alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane lunani m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). K N / R es ear ch NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON

UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T GL E ND A Y AMI L E T H G UT I E R R E Z DE L A O , a. k. a. G l enda Y G ut i erre z, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E RJ r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 07- 72855 A ge nc yN o. A 094- 330- 199 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

an O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d F e bruary16, 2010 ** B efo re: F E RN A N D E Z , G O U L D , an dM . S M IT H , C i rcu i tJu d g es. G l e ndaY am i l e th G ut i e rr e z D e L aO ( “ G ut i e rr e z ” ) , ana t i ve and c i t i z e n of H on du ra s, pet i t i on s f

or re vi ew of the B oard of Im m i grat i on A pp ea l s’ (“ B IA ”) order di sm i ss i ng her app ea lfr om an i m m i grat i on j ud ge’ s dec i si on denyi ng her 

# FI LED FEB 25 2 010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALSK N / Res ea r ch 07- 72855 2 appl i cat i on for a sy l um and w i thh ol di ng of re m ov al . W e have j uri sdi ct i on un der 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 5 2 . R e v ie w in g f o rs ub s tan tia l e v id e n c e , I N S v . E l i as - Zac ar i as , 502 U. S . 4 7 8 , 4 8 1 n . 1 ( 1 9 9 2 ) , we d e n yth e p e t i t i o n f o rr e v i e w. T he agency deni ed G ut i erre z’ s a sy l um cl ai m as t i m e- barr ed and d eni ed her w ith h o ld in g o f

r e m o v a l c la im b a s e do n an a d v e r s e c r e d ib ilityd e te rm in a tio n . G ut i erre z, w ho i s c ou nsel ed, do es no tra i se any argum ent s i n h erop eni ng bri ef c h a lle n g in g th e B I A ’s tim e - b arf in d in g o rits a d v e r s e c r e d ib ilityd e te rm in a tio n . Se e M ar t i nez - Se rrano v . I

N S, 94 F . 3d 1256, 1259- 60 ( 9th C i r . 1996) ( i s s ue s not s upport e d byar gum e ntar e de e m e d w a i ve d) . A c c or di ngl y , w e de nyhe rpe t i t i on f or r e v i e w. P E T I T I O N F O R R E V I E W D E N I E D .
Exhibit 21

- Filed Under Seal -

Case 5:17-cv-00551-LHK Document 285-22 Filed 10/18/18 Page 1 of 1
Salomon MOLYNEAUX, petitioner, v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS.

No. 12-7978.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2013.

Petition for rehearing denied.
Frankie HAYES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-4061

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed July 2, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Victor Martinez OCHOA, petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General.

No. 12-993.

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.
Nyahuma Kamau MACHARIA, petitioner, v. Susan B. DAMOUR, et al.

No. 12M103.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 1, 2013.

Motion to direct the Clerk to file a petition for writ of certiorari out of time denied.
Yvonne JETT, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, et al.

No. 12M110.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 22, 2013.

Motion to direct the Clerk to file a petition for writ of certiorari out of time denied.
Sonny DESPOSITO, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-1255.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 20, 2013.

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

SCOTT JOHNSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

BHAKTA-RILEY INVESTMENT 

CORPORATION, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 17-cv-00724-DMR 

ORDER OF CONDITIONAL 

DISMISSAL

The court has been notified of the settlement of this action, and it appears that no issue 

remains for the court’s determination.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action and all claims asserted herein are DISMISSED 

with prejudice. In the event that the settlement is not reached, any party may move to reopen the 

case and the trial will be rescheduled, provided that such motion is filed within 60 days of this 

order. All scheduled dates, including the trial and pretrial dates, are VACATED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 2, 2017

______________________________________

DONNA M. RYU

United States Magistrate Judge
Motion for Rehearing Granted, Memorandum Opinion filed September 17 , 201 3 ,

Withdrawn, Appeal Reinstated, and Order filed November 7 , 201 3

.

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 13

- 00585

- CV

____________ DENNIS SHAVER , Appellant

V. WELLS FARGO BANK, NA AS TRUSTEE FOR NCBT 2008

- 1 , Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court Waller County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. C12

- 102



### ORDER

On September 17 , 201 3 , this court issued an opinion dismissing this appeal.
On September 26 , 201 3 , appellant filed a motion for rehearing. The motion is GRANTED

. This court’s opinion filed September 17 , 201 3 , is WITHDRAWN , and our judgment of that date is VACATED. The appeal is ordered REINSTATED.

### Appellant’s brief is due thirty days from the da te of this order.

PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Brown, Christopher, and Donovan. (Brown, J. not participating).
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1280 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1280

 To amend part C of title XVIII of the Social Security Act to prohibit 
the operation of the Medicare Comparative Cost Adjustment (CCA) program 
                               in Texas.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 14, 2005

 Mr. Gene Green of Texas (for himself and Mr. Gonzalez) introduced the 
   following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and 
  Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a 
 period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 
consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the 
                          committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend part C of title XVIII of the Social Security Act to prohibit 
the operation of the Medicare Comparative Cost Adjustment (CCA) program 
                               in Texas.

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

SECTION 1. PROHIBITION ON OPERATION OF MEDICARE COMPARATIVE COST 
              ADJUSTMENT (CCA) PROGRAM IN TEXAS.

    Section 1860C-1(b)(2) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-
29(b)(2)) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
subparagraph:
                    ``(C) No part in texas.--No part of the MSA is in 
                Texas.''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





The undersigned have executed this certification in connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the period ending June 30, 2011.  The undersigned hereby certify that to our 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 results of operations of the Company.








Dated:   February 24, 2012





/s/ Fred Zolla


Fred Zolla


President and Chief Executive Officer
In re Charles R. ROBINSON, petitioner.

No. 12-8905.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2013.

Motion of petitioner for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* denied.
Patrick Joseph KELSO, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D19-856

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[June 13, 2019]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

*Affirmed.*
AMERICAN INDEPENDENCE MINES AND MINERALS COMPANY, et al., petitioners, v. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

No. 12-935.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 3, 2013.

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



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 on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2005 (the
Report) of Kiewit Royalty Trust (the Trust), as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof, I, Ted L. Hall, the trust officer of U.S. Bank National Association,
the trustee of the Trust, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge: (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. /s/ Ted L. Hall
Ted L. Hall
Trust Officer U.S. Bank National Association Trustee Date: May 20, 2005
Order entered June 1 , 2015

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**
No. 05
- 14
- 01591
- CR
CHARLES LEE GALLAMOR E, Appellant
V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1 Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 001
- 85499
- 2013 

### O RDER
The Court REINSTATES the appeal. On May 8, 2015, we ordered the trial court to make findings regarding the reporter’s record and whether appellant is indigent. We ADOPT the findings that: (1) appellant is indigent; (2) ap pellant is entitled to proceed without payment for the reporter’s record; (3) appellant wishes to be represented by counsel on appeal; (4) the trial court appointed Dana Lim to represent appellant; (5) Thomas Mullins is the court reporter who recorded the proceedings; and (6) Mr. Mullins represented the reporter’s record could be filed by July 27, 2015.
We DIRECT the Clerk of this Court to list Dana Lim as appellant’s appointed attorney of record.
We STRIKE the pro se brief tendered by appellant on April 30 , 2015.We ORDER court reporter Thomas Mullins to file the reporter’s record by MONDAY, JULY 27, 2015 . Due to the length of the extension given, no further extensions will be granted absent a showing of extraordinary circumstances.
We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order to Thomas Mullins, official court reporter, County Court at Law No. 1; Dana Lim; and the Collin County District Attorney’s Office.
/s/ ADA BROWN JUSTICE
Robert A. STOK, Petitioner, v. TURNBERRY 12G, LLC, etc., et al., Respondents.

No. 3D19-600

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed June 26, 2019

Stok Kon + Braverman, and Robert A. Stok and Natasha Shaikh (Fort Lauderdale), for petitioner.

Quintero Broche, P.A., and Juan P. Broche, for respondent Turnberry 12G, LLC.

Before SALTER, LOGUE, and GORDO, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

*773We grant the petition and quash the parts of the order allowing subpoenas directed to a law firm seeking records of third parties that are claimed to be protected by the third parties' attorney client privileges. We similarly quash the parts of the order allowing subpoenas seeking the medical records of third parties that are claimed to violate the third parties' right to privacy. The trial court order indicates that these objections were overcome simply by requiring a confidentiality order. Without the trial court establishing a method to review and determine which, if any, of these materials were so privileged, the order reflects a departure from the essential requirement of law. *Patrowicz v. Wolff* , 110 So. 3d 973, 974 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) (citing *Snyder v. Value Rent-A-Car* , 736 So. 2d 780, 782 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) ) ("The failure to address whether a claimed privilege applies prior to ordering the disclosure of documents is a departure from the essential requirements of the law.").

Otherwise, we deny the petition for certiorari. Subpoenas for materials other than the medical records of third parties and the records of the law firm may issue. This part of our order is without prejudice to the subpoenaed party or other party with a lawful claim of a privilege from filing objections and a privilege log. All other documents responsive to the subpoenas shall be produced.

Granted in part and denied in part.
小小疏忽可能製作出致命食品

為維護大眾健康。 請勿將未烹煮的生肉肉或海鮮置於即食食方。
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 127 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 127

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring),

SECTION 1. USE OF EMANCIPATION HALL FOR THE UNVEILING OF MARTHA HUGHES 
              CANNON STATUE.

    (a) Authorization.--Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor Center 
is authorized to be used for an event on

              

 December 11, 2024, to unveil a statue of Martha Hughes Cannon.
    (b) Preparations.--Physical preparations for the conduct of the 
event described in subsection (a) shall be carried out in accordance 
with such conditions as may be prescribed by the Architect of the 
Capitol.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 23, 2024.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
118th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                            H. CON. RES. 127

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Authorizing the use of Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor Center 
         for the unveiling of a statue of Martha Hughes Cannon.
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL DATA EXTRACTED FROM THE COMPANY'S
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE QUARTER ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996
INCLUDED IN PART I FINANCIAL INFORMATION AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                     1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           5,274
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   16,133
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                30,306
<PP&E>                                          28,639
<DEPRECIATION>                                   7,910
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 103,211
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           29,585
<BONDS>                                          4,627
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,347
<OTHER-SE>                                      65,600
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   103,211
<SALES>                                         20,625
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                20,625
<CGS>                                           11,243
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   17,117
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 199
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,494
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,258
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,258
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,258
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .33
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .33
        







</TABLE>
David Nathaniel JOHNSON, petitioner, v. MICHIGAN.

No. 12-9019.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 29, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Michigan denied.
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WAYMO LLC,

Plaintiff,

 v.

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 17-00939 WHA

ORDER GRANTING IN PART

AND DENYING IN PART

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION

TO FILE UNDER SEAL

In connection with its pending motion for provisional relief, plaintiff Waymo LLC

moves to seal certain portions of its objections to defendants’ sur-reply (Dkt. No. 325). In a

supporting declaration, defense counsel clarified that “portions highlighted in blue on Page 2,

Lines 5–8 do not merit sealing” (Dkt. No. 398 ¶ 3). The motion to file under seal is DENIED as

to those portions and is otherwise GRANTED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 9, 2017. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 400 Filed 05/09/17 Page 1 of 1
#### Martin Edgar GARCIA-RONQUIO; Lidia Vidana-De-Garcia, Petitioners, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 02-73068.

Agency Nos. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ], [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 12, 2004.*

Decided April 23, 2004.

J. Jack Artz, South Pasadena, CA, for Petitioners.

Regional Counsel, Western Region Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, CAC-District Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Gounsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Kurt B. Larson, William C. Minick, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before HALL, O’SCANNLAIN, and RYMER, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM**

Martin Edgar Garcia-Ronquio and his wife, Lidia Vidana-De-Garcia, natives and *473citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) summarily affirming an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of their applications for cancellation of removal. We lack jurisdiction to consider discretionary hardship determinations. *See Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft,*327 F.3d 887, 892 (9th Cir.2003). We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to review the IJ’s discretionary hardship determination. *See id.*

To the extent petitioners contend that the BIA’s streamlined decision was improper because it left open the question of how more recent decisions affect the outcome of their case, this contention is foreclosed by *Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft,*350 F.3d 845, 850 (9th Cir.2003).

We do not consider petitioners’ contention that Garcia-Ronquio is eligible for relief pursuant to the LIFE Act because they failed to exhaust this issue before the BIA. *See Arreaza-Cruz v. INS,*39 F.3d 909, 912 (9th Cir.1994).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part and DENIED in part.

**

**This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
EXHIBIT 18

 REDACTED VERSION

 OF DOCUMENT

 SOUGHT TO BE SEALED

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 689-7 Filed 06/21/17 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

SOUTH BEND DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

vs. ) Case No. 3:13-CR-19 RLM

)

TERRY WILLIAMS )

ORDER

No objections have been filed to the magistrate judge’s findings and

recommendation upon a plea of guilty issued on July 10, 2013 [Doc. No. 26].

Accordingly, the court now ADOPTS those findings and the recommendation,

ACCEPTS defendant Terry Williams’ plea of guilty, and FINDS the defendant guilty

of Count 1 of the Indictment, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).

SO ORDERED.

ENTERED: July 30, 2013 

 /s/ Robert L. Miller, Jr. 

Judge

United States District Court
Yigal BOSCH, petitioner, v. FROST NATIONAL BANK, et al.

No. 12-1109.

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.
¿Te gustaría tener a estas personas en tu cocina?

Entonces, ¿porqué vas al trabajo cuando estas enfermo?

Vómitos

Dolor de garganta y fiebre Piel y ojos amarillentos (Ictericia)

Diarrea

Proteje a todos...

Quédate en casa cuando estes enfermo.
¿Te gustaría tener a estas personas en tu cocina?

Entonces, ¿porqué vas al trabajo cuando estas enfermo?

Vómitos

Dolor de garganta y fiebre Piel y ojos amarillentos (Ictericia)

Diarrea

Proteje a todos...

Quédate en casa cuando estes enfermo.
¿Te gustaría tener a estas personas en tu cocina?

Entonces, ¿porqué vas al trabajo cuando estas enfermo?

Vómitos

Dolor de garganta y fiebre

Diarrea

Piel y ojos amarillentos (Ictericia)

Proteje a todos...

Quédate en casa cuando estes enfermo.
¿Te gustaría tener a estas personas en tu cocina?

Vómitos

Dolor de garganta y fiebre

Diarrea

Piel y ojos amarillentos (Ictericia)

Entonces, ¿porqué vas al trabajo cuando estas enfermo?

Proteje a todos...

Quédate en casa cuando estes enfermo.