alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Matthew Louis JOHNSON, petitioner, v. CALIFORNIA.

No. 12-7432.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2013.

Petition for rehearing denied.
Paula D. GEORGE, petitioner, v. Ray MABUS, Secretary of the Navy.

No. 12-8793.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
```
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 86 (Thursday, May 4, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22093-22094]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10925]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY

Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition; 
Determination

    Notice is hereby given of the following determination: Pursuant to 
the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 
985, 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978 (43 F.R. 
13359, March 29, 1978), and Delegation Order No. 85-5 of June 27, 1985 
(50 F.R. 27393, July 2, 1985), I hereby determine that the objects in 
the exhibit, ``Claude Monet 1840-1926'' (see list\1\) imported from 
abroad for the temporary exhibition without profit within the United 
States, are of cultural significance. These objects are imported 
pursuant to loan agreements with the foreign lenders. I also determine 
that the temporary exhibition of the objects at The Art Institute of 
Chicago, Chicago, Illinois from on or about July 14, 1995, to on or 
about November 26, 1995, is in the national interest.

    \1\A copy of this list may be obtained by contacting Ms. Neila 
Sheahan of the Office of the General Counsel of USIA. The telephone 
number is 202/619-5030, and the address is Room 700, U.S. 
Information Agency, 301 4th Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20547.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Public notice of this determination is ordered to be published in 
the Federal Register.

    [[Page 22094]] Dated: April 28, 1995.
Les Jin,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 95-10925 Filed 5-3-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8230-01-M
```
118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 120 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 

2 concurring), 

3 SECTION 1. USE OF EMANCIPATION HALL FOR A CERE4 MONY AS PART OF THE UNVEILING OF THE 

5 STATUE OF JOHNNY CASH. 

6 (a) AUTHORIZATION.—Emancipation Hall in the 

7 Capitol Visitor Center is authorized to be used on Sep8 tember 24, 2024, for a ceremony as part of the unveiling 

2 

•HCON 120 EH 

1 of the statue of Johnny Cash, provided by the State of 

2 Arkansas. 

3 (b) PREPARATIONS.—Physical preparations for the 

4 ceremony described in subsection (a) shall be carried out 

5 in accordance with such conditions as the Architect of the 

6 Capitol may prescribe. 

Passed the House of Representatives July 23, 2024. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 120 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Authorizing the use of Emancipation Hall in the 

vided by the State of Arkansas. the unveiling of the statue of Johnny Cash, proCapitol Visitor Center for a ceremony as part of
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Winthrop
Residential Associates III, A Limited Partnership and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1

       
<S>                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                    3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                       1,469,000
<SECURITIES>                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                         0
<INVENTORY>                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                     0
<PP&E>                       4,974,000
<DEPRECIATION>              (2,928,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>               3,701,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                0
<BONDS>                      2,519,000
<COMMON>                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                0
<PREFERRED>                          0
<OTHER-SE>                     865,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY> 3,701,000
<SALES>                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>               295,000
<CGS>                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                  228,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              51,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 16,000
<INCOME-TAX>                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             16,000
<DISCONTINUED>                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                      0
<CHANGES>                            0
<NET-INCOME>                    16,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                      .60
<EPS-DILUTED>                      .60
        


</TABLE>
Carol Johnene MORRIS, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR the DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

No. 12M129.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 3, 2013.

Motion to direct the Clerk to file a petition for writ of certiorari out of time denied.
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15**  **- 7397** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. TONY ALFORENZO WALKER , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Norfolk
. Arenda L. Wright Allen , District Judge. ( 2:93

- cr - 00084

- AWA

- 1 ; 2:98

- cv - 01415

- JCC )

Submitted : December 15, 2015 Decided: December 18, 2015

Before GREGORY and FLOYD , Circuit Judges , and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge
.
Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Tony Alforenzo Walker , Appellant Pro Se. Benjamin L. Hatch, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding pr ecedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Tony Alforenzo Walker seeks to appeal the district court ’ s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for reconsideration of the district court ’ s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 ( 2012 ) motion. The ord er is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (B) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “ a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. ” 28 U.S. C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012)
. When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong.
S lack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutio nal right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Walker has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We deny Walker’s motion for recons ideration. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately3 presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
Terron D. RAWLS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D19-750

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed June 25, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Jamal BENNETT, petitioner, v. ILLINOIS.

No. 12-1149.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 28, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, denied.
Vestalia AYLSWORTH, Appellant, v. MUTINY ON THE BAY CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., Appellee.

No. 3D18-2052

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed June 26, 2019

Aylsworth & Aylsworth, and Vestalia Aylsworth, Miami, for appellant.

Glausier Knight, PLLC, and Charles Evans Glausier, and Melissa J. Knight, and Stan Rowe (Tampa), for appellee.

