this action is dismissed with prejudice.

SO ORDERED this 10th day of August, 2007.

___________________________________

JERRY BUCHMEYER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

I, David A. Fisher, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certifythat: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Qof optionsXpress Holdings, Inc.; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements,and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(c)) for theregistrant and have: 

 

a) Designed such disclosure controlsand procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to bedesigned under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared; 

 

b) [Reserved]

 

c) Evaluated the effectivenessof the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in thisreport our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and 

 

d) Disclosed in this report anychange in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and 

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and Ihave disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee ofregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunction): 

 

a) All significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

 

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date: May 3, 2005

 
|   | /s/ DAVID A. FISHER |
|--------|--------------------------|
|   | Name:                    | David A. Fisher |
|   | Title:                   | *Chief Financial Officer* |
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-6766

HAROLD S. MOSLEY,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

GERALDINE MIRO, Warden, Allendale Correctional

Institution; ROBERT E. WARD, Evans Correctional Institution; MICHAEL MOORE, FormerDirector of SCDC; WILLIAM CATOE, Formerly

Deputy Director of Operations SCDC, current

Director of SCDC,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Charleston. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District

Judge. (CA-99-0530-2-20AJ)

Submitted: September 8, 2000 Decided: September 18, 2000

Before LUTTIG and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Harold S. Mosley, Appellant Pro Se. Paul H. Derrick, JACKSON,

LEWIS, SCHNITZLER & KRUPMAN, Greenville, South Carolina; Vinton

DeVane Lide, VINTON D. LIDE & ASSOCIATES, Lexington, South Carolina, for Appellees.
2

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Harold S. Mosley appeals the district court’s order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1999) complaint. We

have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find

no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of

the district court. See Mosley v. Miro, No. CA-99-0530-2-20AJ

(D.S.C. Mar. 8, 2000). 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.

AFFIRMED
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 

February 2, 2005 

ERRATA

Appeal No. 03-1615 

NTP, INC. V. RESEARCH IN MOTION LTD.

Decided: December 14, 2004 Precedential Opinion 

Please make the following change: 

 Page 54, lines 20-21, delete “under section 271(a)”
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

January 31, 2018

No. 04

- 17

- 00730

- CR

Terrence Jerome BYRD

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 187th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014CR9362W

Honorable Olin B. Strauss, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Bettina J. Williams ’ notification of late record is hereby NOTED.

_________________________________ Karen Angelini, Justice

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

court on this 31st day of January, 2018

.

___________________________________ K eith E. H ottle

Clerk of Court
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AMARILLO DIVISION

_________________________________________

DONALD JOSEPH WEST, §

§

Plaintiff, §

§

v. § 2:04-CV-0091

§

THE STATE OF TEXAS (TDCJ), §

§

Defendant. §

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Plaintiff DONALD JOSEPH WEST, proceeding pro se, has filed suit pursuant to

Title 42, United States Code, Section 1983 complaining against the above-named defendants.

On April 19, 2004, the Court issued a Show Cause Order giving plaintiff fourteen

days in which to respond and show cause why the instant cause should not be dismissed for

plaintiff’s failure to either pay the $150.00 filing fee or submit an Application to Proceed In

Forma Pauperis. The Court also noted therein that it was unclear whether plaintiff was

incarcerated at the time he submitted the complaint and ordered plaintiff to inform the Court

whether he was still confined by the Texas Department of Criminal Justice at the time he mailed

his complaint to the Court.

The response period has expired, and no response has been received from

plaintiff. It appears plaintiff has abandoned his suit and his claims for relief.

It is the conclusion of the United States District Judge that plaintiff has

abandoned this cause and such cause should be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Link v.

Wabash Railroad Co., 370 U.S. 626, 82 S.Ct. 1386, 8 L.Ed.2d 734 (1962) (court possesses

inherent power to dismiss sua sponte for lack of prosecution).

 

 Case 2:04-cv-00091-J-BB Document 6 Filed 05/23/05 Page 1 of 2 PageID 36
2

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:

The referral of the instant cause to the United States Magistrate Judge is hereby

withdrawn.

This Civil Rights Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR

FAILURE TO PROSECUTE.

LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.

The Clerk will mail a copy of this Order to the plaintiff and to any attorney of

record by first class mail.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

ENTERED this 23rd day of May, 2005.

/s/ Mary Lou Robinson 

MARY LOU ROBINSON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

 Case 2:04-cv-00091-J-BB Document 6 Filed 05/23/05 Page 2 of 2 PageID 37