alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

In re JOSE ANTONIO RODRIGUEZ,

Case No. 16-cv-07164-YGR (PR)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE

This action was opened on December 15, 2016 when the Court received from Plaintiff Jose 

Antonio Rodriguez a letter addressed to the Clerk of the Court expressing displeasure with the

conditions of his confinement at the Department of State Hospitals - Atascadero in Atascadero, 

California.

In two notices, both dated December 15, 2016, the Clerk directed Plaintiff to complete a 

civil rights complaint form and an in forma pauperis (“IFP”) application, and told him that he 

must complete these documents within twenty-eight days or his action would be dismissed. The 

Clerk sent Plaintiff a blank civil rights complaint form as well as a prisoner’s IFP application. 

More than twenty-eight days have passed, and Plaintiff has not filed the necessary 

documents or otherwise communicated with the Court. 

Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Clerk shall close 

the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:

______________________________________

YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS

United States District Court Judge

February 3, 2017

Case 4:16-cv-07164-YGR Document 4 Filed 02/03/17 Page 1 of 1
Jaime MEDRANO, et ux., petitioners, v. FLAGSTAR BANK, et al.

No. 12-1205.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 10, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Hugh Edward WALTON, petitioner, v. COLORADO.

No. 12-9084.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Colorado denied.
**Exhibit 34.2**

 

**REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

Discover Products Inc. 

West Valley City, UT

We have examined management’s assertion, included in the accompanying Management’s Assertion on Compliance with Regulation ABCriteria, that Discover Products Inc. (“DPI”) complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Regulation AB for the asset-backed securities transactions involving creditcard receivables conducted by Discover Card Master Trust I and Discover Card Execution Note Trust (the “Platform”) as of and for the one-month period ended December 31, 2012, and as of and for the year ended December 31, 2013,excluding the criteria set forth in Items 1122 (d)(1)(i), (d)(1)(iii), (d)(1)(iv), (d)(2)(ii), (d)(2)(iii), (d)(2)(iv), (d)(2)(v), (d)(2)(vi), (d)(2)(vii), (d)(3)(i), (d)(3)(ii), (d)(3)(iii), (d)(3)(iv), (d)(4)(i), (d)(4)(ii), (d)(4)(iii),(d)(4)(v), (d)(4)(x), (d)(4)(xi), (d)(4)(xii), (d)(4)(xiii), and (d)(4)(xv), which management has determined are not applicable to the activities performed by DPI with respect to the Platform. Appendix A to management’s assertion identifies theindividual asset backed-transactions defined by management as constituting the Platform. Management is responsible for DPI’s compliance with the servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management’s assertionabout DPI’s compliance with the servicing criteria based on our examination. 

Our examination was conducted in accordance withattestation standards issued by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, as adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about DPI’scompliance with the applicable servicing criteria, including tests on a sample basis of the servicing activities related to the Platform, determining whether DPI performed those selected activities in compliance with the servicing criteria duringthe specified period, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our procedures were limited to selected servicing activities performed by DPI during the period covered by this report and, accordingly, suchsamples may not have included servicing activities related to each asset-backed transaction included in the Platform. Further, an examination is not designed to detect noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred prior to the periodspecified above that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by DPI during the period covered by this report. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide alegal determination on DPI’s compliance with the servicing criteria. 

In our opinion, management’s assertion that DPI complied withthe aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of and for the one-month period ended December 31, 2012, and as of and for the year ended December 31, 2013 for the Platform is fairly stated, in all material respects. 

