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

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

CECIL LUMONT BRADFORD, )

ID # 31163-177, )

Movant, ) No. 3:05-CV-0667-D

vs. ) No. 3:03-CR-0280-D (01)

)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) 

Respondent. )

ORDER

After reviewing all relevant matters of record in this case, including the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge, in accordance with 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1), the undersigned is of the opinion that the findings and conclusions of the magistrate

judge are correct, and they are adopted as the findings and conclusions of the court. 

For the reasons stated in the findings, conclusions, and recommendation, movant’s April 13,

2009 motion to reopen pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Rule 60(b)(5) and (6) is construed as a successive

motion to vacate filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The clerk of the court is directed to open a new

civil action for administrative purposes only, file the motion to reopen in that action as a § 2255

motion filed April 13, 2009, and, without further judicial action, transfer the new § 2255 action to

the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit as a successive motion to vacate, pursuant

to Henderson v. Haro, 282 F.3d 862, 864 (5th Cir. 2002), and In re Epps, 127 F.3d 364, 365 (5th

Cir. 1997), and statistically close the new civil action.

For purposes of continuity, the clerk shall directly assign the new civil case to the same

district judge and magistrate judge as in Civil Action No. 3:05-CV-0667-D. In addition, a copy of

this order shall be filed in the new case as an order of transfer. 

 

 Case 3:05-cv-00667-D Document 10 Filed 06/02/09 Page 1 of 2 PageID 39
2

On May 29, 2009 movant filed a motion to expedite recommendation of magistrate judge.

Although the motion is not entirely clear, it appears to request that the court act promptly on the

magistrate judge’s recommendation. To the extent it seeks such relief, the motion is denied as moot

because the court is adopting the recommendation today. To the extent the motion seeks such relief,

it is denied.

SO ORDERED.

June 2, 2009.

_________________________________

SIDNEY A. FITZWATER

CHIEF JUDGE

 

 Case 3:05-cv-00667-D Document 10 Filed 06/02/09 Page 2 of 2 PageID 40
# THE STATE OF TEXAS

M A N D A T E

*********************************************

TO THE 258TH DISTRIC T COURT OF TRINITY C OUNTY, GREETING:

Before our Court of Appeals for the 12th Court of Appeals District of Texas, on the 22nd
day of April, 2015 , the cau se upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment between

JAMES SCOTT FRELS , Appellant

NO. 12

- 13

- 00241

- CR; Trial Court No. 9953

Opinion by James T. Worthen, Chief Justice.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

was determined; and therein our said Court made it s order in these words:

“ THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record and briefs filed herein, and the same being considered, it is the opinion of this court that there was no error in the judgment.

It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED th at the judgment of the court

below be in all things affirmed , and that this decision be certified to the court below for

observance. ”

WHEREAS, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of Appeals for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District of Te xas in this behalf, and in all things have it duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.

WITNESS, THE HONORABLE JAMES T. WORTHEN , Chief Justice of our Court of Appeals for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District, with the Seal thereof affixed, at the City of Tyl er, this the 8 th day of December , 2015.

PAM ESTES , CLERK

By:

_______________________________ Chief Deputy Clerk
Case 3:05-cv-00098-N Document 9 Filed 04/28/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 43
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 LYFE Communications, Inc., (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Robert A. Bryson, President and CEO 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:  (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 result of operations of the Company.   Date:August 20, 2012By:/s/Gregory SmithGregory Smith, CEO  Date:August 20, 2012By:/s/Garrett DawGarrett Daw, Executive Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer
Exhibit 32.2
 
 Chief Financial Officer Certification (Section 906)
 
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
 18 U.S.C., SECTION 1350,
 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 (as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002), I, the undersigned Chief Financial Officer of ABCO Energy, Inc., (the “Company”), herby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the Amendment No. 2 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended June 30, 2014 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the registrant and will be retained by it and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
 
 Dated: September 26, 2014ABCO ENERGY, INC./s/ Charles O’DowdCharles O’DowdChief Financial Officer
C.W. v. ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES

CR-16-1331

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

November 8, 2017

Transferred to Ct. of Civ. App.
STATE of Louisiana v. Tavis LEONARD

NO. 2019-KO-0209

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 15, 2019

Denied.
Statement

Dallas P. Tonsager, Board Member

Farm Credit Administration Board Meeting

March 10, 2016

First, I want to thank all the members of the Capital Workgroup, who have worked so hard over 

the years on this very complex subject. I believe this rule is the most challenging regulation that 

the Agency has ever promulgated, and staff has done a remarkably skillful job of developing it.

I fully support this capital rule, which will accomplish a number of benefits for the Farm Credit 

System that will extend to the farmers and ranchers that the System serves. 

First, by conforming our capital requirements to the Basel III guidance, the rule puts FCS 

capital standards on a par with that of the commercial banks, which in turn makes 

System capital more understandable and transparent to investors and should enhance 

the System’s ability to issue debt in the capital markets.