Before EMAS, C.J., and FERNANDEZ, and MILLER, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. *See**Deutsche Bank Nat'l Tr. Co. v. de Brito*, 235 So. 3d 972, 975 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) ("The foundation for admission of a business record may be established by a records custodian or other qualified witness, and that witness authenticating the records need not be the person who actually prepared the business records. The witness just needs to be well enough acquainted with the activity to testify that the successor business relies on those records, and that the circumstances indicate the records are trustworthy.") (internal citations omitted) (citing *Bank of N.Y. v. Calloway*, 157 So. 3d 1064 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) ; *Nationstar Mortg., LLC v. Berdecia*, 169 So. 3d 209, 216 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015) ; *Cayea v. CitiMortgage, Inc.*, 138 So. 3d 1214, 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) ); *Progressive Express Ins. Co. v. Camillo*, 80 So. 3d 394, 402 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) ("Proof of mailing of a document to the correct address creates a presumption that the item mailed was, in fact, received.") (citation omitted); *Berwick v. Prudential Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co.*, 436 So. 2d 239, 240 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983) ("It is presumed that mail properly addressed, stamped and mailed was received by the addressee.") (citing *Brown v. Giffen Indus., Inc.*, 281 So. 2d 897 (Fla. 1973) ; *Milros-Sans Souci, Inc. v. Dade Cty.*, 296 So. 2d 545 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974) ); *see also**Allstate Ins. Co. v. Eckert*, 472 So. 2d 807, 809 (Fla 4th DCA 1985) (holding that where "no credible evidence *782sufficient to sustain a finding of the nonexistence of the presumed fact was introduced, the trier of fact was required to assume the existence thereof") (citing § 90.302, Fla. Stat.).
Jason Martinez VARGAS, petitioner, v. Tim VIRGA, Warden.

No. 12-8666.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
ATLANTIC MARINE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., petitioner, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR The WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS, et al.

No. 12-929.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 1, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit granted.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TETYANA DORSANEO,

Plaintiff,

v.

EDWARD MATTHEW DORSANEO,

Defendant.

Case No. 17-cv-00765-VC 

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO 

DISMISS, DENYING SANCTIONS, AND 

SETTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT 

SCHEDULE

Re: Dkt. Nos. 69, 73, 78, 79

1. Edward Dorsaneo's motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 69) is denied. The United States is 

not a necessary party to this action simply because of the chance that Tetyana could apply for 

public benefits for the same time period for which she is seeking damages from Edward. There 

is no evidence that the United States government has sought reimbursement from Edward on this

basis or that Edward faces any actual risk of incurring multiple obligations to the United States 

government and Tetyana on these grounds. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 19(a); see also White v. Univ. of 

Cal., 765 F.3d 1010, 1026 (9th Cir. 2014). It also bears noting that Edward failed to file his 

motion before the deadline for dispositive motions. The Court could sanction Edward and his 

counsel for failing to meet this deadline, particularly since Edward's counsel has already been 

warned that he must do a better job of following the rules. However, because it is three days 

before Christmas, the Court will simply give one more warning: Edward and his counsel will be 

sanctioned if they do not follow the rules, including this Court's standing orders, going forward.

2. Tetyana's motion for summary judgment will be heard on February 1, 2018. Tetyana's 

brief in support of her motion for summary judgment is due on January 4, 2018. Edward's 

response is due January 18, 2018. Tetyana's reply is due January 25, 2018.
2

3. Edward's request for sanctions (Dkt. No. 78) is denied, although counsel for Tatyana 

is also warned that any future failure to comply with rules or deadlines in this case will likely 

result in sanctions. Edward's request for judicial notice (Dkt. No. 79) is denied without prejudice 

to being renewed along with his opposition to Tetyana's summary judgment motion.

4. The pretrial conference and trial dates are vacated. The Court will set new dates for 

the pretrial conference and trial, if necessary, after the summary judgment motion is heard.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 22, 2017

______________________________________

VINCE CHHABRIA

United States District Judge
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule  contains summary financial  information  extracted from Form 10-Q
for the three months ended March 31,1999 for May Drilling Partnership 1983-1 and
is qualified in its entirety by reference to such Form 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000711308
<NAME>                        May Drilling Partnership 1983-1
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                         112
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  40
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         515
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 669
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          0
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   669
<SALES>                                        53
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               55
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  9
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                17
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            17
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   17
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
        


</TABLE>
Bernard JACOBS, III, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-2982

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 15, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Tommy BLASH, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D19-0738

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed June 5, 2019.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Charles A. FIELDS, petitioner, v. David C. MILLER, Warden.

No. 12-8480.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 1, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.
Summary of Compensation Arrangements for Patrick J. O'Malley



 EXHIBIT 10.25 
 Summary of Compensation Arrangements for Patrick J. O’Malley 
 The following is a
description of the compensation arrangements for Patrick J. O’Malley, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Seagate Technology (the “Company”). This description is provided pursuant to Paragraph 10(iii) to
Item 601(b) of Regulation S-K, which requires a written description of a compensatory arrangement when no formal document contains the compensation information. 
 On April 24, 2008, the Company’s Board of Directors appointed Patrick J. O’Malley to serve as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, effective August 25, 2008. Upon commencement of
his service as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Mr. O’Malley’s annual base salary was increased to $490,000, with a bonus at target of 100% of his base salary. 
 Consistent with the temporary salary reductions announced by the Company and disclosed in the Company’s Forms 8-K filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on January 14, 2009 and January 21, 2009, Mr. O’Malley’s base salary was reduced by 25%, effective February 2, 2009.
Travis JOHNSON, petitioner, v. FLORIDA.

No. 12-8144.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District, denied.
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  In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended February 28, 2009 of Sparking Events, Inc, a Nevada corporation (the Company), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Annual Report), I, Adam Santos, Chairman, President and Chief Financial 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 Annual Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and  2. The information contained in this Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.   /s/ Adam Santos ------------------------------ Adam Santos  President, Secretary Treasurer, Principal Executive Officer, Principal Financial Officer and Director  Date:  May 29, 2009
ex10-5.htm


    Exhibit
10.5

     

     

    
       

       

      EXERCISE
OF OPTION TO EXTEND AND

      AMENDMENT NO. 1

      TO

      CHARTER
PARTY

      DATED
OCTOBER 6, 2005

      (THE
“CHARTERPARTY”)

      BETWEEN

      CHRIS
TANKER CORPORATION (THE “OWNERS”)

      AND

      DHT CHRIS
VLCC CORP. (THE “CHARTERERS”)

      FOR THE
VESSEL

      OVERSEAS
CHRIS

       

      Pursuant
to clause 99 of the Charterparty, the Charterers hereby declare, as of November
26, 2008, the exercise of the first 12 months of the option period which shall
commence on October 17, 2011 at 0001 hours GMT and end on October 16, 2012 at
2400 hours GMT (the “Option
Period”).

       

      As of the
date of this agreement, the Owners and the Charterers hereby amend the terms of
the Charterparty as follows:

       

      (1)
Notwithstanding clause 99, the rate during the Option Period shall, at the
option of the Charterers, be:

      


      
        
          	 
      	
                  a)

                	
                  usd
      38,500 per day;
      or

                
	 
      	 
      	 
      
	 
      	
                  b)

                	
                  the
      market rate as determined by the Association of Shipbrokers Agents and
      Agents Tanker Broker Panel plus five percent provided, however, that
      the rate payable during the Option Period shall never be less than usd
      33,500 per
      day.

                


        

      

      


      (2)
Except as expressly amended by this agreement, the terms and conditions of the
Charterparty remain unchanged and in full force and effect including, without
limitation, the profit sharing arrangement between the Owners and the
Charterers.

       

      
         

        
          January
15, 2009

           

          
            
              
                	For Chris
      Tanker Corporation	 	 	For
      DHT Chris VLCC Corp.	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	
                        By: 
      /s/ Ole Jacob Diesen  

                      	 	 	
                        By: 
      /s/ Mats Berglund

                      	 
	
                        Name: 
      Ole Jacob Diesen

                      	 	 	
                        Name: 
      Mats Berglund

                      	 
	
                        Title:    Vice
      President

                      	 	 	
                        Title:   
      Senior Vice President
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

PRITAM RAJ-SHARM KANDEL,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 237 MAL 2023

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 5th day of March, 2024, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
---

Exhibit 99.10

CONSENT OF MINING PLUS PERU S.A.C. To:

   United States Securities and Exchange Commission Washington, D.C. 20549Alberta Securities CommissionBritish Columbia Securities CommissionOntario Securities CommissionRio Alto Mining Limited
  Ladies and Gentlemen: Re:

   Technical report entitled "La Arena Project, Peru", effective December 31st, 2013 (the "Report" prepared for Rio Alto Mining Limited (the "Company")
 We do hereby consent to the filing of the written disclosure regarding the technical report entitled "La Arena Project, Peru Technical Report (NI 43-10 I)" with an effective date December 31, 2013 and dated March 28th, 2014 (the "Technical Report") prepared for Rio Alto Mining Limited ("Rio Alto") in compliance with National Instrument 43-101 - Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects ("NI 43-101") by Ian Dreyer, of MIC S.A.C. ("MIC"), Enrique Garay, of Rio Alto Mining Limited ("Rio Alto"), by Marek Mroczek, of Mining Plus ('Mining Plus"), by Greg Lane, of Ausenco ("Ausenco"), . by Mark Smith, of RRD International Corp. ("RDD"), by Linton Kirk, of Kirk Mining Consultants ("Kirk"), and by Chris Kaye, of MQes ("MQes") and of extracts from or a summary of the technical report and of certain mineral resource or reserve estimates and other information pertaining to the project, the use of our name in the Company's Annual Information Form for the fiscal year ended December 31, 20 I3 (the "AIF") and to being named in the AIF. The undersigned further acknowledges that the AlF will be filed as an Exhibit to the Company's Annual Report on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 (the "Form 40-F") and consents to being named in the Form 40-F and authorize the use of the information represented therein relating to the Report. DATED the 28th day of March, 2014 By:

   /s/ Paul MurphyCompany: MINING PLUS PERU S.A.C.Name: Paul MurphyTitle: General Manager


---
Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 39 Filed 03/12/17 Page 1 of 2

3/14/2017 03/12/2017

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Susan Y. Soong Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 48 Filed 03/14/17 Page 1 of 2
Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 39 Filed 03/12/17 Page 2 of 2 Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 48 Filed 03/14/17 Page 2 of 2