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP 

Chicago,IL 

March 21, 2014
EXHIBIT 32.1


Certification of Principal Executive Officer


Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350


(Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)








I, C. Eugene Gronning, Chief Executive Officer, and Principal Accounting Officer, of PMI Construction Group (the "Registrant") 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 the best of our knowledge, based upon a review of the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period December 31, 2009 of the Registrant, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"):





(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and


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





Dated:  April 9, 2010                                   By: /s/ C. Eugene Gronning


C. Eugene Gronning


Chief Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer





* A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to PMI Construction Group and will be retained by PMI Construction Group and furnished to the Securities Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 89 (Tuesday, May 9, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 24658]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-11410]



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


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Advisory Council on Unemployment Compensation; Notice of Hearings

    Summary: The Advisory Council on Unemployment Compensation (ACUC) 
was established in accordance with the provisions of the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act on January 24, 1992 (57 FR 4007, Feb. 3, 1992). 
Public Law 102-164, the Emergency Unemployment Compensation Act of 
1991, mandated the establishment of the Council to evaluate the overall 
unemployment insurance program, including the purpose, goals, counter-
cyclical effectiveness, coverage, benefit adequacy, trust fund 
solvency, funding of State administrative costs, administrative 
efficiency, and other aspects of the program, and to make 
recommendations for improvement.
    Time and Place: The hearings will be held from 1:30 p.m. to 4:30 
p.m. on May 31 at the Madison Hotel, 15th & M Streets, N.W., 
Washington, D.C.

Public Participation

    The hearings will be open to the public. Seating will be available 
to the public on a first-come, first-served basis. Seats will be 
reserved for the media. Individuals with disabilities in need of 
special accommodations should contact the Designated Federal Official 
(DFO), listed below, at least 7 days prior to the hearing.

Submitting Written Statements

    Individuals or organizations wishing to submit written statements 
should send fifteen (15) copies to Esther R. Johnson, DFO, Advisory 
Council on Unemployment Compensation, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 
Constitution Avenue, N.W., Room S-4231, Washington, D.C. 20210. 
Statements must be received not later than May 22, 1995.

Presenting Oral Statements

    Individuals or organizations wishing to present oral statements 
should send a written request to Ellen S. Calhoun, Advisory Council on 
Unemployment Compensation, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution 
Avenue, N.W., Room S-4206, Washington, D.C. 20210. Requests for 
presenting oral statements should indicate a daytime phone number. Time 
slots will be assigned on a first-come, first-served basis. All such 
requests must be received not later than May 22, 1995.
    For Additional Information Contact: Esther R. Johnson, DFO, 
Advisory Council on Unemployment Compensation, U.S. Department of 
Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Room S-4231, Washington, D.C. 
20210. (202) 219-7831. (This is not a toll-free number.)

    Signed at Washington, D.C., this 3rd day of May 1995.
Doug Ross,
Assistant Secretary of Labor.
[FR Doc. 95-11410 Filed 5-8-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
Omar BLANCO, petitioner, v. Michael D. CREWS, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, et al.

No. 12-8013.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
Jerry NEVES, petitioner, v. Jeffrey BEARD, Secretary, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

No. 12-9292.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 22, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Filed 6 / 23 / 14 P. v. F leming CA

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b ). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.111.5.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respon dent,

v.

CONNIE K. FLEMING,

Defendant and Appellant. 2d Crim. No. B253656

(Super. Ct. No. 1440592)

(Santa Barbara County)

Connie K. Fleming appeals from the judgment entered after a jury convicted

her of misdemeanor assault (Pen. Code, § 240). 1 The trial court sentenced appellant to 180

days county jail with credit for time served and ordered appellant to pay a $140 fine and a

$165 restitution fine/fee. The trial court exonerated $265 of the fines/fees.

We appointed coun sel to represent appellant in this appeal. After counsel’s

examination of the record, she filed an opening brief in which no issues were raised.

On May 8, 2014, we advised appellant that she had 30 days within which to

personally submit any contentions or issues s he wished us to consider. No response has

been received.

1 Unless otherwise stated, all statutory references are to the Penal Code.2 We have reviewed the entire record and are satisfied that appellant's attorney

has fully complied with her responsibilities and that no arguable issues exist. ( People v.

Wende (1979) 2 5 Cal.3d 436, 443; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 126.)

The judgment is affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

YEGAN, J.

We concur:

GILBERT, P.J.

PERREN, J.3 Brian E. Hill, Judge

Superior Court County of Santa Barbara

__________________ ____________

Sarah G. LoPresti, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant

and Appellant.

No. appearance for Respondent.
Jenifer A. LOCKWOOD, petitioner, v. FLORIDA.