Yet even as this capital rule conforms to Basel III, it makes adjustments where 

necessary to recognize the cooperative structure of the Farm Credit System and its 

limited lending authorities to serve agriculture and rural America. 

The rule not only ensures that System capital will remain strong, but serves to enhance 

the strength of the System’s capital through the use of a leverage ratio and buffers and 

appropriate risk-weighting measures. 

The FCS is well-positioned to adapt to these new capital requirements given the strong 

capital positions that exist throughout the System. As staff has noted, these new 

requirements will not lower the strong capital ratios that all four FCS banks and most 

associations currently enjoy.

There is still much work to be done to train FCA staff, and particularly our examiners, on all 

aspects of this complex rule. But I am confident that this task will be undertaken with the same 

skill and success that produced this challenging rule. I also am confident that our staff will work 

closely with System representatives to help make the transition to these new regulations as 

smooth as possible for System banks and associations.
EXHIBIT 32.2

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, W. Donald Brunson, President of Coastal Bancshares Acquisition Corp. (the “Company”), do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge: 

 

the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act  of 1934; and

 

the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

Date: November 14, 2006

 

/s/ W. Donald Brunson

W. Donald Brunson

President

(Principal Executive Officer)
# C_2017347EN.01001801.xml

| 16.10.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 347/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.10.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 347/18

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from Court of Appeal (Ireland) made on 9 August 2017 — Neculai Tarola v Minister for Social Protection

(Case C-483/17)

(2017/C 347/23)

Language of the case: English

Referring court

Referring court

Court of Appeal

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Neculai Tarola

Applicant:

Defendant: Minister for Social Protection

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Where a citizen of another EU member state after his first twelve months of exercising his right of free movement arrives in the host state and works (otherwise than for a fixed term contract) for a two week period for which he is remunerated and thereafter becomes involuntarily unemployed, does that citizen thereby retain the status of a worker for no less than a further six months for the purposes of Article 7(3)(c) and Article 7(1)(a) of Directive 2004/38/EC (1) such as would entitle him to receive social assistance payments or, as the case may be, social security benefits on the same basis as if he were a resident citizen of the host State?

1

---

(1)  Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC (OJ L 158, p. 77)

1

---
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

TERESA WARD COOPER §

§

Plaintiff, §

§ NO. 3-04-CV-2407-N

VS. § 

§ (Consolidated With: 

CITY OF DALLAS, TEXAS, § No. 3-06-CV-1794-N)

ET AL. §

§

Defendants. §

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

After making an independent review of the pleadings, files and records in this case, and the

Findings and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge dated May 20, 2008, including

de novo review of those matters to which objection was made, the Court finds that the Findings and

Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge are correct and they are accepted as the Findings and

Recommendation of the Court.

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Findings and Recommendation of the United

States Magistrate Judge are accepted.

SO ORDERED.

Signed August 11, 2008.

 _____________________________________

 DAVID C. GODBEY

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Jimmy Korea DAVIS v. STATE

CR-16-0892

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

December 8, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Rafael Alberto LLOVERA, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D18-826

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[February 7, 2019]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
<Page>


INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the use in this Pre-Effective Amendment No. 1 to Registration
Statement No. 333-105261 of Hartford Life and Annuity Insurance Company
Separate Account Ten of our report dated March 26, 2003, relating to the
financial statements of Hartford Life and Annuity Insurance Company, and of
our report dated February 21, 2003, relating to the financial statements of
Hartford Life and Annuity Insurance Company Separate Account Ten, appearing
in the Statement of Additional Information, which is a part of such
Registration Statement, and to the reference to us under the heading
"Independent Public Accountants" in such Statement of Additional Information.

Deloitte & Touche LLP
Hartford, Connecticut
July 31, 2003
EX PARTE Samantha WRIGHT

CR-16-0728

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

October 4, 2017

Habeas corpus pet. denied.
# C_2017168EN.01002401.xml

| 29.5.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 168/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.5.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 168/24

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal da Relação do Porto (Portugal) lodged on 13 March 2017 — Hélder José Cunha Martins v Fundo de Garantia Automóvel

(Case C-131/17)

(2017/C 168/32)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Referring court

Tribunal da Relação do Porto

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Hélder José Cunha Martins, [the party against whom enforcement is sought]

Applicant:

Defendant: Fundo de Garantia Automóvel, [the party seeking enforcement]

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | In the context of an action for damages arising from a road-traffic accident, must a finding of joint and several liability on appeal by a higher court, without recourse being had to the principle of the immediacy of evidence and without all the grounds of defence being available, be considered to have been made in a fair and equitable hearing, as provided for in Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union? |
| --- | --- |

1.

In the context of an action for damages arising from a road-traffic accident, must a finding of joint and several liability on appeal by a higher court, without recourse being had to the principle of the immediacy of evidence and without all the grounds of defence being available, be considered to have been made in a fair and equitable hearing, as provided for in Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union?

| 2. | Is the attachment of goods in enforcement proceedings, without the action for recovery having been heard beforehand, contrary to Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Is the attachment of goods in enforcement proceedings, without the action for recovery having been heard beforehand, contrary to Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union?

---
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA

Present: Judges Bray, Annunziata and Overton

JOURDEAN SARAH LORAH

v. Record No. 1164-96-4 MEMORANDUM OPINION * PER CURIAM ROD HARRIS/L2R DESIGN ASSOCIATES NOVEMBER 26, 1996 AND FIRST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA

FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION (Jourdean Sarah Lorah, pro se , on brief). (Lisa C. Healey; Siciliano, Ellis, Dyer & Boccarosse, on brief), for appellees.

Jordean Sarah Lorah ("claimant") contends that the Workers' Compensation Commission ("commission") erred in denying her application for benefits alleging an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of her employment on February 13, 1992. Claimant makes numerous arguments in her opening brief which are irrelevant to the disposition of this appeal. The dispositive issue is whether the commission erred in finding that the statute of limitations contained in Code § 65.2-601 barred it from considering claimant's application. Upon reviewing the record and the briefs of the parties, we conclude that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we summarily affirm the commission's

decision. Rule 5A:27. Code § 65.2-601 provides that "[t]he right to compensation

* Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not designated for publication.2 under this title shall be forever barred, unless a claim be filed with the Commission within two years after the accident." Claimant alleged that her accident occurred on February 13, 1992. She did not file her application until April 10, 1995, more than two years after the date of her alleged accident. Therefore,

unless the statute of limitations was tolled or the doctrine of estoppel applied, claimant's application was time-barred. Claimant admitted that she did not notify employer of her accident. In addition, employer's representative testified that he did not become aware of claimant's accident until April 1995, after the statute of limitations had expired. Thus, the commission did not err in refusing to apply the tolling provisions contained in Code § 65.2-602 or the doctrine of estoppel to bar employer from raising the statute of limitations. Based upon this record, we cannot say that the commission erred in finding that claimant's application was time-barred. Accordingly, we affirm the commission's decision.

Affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 255 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

119th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 255

 To name the Department of Veterans Affairs community-based outpatient 
    clinic in Lubbock, Texas, as the ``General Bernie Mittemeyer VA 
                               Clinic''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 9, 2025

Mr. Arrington introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To name the Department of Veterans Affairs community-based outpatient 
    clinic in Lubbock, Texas, as the ``General Bernie Mittemeyer VA 
                               Clinic''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. NAME OF DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS COMMUNITY-BASED 
              OUTPATIENT CLINIC, LUBBOCK, TEXAS.

     The Department of Veterans Affairs community-based outpatient 
clinic in Lubbock, Texas, shall after the date of the enactment of this 
Act be known and designated as the ``General Bernie Mittemeyer VA 
Clinic''. Any reference to such clinic in any law, regulation, map, 
document, record, or other paper of the United States shall be 
considered to be a reference to the General Bernie Mittemeyer VA 
Clinic.
                                 <all>
```
Case 3:05-cr-00075-N Document 468 Filed 03/31/06 Page 1 of 1 PageID 1056
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 January 31, 2014

p0127

Order 

Clerk

January 31, 2014

147358(21)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 147358

COA: 311747

Oakland CC: 2009-225938-FH

JASON STEPHEN SZYDLEK,

Defendant-Appellant.

____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s October 28, 

2013 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was 

entered erroneously.
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 9 (Wednesday, January 15, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3977-3978]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-00790]

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

POSTAL SERVICE

Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and USPS 
Ground Advantage[supreg] Negotiated Service Agreement

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 15, 2025.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
January 6, 2025, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS 
Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract

[[Page 3978]]

1231 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at 
www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-1048, K2025-1047.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2025-00790 Filed 1-14-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection withthe Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Comstock Homebuilding Companies, Inc. (the“Company”) for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), each of ChristopherClemente, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company and BruceLabovitz, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, to our bestknowledge and belief, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that

 

(1)                                  TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

 

(2)                                  Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date: August 9,  2005 | /s/ Christopher  Clemente             |   |
|-----------------------|---------------------------------------|--------|
|                  | Christopher Clemente                  |
|                  | Chairman and  Chief Executive Officer |
|                  |                                  |
| Date: August 9,  2005 | /s/ Bruce J.  Labovitz                |   |
|                  | Bruce J.  Labovitz                    |
|                  | Chief Financial  Officer              |

 

A signed originalof this written statement required by Section 906, or other documentauthenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appearsin typed form within the electronic version of this written statement requiredby Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained bythe Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or itsstaff upon request.

 

----