alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6216
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DEWAYNE ANDERSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, District Judge. (1:06-cr-00020-IMK-JSK-8) Submitted: May 22, 2008 Decided: May 29, 2008 Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dewayne Anderson, Appellant Pro Se. Zelda Elizabeth Wesley, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Clarksburg, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Dewayne Anderson appeals the district court’s order denying his second motion for relief from judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(4). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Anderson , No. 1:06-cr-00020-IMK-JSK-8 (N.D.W. Va. Jan. 16, 2008). We also deny the motion for bail or release pending appeal as moot. 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
EX-35.2
(logo) MORGAN STANLEY
CREDIT CORPORATION

Douglas J. Bush
Senior Vice President



Officer's Certificate


Pursuant to the Servicing Agreement between Morgan Stanley Credit Corporation,
formerly known as Morgan Stanley Dean Witter Credit Corporation, as seller and
servicer (referred to herein in such capacity as the "Servicer"), and Morgan
Stanley Mortgage Trust 2006-5AR, 2006-6AR, 2006-7, 2006-8AR, 2006-11, 2007-12,
2007-13, 2007-14AR, 2007-15AR the undersigned, hereby states that:

(1) A review of the activities of the Servicer and of its performance under the
Servicing Agreement during the calendar year ended December 31, 2007 has been
made under my supervision; and

(2) To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has
fulfilled all its obligations under the Agreement throughout such period.



MORGAN STANLEY
CREDIT CORPORATION


By /s/ Douglas J. Bush
Douglas J. Bush

Title Senior Vice President

Dated as of December 31, 2007



75 N. Fairway Drive, Vernon Hills, Illinois 60061 Tel (847)918-3016
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

BRIAN BYRNE,

Plaintiff,

v.

NANCY A. BERRYHILL,

Defendant.

Case No. 17-cv-00759-WHO 

REFERRAL FOR PURPOSE OF 

DETERMINING RELATIONSHIP

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 3-12(c), the above-entitled case is hereby REFERRED, to the 

Honorable Joseph C. Spero for consideration of whether the case is related to Byrne v. Colvin, 13-

cv-4720.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 23, 2017

______________________________________

WILLIAM H. ORRICK

United States District Judge

Case 3:17-cv-00759-JCS Document 8 Filed 02/23/17 Page 1 of 1
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

FAST TRAK INVESTMENT COMPANY, 

LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

RICHARD P SAX, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 4:17-cv-00257-KAW 

ORDER GRANTING TELEPHONIC 

APPEARANCE

Re: Dkt. No. 47

Plaintiff’s motion to appear telephonically at the case management conference on August 

29, 2017 at 1:30 P.M. is GRANTED. 

Counsel shall comply with the Court’s Standing Order on Procedures for Telephonic 

Appearances, available online at http://cand.uscourts.gov/kaworders. This includes personally 

arranging the telephonic appearance with CourtCall—a paid, private service—in advance of the 

hearing date.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 25, 2017

______________________________________

KANDIS A. WESTMORE

United States Magistrate Judge
Why It’s Important to Cool Food Properly Why It’s Important to Cool Food Properly 

Covered/stacked pans 

of food are still 78. F 

after 24 hours.

Proper cooling methods in Placing food in shallow, 

ice baths, under refriger

 Separating food into sm

under refrigeration Using rapid cooling equ

 Stirring the food in a con

in an ice water bath

 Other eff ective methods

Protect People Everywhere.Cool Food Properly.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 17 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 17

Expressing the sense of Congress that the Federal Government should not 
 impose any restrictions on the export of crude oil or other petroleum 
                               products.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 17, 2023

 Mr. Guthrie submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
            referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Expressing the sense of Congress that the Federal Government should not 
 impose any restrictions on the export of crude oil or other petroleum 
                               products.

Whereas the United States has enjoyed a renaissance in energy production, with 
        the expansion of domestic crude oil and other petroleum product 
        production contributing to enhanced energy security and significant 
        economic benefits to the national economy;
Whereas, in 2015, Congress recognized the need to adapt to changing crude oil 
        market conditions and repealed all restrictions on the export of crude 
        oil on a bipartisan basis;
Whereas lifting the restrictions on crude oil exports encouraged additional 
        domestic energy production, created American jobs and economic 
        development, and allowed the United States to emerge as the leading oil 
        producer in the world;
Whereas, in 2019, the United States became a net exporter of petroleum products 
        for the first time since 1952, and the reliance of the United States on 
        foreign imports of petroleum products has declined to historic lows; and
Whereas free trade, open markets, and competition have contributed to the rise 
        of the United States as a global energy superpower: Now, therefore, be 
        it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of Congress that the Federal Government should not 
impose--
            (1) overly restrictive regulations on the exploration, 
        production, or marketing of energy resources; or
            (2) any restrictions on the export of crude oil or other 
        petroleum products under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act 
        (42 U.S.C. 6201 et seq.).
                                 <all>
```
Akin ANACOGLU, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-3479

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed July 2, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Idalberto ALVAREZ, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D18-1734

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

May 16, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

*Affirmed.*
Raul Aguirre BARAJAS, petitioner, v. Greg LEWIS, Warden.

No. 12-8489.

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.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 86 (Thursday, May 4, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 22061]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10960]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. ER95-916-000]


Portland General Electric Company; Notice of Filing

April 28, 1995.
    Take notice that on April 14, 1995, Portland General Electric 
Company tendered for filing a Notice of Cancellation of FERC Rate 
Schedule No. 180.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 825 North Capitol Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules 
of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 18 CFR 385.214). All such 
motions or protests should be filed on or before May 12, 1995. Protests 
will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate 
action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to 
the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion 
to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-10960 Filed 5-3-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Jason Dennis McGUIRE, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-9032.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 1, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 78 (Monday, April 24, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 20051-20052]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10027]



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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 61

[CC Docket No. 93-179, FCC 95-133]


Price Cap Rules for Local Exchange Carriers

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action is taken to incorporate explicitly the ``add-
back'' adjustment into the local exchange carrier (LEC) price cap 
rules. The explicit add-back rule will first be applied when the LECs 
file their 1995 access tariffs. It is intended that the explicit add-
back rule will ensure that [[Page 20052]] the LEC price cap plan 
operates as the Commission intended when it adopted the LEC price cap 
plan.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 24, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Joanne F. Wall, (202) 418-1550.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 30, 1995, the Commission adopted a 
Report and Order in CC Docket No. 93-179 amending the Commission's LEC 
price cap rules. This order makes explicit the requirement that LECs 
must exclude the effects of sharing and low-end adjustments relating to 
the prior year before computing the earnings levels that determine 
required sharing or permitted low-end adjustments for the current year. 
The Commission found that this requirement, known as the ``add-back 
adjustment'' rule, is essential to ensure that the sharing and low-end 
adjustments of the LEC price cap plan achieve their intended purpose.
    The full text of this item is available for inspection and copying 
during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room 239) of 
the Federal Communications Commission, 1919 M Street, NW., Washington, 
DC 20554. The complete text of this decision may be purchased from the 
Commission's duplicating contractor, International Transcription 
Service, Inc., 2100 M Street, NW., Suite 140, Washington, DC 20036, 
(202) 857-3800.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 61

    Communications common carriers, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Telegraph, Telephone.

Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.

    Part 61 of Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended 
as follows:

PART 61--TARIFFS

    1. The authority citation continues to read as follows:

    Authority: Secs. 1, 4(i), 4(j), 201-205, and 403 of the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended; 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 
154(j), 201-205, and 403.

    2. Section 61.3(e) is amended by adding a last sentence to read as 
follows:


Sec. 61.3  Definitions.

* * * * *
    (e) * * * Base year or base period earnings shall not include 
amounts associated with exogenous adjustments to the PCI for the 
sharing or lower formula adjustment mechanisms.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 95-10027 Filed 4-21-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-M
1























































CASE NO. 3:17-cv-00939-WHA

WAYMO’S RESPONSE TO ORDER RE IN-CHAMBERS CONFERENCE

QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP

 Charles K. Verhoeven (Bar No. 170151)

 charlesverhoeven@quinnemanuel.com

 David A. Perlson (Bar No. 209502)

 davidperlson@quinnemanuel.com

 Melissa Baily (Bar No. 237649)

 melissabaily@quinnemanuel.com

 John Neukom (Bar No. 275887)

 johnneukom@quinnemanuel.com

 Jordan Jaffe (Bar No. 254886)

 jordanjaffe@quinnemanuel.com

50 California Street, 22nd Floor

San Francisco, California 94111-4788

Telephone: (415) 875-6600

Facsimile: (415) 875-6700

Attorneys for WAYMO LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

WAYMO LLC,

Plaintiff,

vs.

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; 

OTTOMOTTO LLC; OTTO TRUCKING 

LLC,

Defendants.

CASE NO. 3:17-cv-00939-WHA

PLAINTIFF WAYMO’S RESPONSE TO 

ORDER RE IN-CHAMBERS 

CONFERENCE

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 124 Filed 03/29/17 Page 1 of 2
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

-1- CASE NO. 3:17-cv-00939-WHA

WAYMO’S RESPONSE TO ORDER RE IN-CHAMBERS CONFERENCE

Plaintiff Waymo LLC (“Waymo”) acknowledges the Court’s Order of yesterday, Dkt. No. 

123, setting an in-chambers hearing for today at 2 p.m. Waymo and counsel will appear at that time. 

The Court’s Order states that the parties have until 10 a.m. today to stipulate to the absence of 

a Court Reporter. Waymo is unable to take a position on whether a Court Reporter should be present, 

because Defendants have (despite requests) refused to tell Waymo’s counsel even the subject matter 

of the requested hearing. (See Exhibit 1.)

DATED: March 29, 2017 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP

By /s/ Charles K. Verhoeven

Charles K. Verhoeven

Attorneys for Plaintiff Waymo LLC

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 124 Filed 03/29/17 Page 2 of 2
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 Sabine Royalty Trust (the Trust) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, not in its individual capacity but solely as the trustee of the Trust, certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to its knowledge:

(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 Trust.



BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., TRUSTEE FOR SABINE ROYALTY TRUSTBy: /s/ Ron E. HooperRon E. Hooper Senior Vice President, Royalty Management


Date: May 7, 2012

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Sabine Royalty Trust and will be retained by Sabine Royalty Trust and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Krupp
Fund 4 financial statements for the six months ending June 30, 1997 and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             12-31-97
<PERIOD-END>                                  06-30-97
<CASH>                                         769,654
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   16,007<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               538,651
<PP&E>                                      41,026,598<F2>
<DEPRECIATION>                            (25,923,828)<F3>
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              16,427,082
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          961,312
<BONDS>                                     19,812,287<F4>
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                   (4,346,517)<F5>
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                16,427,082
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,818,518<F6>
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,091,422<F7>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             640,283
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    84,740<F8>
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0<F8>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0<F8>
<FN>
<F1>Includes all receivables grouped in "Prepaid Expenses and Other Assets" on
the balance sheet.
<F2>Includes apartment complexes of $40,627,940 and Deferred Expenses of $398,658.
<F3>Includes Depreciation of $25,740,286 and amortization of Deferred Expenses
of $183,542.
<F4>Represents mortgage notes payable of $19,812,287.
<F5>Represents total deficit of the general partners ($302,014) and the
Limited Partners ($4,044,503).
<F6>Includes all revenue of the Partnership.
<F7>Includes operating expenses of $1,691,375, real estate taxes of $375,364
and depreciation and amortization of $1,024,683.
<F8>Net income allocated $847 to general partners and $847 to general partners
and $83,893 to limited partners.  Average net income of $2.68 per unit
on 30,000 units outstanding.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                            9                       
<MULTIPLIER>                                     1,000
       
<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  9-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          Dec-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             Jan-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               Sep-30-1996
<CASH>                                         121,788
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           9,436
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                51,200
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    473,275
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          25,510
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                      2,733,026 
<ALLOWANCE>                                    (45,365)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,546,154
<DEPOSITS>                                   3,054,741
<SHORT-TERM>                                   195,161
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             52,660
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     67,838
<COMMON>                                         5,915
<OTHER-SE>                                     169,839
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               3,546,154
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                175,260
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               17,966
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                 3,782
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               197,008
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              93,503
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             106,580
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           90,428
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    8,774
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                (421)
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 81,237
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 15,743
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      15,743
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    11,439
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   304.39
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   302.68
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.99 
<LOANS-NON>                                     33,392
<LOANS-PAST>                                     5,988
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   281
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                 24,455
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                52,665
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  (21,303)
<RECOVERIES>                                     5,229
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               45,365
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            45,365
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        


</TABLE>
Michael R. JAFFE, Appellant, v. Marvin BAILEY, Administrator, and Northeast Florida State Hospital, Facility Respondent, Appellees.

No. 1D18-3620

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

June 26, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

February 5, 2015

N o. 04

- 14

- 00480

- CV

STATE OF TEXAS FOR THE BEST INTEREST AND PROTECTION OF J.B.

, As a

Mentally Ill Person,

From the Probate Court No 1, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014

- MH

- 2140

Honorable Polly Jackson Spencer, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

The above cause has been set for formal submission ON BRIEFS ONLY before this

Court on February 26, 2015, before a panel consisting of Justice Alvarez , Justice Chapa , and

Justice Pulliam

.

It is so ORDERED on this 5 th day o f February, 2015.



### PER CURIAM

Attested to:

_______________________________ K eith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
Gary Lynn WEEKS v. STATE

CR-16-0881

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

February 9, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Reversed and remanded.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDG MENT

No. 04

- 20

- 00325

- CV

CESAR ORNELES LAW, PLLC and Cesar Ornelas, II,

Appellants

v.

Rachel Rodriguez MEDINA

, Appellee

From the 407th Judicial District Court

, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2019

- CI

- 15819

Honorable Michael E. Mery , Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE MARTINEZ

, JUSTICE ALVAREZ , AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the parties’ joint motion to dismiss is

GRANTED, and this appeal a nd cross appeal are DISMISSED. Costs of the appeal and cross

appeal are taxed against the party who incurred them.

SIGNED September 16, 2020.

_________________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez , Justice
Eric Brandon ALMLY, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-9058.

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.
Gerard DENEUS, petitioner, v. FLORIDA.

No. 12-7318.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2013.

*1797Petition for writ of certiorari to the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District, denied.