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

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

HAMMOND DIVISION AT LAFAYETTE

MALIBU MEDIA, LLC, )

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CAUSE NO. 4:13-CV-27-JD-JEM

)

JOHN DOE, subscriber assigned IP )

address 98.226.144.247, )

Defendant. )

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on a Motion to Quash or Modify Subpoena [DE 8], filed by

Defendant John Doe on June 17, 2013. Defendant seeks to quash a third party subpoena served by

Plaintiff Malibu Media on Defendant’s Internet Service Provider (“ISP”) in order to determine

Defendant’s identity so Plaintiff can pursue claims for copyright infringement. In the alternative,

Defendant seeks a Protective Order prohibiting any party from publicly disclosing any information

that Plaintiff obtains in response to the subpoena. On July 1, 2013, Plaintiff Malibu Media, LLC,

filed a response. Defendant did not file a reply within the time allowed to do so. 

This copyright infringement case involves a Defendant originally known to Plaintiff only by

an IP address of 98.226.144.247. On April 22, 2013, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Leave to Serve a

Third Party Subpoena Prior to a Rule 26(f) Conference in order to request from Defendant’s Internet

Service Provider (“ISP”) the identity of the subscriber assigned that IP address at the time of the

alleged downloads. On May 9, 2013, this Court granted Plaintiff’s motion. However, due to the

potential for embarrassment and annoyance to Defendant because of the sexually explicit nature of

the allegedly downloaded films, the Court also entered a Protective Order allowing Defendant to

proceed anonymously. The Court also ordered Plaintiff “to refrain from any direct communication

case 4:13-cv-00027-JD-JEM document 17 filed 08/15/13 page 1 of 2
with Defendant without express leave of Court.”

On July 24, 2013, Plaintiff filed a notice of Settlement with Defendant John Doe, indicating 

it had settled this matter with Defendant and intended to dismiss the action with prejudice upon

satisfaction of the terms of the settlement agreement. Because it appeared Plaintiff had

communicated with Defendant in violation of this Court’s Protective Order of May 9, 2013, this

Court set this matter for a Show Cause hearing on August 29, 2013, at 11:00 am. 

Accordingly, the Court TAKES UNDER ADVISEMENT Defendant’s Motion to Quash

or Modify Subpoena [DE 8] until after resolution of the issues to be addressed at the Show Cause

hearing. 

So ORDERED this 15th day of August, 2013.

s/ John E. Martin 

MAGISTRATE JUDGE JOHN E. MARTIN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

cc: All counsel of record

John Doe

2

case 4:13-cv-00027-JD-JEM document 17 filed 08/15/13 page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 822 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 822

 To authorize testimony and representation in United States v. Rhodes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 11, 2022

  Mr. Schumer (for himself and Mr. McConnell) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 To authorize testimony and representation in United States v. Rhodes.

Whereas, in the case of United States v. Rhodes, Cr. No. 22-15, pending in the 
        United States District Court for the District of Columbia, the 
        prosecution has requested the production of testimony from Virginia 
        Brown, formerly a Chamber Assistant of the Senate;
Whereas, pursuant to sections 703(a) and 704(a)(2) of the Ethics in Government 
        Act of 1978, 2 U.S.C. Sec. Sec.  288b(a) and 288c(a)(2), the Senate may 
        direct its counsel to represent current or former officers and employees 
        of the Senate with respect to any subpoena, order, or request for 
        evidence relating to their official responsibilities;
Whereas, by the privileges of the Senate of the United States and Rule XI of the 
        Standing Rules of the Senate, no evidence under the control or in the 
        possession of the Senate may, by the judicial or administrative process, 
        be taken from such control or possession but by permission of the 
        Senate; and
Whereas, when it appears that evidence under the control or in the possession of 
        the Senate may promote the administration of justice, the Senate will 
        take such action as will promote the ends of justice consistent with the 
        privileges of the Senate: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That Virginia Brown, a former Chamber Assistant of the 
Senate, is authorized to provide relevant testimony in the case of 
United States v. Rhodes, except concerning matters for which a 
privilege should be asserted.
    Sec. 2.  The Senate Legal Counsel is authorized to represent Ms. 
Brown, and any current or former officer or employee of her office, in 
connection with the production of evidence authorized in section one of 
this resolution.
                                 <all>
```
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

**____________** No. 22

- 10453 Summary Calendar

**____________ United States of America,**  Plaintiff

— Appellee **,**
versus **Maxwell David Wilson,** Defendant

— Appellant

**.**

**______________________________** Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 5:21

- CR

- 125

- 1

**______________________________** Before **Higginbotham, Graves,** and **Ho,** Circuit Judges

**. Per Curiam**  **:** ***** Maxwell David Wilson appeals his sentence for distrib ution of child pornography. We pretermit consideration of the applicability of the appeal waiver in his plea agreement

. See United States v. De Leon , 915 F.3d 386, 289 n.2 (5th Cir. 2019).

**_____________________**
* This opinion is not designated for publication. See **5th Cir . R.**  47.5. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED February 15, 2023 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 22-10453 Document: 00516647346 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/15/2023No. 22

- 10453

2 Given Wilson ’s history of direct sexual abuse of a child, he has not shown that the imposition of a condition of supervised release limiting his contact with mi nors was plain error. See Puckett v. United States , 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009); United States v. Cabello , 33 F.4th 281, 291 (5th Cir. 2022); United States v. Ellis , 720 F.3d 220, 223

- 24 (5th Cir. 2013). The challenged condition is not absolute, as it permi ts Wilson to have supervised contact with persons under the age of 18, and, with his probation officer’s permission, to work or volunteer where minors congregate and to have an intentional relationship with someone who has minor children

. C f

. United States v. Duke , 788 F.3d 392, 401

- 03 (5th Cir. 2015). The district court’s judgment is **AFFIRMED**
. Case: 22-10453 Document: 00516647346 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/15/2023
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 93 (Monday, May 15, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 25929]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-11900]



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

INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION

[Finance Docket No. 32673]


California Northern Railroad Company Limited Partnership--
Trackage Rights--Southern Pacific Transportation Company

    Southern Pacific Transportation Company (SPT) has agreed to grant 
overhead trackage rights to California Northern Railroad Company 
Limited Partnership (CNR) over approximately 28.95 miles of rail line. 
The trackage rights will permit CNR to operate over: (1) A portion of 
SPT's line known as the Sacramento Line from Davis, CA, at SPT's 
milepost 75.4 to Suisun-Fairfield, CA, at SPT's milepost 47.8; (2) a 
portion of SPT's line known as the West Valley Line which includes 
trackage at Davis, CA, from SPT's milepost 75.58 to SPT's milepost 
75.4; and (3) a portion of SPT's line known as the Shellville Branch 
which includes trackage at Suisun-Fairfield, CA, from SPT's milepost 
48.97 to SPT's milepost 47.8. The trackage rights will include the 
double track currently in place on the Sacramento Line, all operating 
sidings used for the purpose of meeting and passing trains, and SPT-
owned portions of existing connections. The trackage rights were to 
become effective on or after May 1, 1995.
    The proposed transaction will facilitate more economic and 
efficient operations by permitting direct movement of CNR's trains 
between Davis and Suisun-Fairfield. CNR currently interchanges traffic 
with SPT at Davis and at Suisun-Fairfield for trains moving from the 
West Valley Line to the Shellville Branch. The trackage rights will 
allow CNR to conduct operations between these two lines without 
incurring the cost and delay of two interchanges.
    This notice is filed under 49 CFR 1180.2(d)(7). If the notice 
contains false or misleading information, the exemption is void ab 
initio. Petitions to revoke the exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10505(d) may 
be filed at any time. The filing of a petition to revoke will not stay 
the transaction. Pleadings must be filed with the Commission and served 
on: Mark H. Sidman, 1350 New York Avenue, N.W., Suite 800, Washington, 
DC 20005-4797.
    As a condition to the use of this exemption, any employees 
adversely affected by the trackage rights will be protected under 
Norfolk and Western Ry. Co.--Trackage Rights--BN, 354 I.C.C. 605 
(1978), as modified in Mendocino Coast Ry., Inc.--Lease and Operate, 
360 I.C.C. 653 (1980).

    Decided: May 9, 1995.

    By the Commission, David M. Konschnik, Director, Office of 
Proceedings.
Vernon A. Williams,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-11900 Filed 5-12-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7035-01-P
PORTFOLIO RECOVERY ASSOCIATES, LLC, et al., petitioners, v. Jesse MEYER, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, et al.

No. 12-1199.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
##### 



Exhibit 31.2
 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
      (a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls
and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information
relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us
by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is
being prepared;(b)
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal
control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation
of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles;(c)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures
and presented in this report our 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 occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter that
has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting; and
  (a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation 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 the registrants internal control over financial reporting.
 /s/ Robert G. Gargus

Robert G. Gargus,Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                            9
<CIK>                         0000710507
<NAME>                        First Banks, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                     1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  9-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          Dec-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             Jan-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               Sep-30-1999
<CASH>                                         115,808