No. 12-7498.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2013.

*1857Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Florida denied.
IN RE: Jack F. OWENS, Jr.

NO. 2019-OB-0985

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 26, 2019

*869ORDER

The Office of Disciplinary Counsel ("ODC") filed formal charges against respondent, alleging that he failed to file federal tax returns on behalf of his law firm and failed to remit funds withheld from his employees' paychecks to the federal government. Respondent now seeks to permanently resign from the practice of law in lieu of discipline. The ODC has concurred in respondent's petition.

Having considered the Petition for Permanent Resignation from the Practice of Law filed by Jack F. Owens, Jr., Louisiana Bar Roll number 10254, and the concurrence thereto filed by the ODC,

IT IS ORDERED that the request of Jack F. Owens, Jr. for permanent resignation in lieu of discipline be and is hereby granted, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 20.1 and Rule 5.5 of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Jack F. Owens, Jr. shall be permanently prohibited from practicing law in Louisiana or in any other jurisdiction in which he is admitted to the practice of law; shall be permanently prohibited from seeking readmission to the practice of law in this state or in any other jurisdiction in which he is admitted; and shall be permanently prohibited from seeking admission to the practice of law in any jurisdiction.
Oscar MONTANO, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-9600.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Peter Allen ANDERSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D19-200

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed April 30, 2019 Rehearing Denied May 31, 2019 Rehearing Denied July 1, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Stephen LAW, petitioner, v. Alfred H. SIEGEL.

No. 12-8451.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 1, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
**EXHIBIT 31**

**CERTIFICATIONS**

I, Ron Hooper, certifythat: 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Sabine Royalty Trust,for which Southwest Bank acts as Trustee; 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered 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, distributable income and changes in trust corpus of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(c)and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)), or for causing such controls and proceduresto be established and maintained, for the registrant and I have: 

a) Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under my supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

b) Designed such internal controlover financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under my supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements forexternal purposes; 

c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report my conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 

d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurredduring the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and 

5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,to the registrant’s auditors: 

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date: November 4, 2016
Billy Ray IRICK, petitioner, v. Derrick D. SCHOFIELD, Commissioner, Tennessee Department of Correction, et al.

No. 12-8293.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Tennessee, Middle Division, denied.
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA

No. 16-0624 

Filed January 11, 2017 

FIRST AMERICAN BANK and C.J. LAND, L.L.C., 

 Plaintiffs-Appellees, 

vs. 

FOBIAN FARMS, INC., HOOVER HIGHWAY 

BUSINESS PARK, INC., and GATEWAY, LTD., 

 Defendants-Appellants. 

________________________________________________________________ 

 Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Ian K. Thornhill, 

Judge. 

 Fobian Farms, Inc. challenges the district court’s ruling on remand arguing 

it abused its discretion in imposing sanctions. WRIT ANNULLED. 

 Gregg A. Geerdes, Iowa City, for appellants. 

 Mark A. Roberts, Lynn W. Hartman, and Dawn M. Gibson of Simmons 

Perrine Moyer Bergman P.L.C., Cedar Rapids, for appellees. 

 Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Tabor and Mullins, JJ. 

1 of 4

ELECTRONICALLY FILED JAN 11, 2017 CLERK OF SUPREME COURT
2

MULLINS, Judge.

 This case was previously before this court and was remanded to the 

district court to make required specific findings and reconsider the amount of the 

sanctions. See First Am. Bank v. Fobian Farms, Inc., No. 14-0309, 2015 WL 

3613379, at *12 (Iowa Ct. App. June 10, 2015). Fobian Farms, Inc. challenges 

the district court’s ruling on remand arguing it abused its discretion in several 

respects.1 

 “A district court’s order imposing sanctions under our rules of civil 

procedure is reviewable for an abuse of discretion.” Everly, 774 N.W.2d at 492. 

An abuse occurs “when the district court exercises its discretion on grounds or 

for reasons clearly untenable or to an extent clearly unreasonable.” Schettler v. 