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           1,746
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                59,300
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    413,192
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          21,298
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            21,411
<LOANS>                                      3,992,953
<ALLOWANCE>                                     68,498
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,853,246
<DEPOSITS>                                   4,218,034
<SHORT-TERM>                                    96,260
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            126,019
<LONG-TERM>                                    127,569
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     13,063
<COMMON>                                         5,915
<OTHER-SE>                                     266,386
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               4,853,246
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                235,558
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               20,454
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                 1,234
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               257,246
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                             107,151
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             116,660
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                          140,586
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    8,743
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 490
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                110,250
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 53,732
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      53,732
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    32,852
<EPS-BASIC>                                 1,366.29
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 1,320.33
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    8.12
<LOANS-NON>                                     43,027
<LOANS-PAST>                                     2,379
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                 77,474
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                60,970
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                   11,154
<RECOVERIES>                                     6,931
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               68,498
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            57,359
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                         11,139



</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2003

(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)



In connection with the Quarterly Report of CAPITAL RESOURCE ALLIANCE INC., a Colorado corporation (the "Company"), on Form 10-K for the quarter ended
June 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"),
Ray Gordon, Chief Executive Officer and Frederick Fitzgerald, Chief Financial Officer of the Company do hereby certify, pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2003 (18 U.S.C.  1350), that to their knowledge:



(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.



/s/
Ray Gordon

Ray
Gordon, President and Chief Executive Officer



/s/ Frederick Fitzgerald

Frederick Fitzgerald, Secretary/Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer



October 10, 2009



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Capital Resource Alliance Inc. and will be retained by Capital Resource Alliance Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
case 3:13-cv-00204-JTM-CAN document 1-5 filed 03/14/13 page 1 of 2
case 3:13-cv-00204-JTM-CAN document 1-5 filed 03/14/13 page 2 of 2
## IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_______________



### m 01-30106

_______________



### D AVID 

### M. M C 

### E LROY 

### ; L AURA 

### M C 

### E LROY 

### , I NDIVIDUALLY AND ON B EHALF OF T HEIR M INOR C HILD , D AVID R. M C E LROY , 

### Plaintiffs-Appellants,

VERSUS



### C UDD 

### P RESSURE 

### C ONTROL 

### , I NC 

### .; A PACHE 

### C ORPORATION 

### , Defendants-Appellees.

_________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana


### m 00-CV-1162-N

_________________________

February 11, 20022

Before S MITH

and D E M OSS , Circuit Judges, and D UPLANTIER , District Judge. *

P ER C URIAM : **

David McElroy app eals a summary judgment denying his claim for damages allegedly resulting from a blowout on an offshore oil rig

near the one on which he was working. We have reviewed the briefs and pertinent portions of the record and have heard the arguments of counsel. We conclude that the district court

co mmit ted no reversible error in granting summary judgment.

AFFIRMED.

* District Judge of the Eastern Distric t of Louisiana, sitting by designation.

** Purs uant to 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4.
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. Sec.1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
OF 2002



In connection with the Amendment
No. 1 to the Annual Report of DiMi Telematics International, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended
August 31, 2013 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned,
Barry Tenzer, the President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge that:



1.	The Report on Form 10-K fully
complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



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



This certificate is being made for the
exclusive purpose of compliance by the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of the Company with the requirements
of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and may not be disclosed, distributed or used by any person or for any reason
other than as specifically required by law.



|                        |    
|----------------------- | ---
|                        |    
|Date:	 October 15, 2014 | By:
|                        |
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 September 30, 2009 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 FORSABINE ROYALTY TRUST  By:
    /s/ Ron E. Hooper Ron E. HooperSenior Vice President, Royalty Management Date: October 30, 2009 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.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

LEROY MOORMAN, 

Petitioner, 

 Civil Action No. 3:13-CV-908-JVB

v.

SUPERINTENDENT, 

Respondent. 

OPINION AND ORDER

Leroy Moorman filed a pro se habeas corpus petition challenging his prison disciplinary

hearing which was held at the Plainfield Correctional Facility on December 26, 2012. At that

hearing the Disciplinary Hearing Body (DHB) found him guilty of Assault on Staff in violation

of A-117 under cause number IYC 12-12-158. He was sanctioned with the loss of 180 days

earned credit time and demoted to Credit Class 2. The Respondent has filed a motion to dismiss

arguing that “the conviction and sanctions . . . have been vacated [therefore] there is no longer a

case or controversy for this Court to adjudicate . . ..” However, the attached exhibit from the

Legal Services Division of the Indiana Department of Correction makes no mention of either the

conviction nor the sanctions having been vacated. It only says that the case was sent back for a

rehearing. Nevertheless, Moorman has not disputed that the conviction was vacated and the lost

time restored. Therefore the court will accept counsel’s representations on this point even though

there is no evidence in the record which directly supports those assertions. Thus, the motion (DE

7) is GRANTED and the case is ordered DISMISSED because there is no case or controversy to

adjudicate. See Hadley v. Holmes, 341 F.3d 661, 664 (7th Cir. 2003). 
SO ORDERED on March 13, 2014.

 s/ Joseph S. Van Bokkelen 

JOSEPH S. VAN BOKKELEN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2
Richard P. RUSSELL, Jr., petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-9709.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
    /s/  Duston M. WilliamsDuston M. WilliamsExecutive Vice President,
Finance and Chief Financial
Officer  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form
within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided
to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.