Iowa Dist. Ct., 509 N.W.2d 459, 464 (Iowa 1993). On our review for an abuse of 

discretion, we will correct erroneous applications of law. Weigel v. Weigel, 467 

N.W.2d 277, 280 (Iowa 1991). 

 On remand, the district court entered an order directing the parties to 

submit briefs on the remaining issues. After the parties submitted their briefs, the 

court wrote a thorough opinion identifying and addressing the issues. The court 

showed it exercised its discretion by considering all the necessary factors. The 

reasons for its conclusions are not untenable and are not clearly unreasonable. 

We find no erroneous applications of law. Accordingly, we find the district court 

 

1

 Fobian Farms filed an appeal. “The proper means to review a district court’s order 

imposing sanctions is by writ of certiorari.” Everly v. Knoxville Cmty. Sch. Dist., 774 

N.W.2d 488, 492 (Iowa 2009). Thus, we treat this appeal as a petition for a writ of 

certiorari. See id. 

2 of 4
3

did not abuse its discretion. We annul the writ without further opinion. See Iowa 

Ct. R. 21.26(1)(d), (e). 

WRIT ANNULLED. 

3 of 4
State of Iowa Courts

Case Number Case Title

16-0624 First American Bank v. Fobian Farms

Electronically signed on 2017-01-11 09:27:42

4 of 4
III 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 749 

Recognizing the 10-year anniversary of the tragic attack that took place 

at the Sikh Temple of Wisconsin on August 5, 2012, and honoring 

the memory of those who died in the attack. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

AUGUST 6, 2022 

Ms. BALDWIN (for herself and Mr. JOHNSON) submitted the following 

resolution; which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing the 10-year anniversary of the tragic attack 

that took place at the Sikh Temple of Wisconsin on 

August 5, 2012, and honoring the memory of those who 

died in the attack. 

Whereas the freedom of religion is protected in the Constitution, and no religious institution should be subject to violence, hate, intolerance, or religious and racial discrimination; 

Whereas, on Sunday, August 5, 2012, a shooting took place 

that resulted in the death of 7 worshipers who were at 

the Sikh Temple of Wisconsin, a gurdwara in Oak Creek, 

Wisconsin; 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•SRES 749 ATS 

Whereas the attack occurred as members of the congregation 

prepared a free community meal served to all 

congregants arriving for Sunday services; 

Whereas several worshipers were injured, including a responding officer, Lieutenant Brian Murphy, who was 

shot 15 times at close range; 

Whereas Lieutenant Brian Murphy, Officer Savan Lenda, 

and all the first responders to the gurdwara in Oak 

Creek demonstrated great courage in their quick response 

to the shooting, saving countless lives; 

Whereas the Oak Creek shooting was a senseless act of violence and tragedy that should never befall any house of 

worship; 

Whereas the Sikh community responded to the shooting in 

Oak Creek with compassion and stayed true to the Sikh 

principle of chardi kala, which roughly translates to ‘‘relentless optimism’’; 

Whereas, 10 years later, the effects of this shooting are still 

being felt and will be felt for years to come; and 

Whereas the community of Oak Creek will continue to overcome the tragedy and become stronger than before: Now, 

therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) condemns in the strongest possible terms 

3 the horrific attack that occurred at the Sikh Temple 

4 of Wisconsin on August 5, 2012; 

5 (2) honors the memories of Paramjit Kaur 

6 Saini, Suveg Singh Khattra, Satwant Singh Kaleka, 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•SRES 749 ATS 

1 Ranjit Singh, Sita Singh, Prakash Singh, and Baba 

2 Punjab Singh who died in the attack; 

3 (3) offers its heartfelt condolences to the fami4 lies, friends, and loved ones of those who died in the 

5 attack; 

6 (4) recognizes the Sikh community for dem7 onstrating unwavering courage, strength, and resil8 ience in response to the attack; 

9 (5) applauds the bravery of the first responders 

10 who prevented the gunman from potentially taking 

11 more lives and quickly treated those who were 

12 wounded; and 

13 (6) condemns intolerance, including religious 

14 and racial discrimination, and calls for unwavering 

15 resolve to prevent and seek justice for acts of hate 

16 and terrorism. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB