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

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

FORT WAYNE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) CAUSE NO. 1:13-CR-78

)

MARVIN L. BENNETT )

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

UPON A PLEA OF GUILTY

TO: THE HONORABLE THERESA L. SPRINGMANN, JUDGE, 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Upon Defendant’s request to enter a plea of guilty pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal Rules

of Criminal Procedure, this matter came on for hearing before U.S. Magistrate Roger B. Cosbey,

on November 6, 2014, with the written consents of the defendant, counsel for the defendant, and

counsel for the United States of America.

The hearing on defendant’s plea of guilty was in full compliance with Rule 11, Federal

Rules of Criminal Procedure, before the Magistrate Judge in open court and on the record.

In consideration of that hearing and the statements made by the defendant under oath on

the record and in the presence of counsel, the remarks of the Assistant United States Attorney and

of counsel for defendant,

I FIND as follows:

(1) that defendant understands the nature of the charge against him to which the plea is

offered;

(2) that the defendant understands his right to trial by jury, to persist in his plea of not

guilty, to the assistance of counsel at trial, to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses, and
his right against compelled self-incrimination;

(3) that the defendant understands what the maximum possible sentence is, including the

effect of the supervised release term, and defendant understands that the Sentencing Guidelines

apply and that the Court may depart from those guidelines under some circumstances;

(4) that the plea of guilty by the defendant has been knowingly and voluntarily made and

is not the result of force or threats or of promises apart from the plea agreement between the

parties;

(5) that defendant is competent to plead guilty;

(6) that the defendant understands that his answers may later be used against him in a

prosecution for perjury or false statement;

(7) that there is a factual basis for the defendant’s plea; and further,

I RECOMMEND that the Court accept the defendant’s plea of guilty and that the

Defendant be adjudged guilty of the offense charged in the single-count Indictment, and have

sentence imposed. A Presentence Report has been ordered. Should this Report and

Recommendation be accepted and the Defendant adjudged guilty, sentencing will be scheduled

before Judge Theresa L. Springmann by separate order and notice. Objections to the Findings

and Recommendation are waived unless filed and served within fourteen (14) days. 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1)(B).

DATED this 6th day of November 2014.

/s/ Roger B. Cosbey 

Roger B. Cosbey

United States Magistrate Judge

2
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 95 (Wednesday, May 17, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 26470]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-12163]



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


DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Research on the Feasibility of Standardized Diagnostic Devices to 
Aid in the Inspection and Maintenance of Commercial Motor Vehicles; 
Public Meeting

AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA); DOT.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The FHWA announces a public meeting to present the final 
results of its contractual research study to assess the feasibility of 
employing standardized electronic diagnostic devices for use by truck 
maintenance personnel and roadside safety and emissions inspectors. 
This meeting will be held for the benefit of representatives of the 
motor carrier industry, enforcement organizations, trade associations, 
and other interested persons.

DATES: The public meeting will be held on June 19, 1995, from 10 a.m. 
to 12 noon.

ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be held in Conference room 2230 of 
the NASSIF Building, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 7th Street, 
SW., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Stan Hamilton, Federal Highway 
Administration, Office of Motor Carriers, 400 7th Street SW., room 
3103, Washington, DC 20590, telephone (202) 366-0665. Office hours are 
from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except 
Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FHWA announces a public meeting to 
provide the results of its two-year assessment of the feasibility of 
standardized electronic diagnostic devices for commercial motor vehicle 
maintenance and inspection. Mandated by the Congress in Fiscal Year 
1992, this research was performed for the FHWA by the Trucking Research 
Institute in cooperation with the Texas Transportation Institute. The 
research reviewed current literature on microelectronic technology that 
was, or could be, available for heavy-duty vehicle usage, and then 
proceeded to identify and evaluate sensors for application in 
diagnostic systems for major vehicle components on heavy trucks. Also 
evaluated were potential cost-sharing opportunities that would be 
available from the private sector to assist in the development of 
standardized diagnostic tools. Commercial motor carriers, original 
equipment manufacturers, engine manufacturers, components suppliers, 
diagnostic service tool suppliers, and other involved in the 
manufacture and use of heavy trucks were interviewed and provided 
extensive information for this study. Most of the organizations 
interviewed appeared willing to assist in some fashion in the 
implementation and testing of the diagnostic systems identified.

    Authority: 23 U.S.C. 315; 49 CFR 1.48.

    Issued on: May 11, 1995.
Rodney E. Slater,
Federal Highway Administrator.
[FR Doc. 95-12163 Filed 5-16-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P
Exhibit 31.2  Certification I, Eric T. Jones, certify that:  (1) I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Thunder Mountain Gold Inc.  (2) Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact 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 all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; (4) The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the small business issuer and have: 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 is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;  (b)  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  (c) disclosed in this report any changes in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants first fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting.  (5) The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): (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 small business issuer'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 small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting. /s/ Eric T. Jones By  ____________________________________ Eric T. Jones Secretary/Treasurer and Director and Chief Financial Accounting Officer Date:   May 14, 2007
Exhibit 13.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED  PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, who is carrying out the functions of chief executive officer for Brookfield Infrastructure Partners L.P.
(the "Partnership") pursuant to an Amended and Restated Master Services Agreement, dated March 28, 2014, among Brookfield Asset Management Inc., the Partnership, Brookfield
Infrastructure L.P. and others, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his knowledge, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, (i) the annual report of the Partnership on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013
(the "Annual Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and (ii) the information contained
in the Annual Report fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of the Partnership.

Dated:
April 30, 2014

|                                                                                        |  | 
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 
|/s/ SAMUEL POLLOCK Name: Samuel Pollock
Title:CEO, Brookfield Infrastructure Group L.P. |  | 

---



QuickLinks
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

RUDOLPH ELLIS, Jr., 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

RALPH DIAZ, Secretary of Corrections, 

Defendant-Appellee.

No. 21-15265 

D.C. No. 1:20-cv-00134-DAD-EPG 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Dale A. Drozd, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 15, 2022**

Before: FERNANDEZ, TASHIMA, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Rudolph Ellis, Jr. appeals pro se from the district 

court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional 

claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. 

Wilhelm v. Rotman, 680 F.3d 1113, 1118 (9th Cir. 2012) (dismissal under 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

FEB 22 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 21-15265 

28 U.S.C. § 1915A); Watison v. Carter, 668 F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir. 2012) 

(dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii)). We affirm. 

The district court properly dismissed Ellis’s First and Fourteenth 

Amendment claims stemming from the denial of family visits because Ellis failed 

to allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim. See Vill. of Willowbrook v. 

Olech, 528 U.S. 562, 564 (2000) (per curiam) (setting forth elements of an equal 

protection “class of one” claim); Ramirez v. Galaza, 334 F.3d 850, 860 (9th Cir. 

2003) (explaining that “inmates lack a separate constitutional entitlement to a 

specific prison grievance procedure”); Gerber v. Hickman, 291 F.3d 617, 621 (9th 

Cir. 2002) (noting “it is well-settled that prisoners have no constitutional right 

while incarcerated to contact visits or conjugal visits”); 15 C.C.R. § 3177 (defining 

“family visits” as “extended overnight visits”); see also Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 

338, 341-42 (9th Cir. 2010) (stating that although pro se pleadings are liberally 

construed, a plaintiff must allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim).

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Ellis leave to 

amend because amendment would have been futile. See Cervantes v. Countrywide 

Home Loans, Inc., 656 F.3d 1034, 1041 (9th Cir. 2011) (setting forth standard of 

review and explaining that a district court may dismiss without leave to amend 

when amendment would be futile).

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued 
3 21-15265 

in the opening brief. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009). 

AFFIRMED.
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1597

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the age limit 

for the child tax credit. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 13, 2005

Ms. BALDWIN (for herself, Mr. BROWN of Ohio, Mr. KUCINICH, Mr. CHABOT, 

Mr. GONZALEZ, and Mr. SENSENBRENNER) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase 

the age limit for the child tax credit.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. INCREASE IN AGE LIMIT FOR CHILD TAX CRED4 IT. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (1) of section 24(c) of 

6 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (defining qualifying 

7 child) is amended by striking ‘‘age 17’’ and inserting ‘‘age 

8 19’’. 
2

•HR 1597 IH 

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

3 December 31, 2005.

Æ
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 98 (Monday, May 22, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 27106]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-12450]



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


FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Valley National Bank; De Novo Corporation to do Business Under 
Section 25A of the Federal Reserve Act

    An application has been submitted for the Board's approval of the 
organization of a corporation to do business under section 25A of the 
Federal Reserve Act (Edge Corporation) 12 U.S.C. Sec.  611 et seq. The 
Edge Corporation will operate as a subsidiary of the applicant, Valley 
National Bank, Passaic, New Jersey. The factors that are to be 
considered in acting on the application are set forth in the Board's 
Regulation K (12 CFR 211.4).
    The application may by inspected at the Federal Reserve Bank of New 
York or at the Board of Governors. Any comment on an application that 
requests a hearing must include a statement of why a written 
presentation would not suffice in lieu of a hearing, identify 
specifically any questions of fact that are in dispute, and summarize 
the evidence that would be presented at a hearing.
    Comments regarding the application must be received by the Reserve 
Bank indicated or at the offices of the Board of Governors not later 
than June 20, 1995.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of New York (William L. Rutledge, Senior 
Vice President) 33 Liberty Street, New York, New York 10045:
    1. Valley National Bank, Passaic, New Jersey; to establish VNB 
International Services, Inc., Wayne, New Jersey, a de novo Edge 
Corporation, pursuant to Sec.  25A of the Federal Reserve Act.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, May 16, 1995.
Jennifer J. Johnson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 95-12450 Filed 5-19-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-F
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1605 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1605

     To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to exclude 
    communications over the Internet from the definition of public 
                             communication.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 13, 2005

Mr. Hensarling introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                   Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to exclude 
    communications over the Internet from the definition of public 
                             communication.

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

SECTION 1. MODIFICATION OF DEFINITION OF PUBLIC COMMUNICATION.

    Paragraph (22) of section 301 of the Federal Election Campaign Act 
of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431(22)) is amended by adding at the end the 
following new sentence: ``Such term shall not include communications 
over the Internet.''.
                                 <all>
```
----

----

|                               | Company Name |                                                  |
|------------------------------------|--------------|-------------------------------------------------------|
|                               |         |                                                  |   |
| Date  November 16, 2009  | By:          | /s/ Dennis M. McGrath                            |   |
|                               |         | Name   Dennis M. McGrath                    |   |
|                               |         | Title     Chief Executive Officer |   |
|                               |         |                                                  |   |

----
Michael Dean OVERSTREET, petitioner, v. Bill K. WILSON, Superintendent, Indiana State Prison.

No. 12-8413.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 28, 2013.

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

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

FORT WAYNE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) CASE NO.: 1:13-CR-2-TLS

)

NICOLE R. SPRANKLES )

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

This matter is before the Court on the Findings and Recommendation of the United States

Magistrate Judge [ECF No. 10] filed on February 4, 2013. The Defendant has waived objection to

the Findings and Recommendation, and the Court, being duly advised, adopts the Findings and

Recommendation [ECF No. 10] in its entirety and accepts the recommended disposition, including

the Defendant’s waiver of prosecution by indictment. Subject to this Court’s consideration of the

Plea Agreement pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(c), the plea of guilty to the offense

charged in Count 1 of the Information is hereby accepted, and the Defendant is adjudged guilty of

such offense. 

Any request for a sentence involving a departure under the United States Sentencing

Guidelines, or for a variance above or below a Guidelines sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a),

with the exception of matters raised pursuant to §5K1.1 of the Guidelines, shall be communicated to

the probation officer and opposing counsel, in writing, within fourteen (14) days following initial

disclosure of the pre-sentence report. Any sentencing memorandum addressing these or any other

issues, including requests for a departure based on § 5K1.1, shall be filed with the Court no later

than seven (7) days prior to the sentencing hearing. The notice of sentencing and pre-sentence

scheduling deadlines will be issued by separate order.

SO ORDERED on February 26, 2013. 

 s/ Theresa L. Springmann 

THERESA L. SPRINGMANN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Robert L. JENKINS, petitioner, v. MISSISSIPPI.

No. 12-9341.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 24, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Mississippi denied.
Carol BYRD, petitioner, v. TIME WARNER CABLE INC., et al.

No. 13-5482.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 4, 2013.

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

THE CHIEF JUSTICE took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5

<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
REGISTRANT'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1997 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
INCLUDED IN SUCH REPORT.
</LEGEND>

       
<S>                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>         9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>     DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>          SEP-30-1997

<CASH>                       17,437,489 
<SECURITIES>                    374,085 
<RECEIVABLES>                 2,419,642 
<ALLOWANCES>                       0    
<INVENTORY>                        0    
<CURRENT-ASSETS>             20,231,216 
<PP&E>                       20,967,242 
<DEPRECIATION>                     0    
<TOTAL-ASSETS>               42,034,936 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>        66,561,915 
<BONDS>                       1,436,162 
<COMMON>                           0    
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>              0    
<PREFERRED>                        0    
<OTHER-SE>                  (30,385,235)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY> 42,034,936 
<SALES>                      14,784,053 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>             15,074,771 
<CGS>                              0    
<TOTAL-COSTS>                10,408,436 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                804,904 
<LOSS-PROVISION>                   0    
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>            9,348,164 
<INCOME-PRETAX>              (5,486,733)
<INCOME-TAX>                       0    
<INCOME-CONTINUING>          (5,392,121)
<DISCONTINUED>               95,553,572 
<EXTRAORDINARY>              55,468,888 
<CHANGES>                          0    
<NET-INCOME>                145,630,339 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                    394.36 
<EPS-DILUTED>                    394.36 

        


</TABLE>
IIB 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1460 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 7, 2005 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 6200 Rolling Road in Springfield, Virginia, 

as the ‘‘Captain Mark Stubenhofer Post Office Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

HR 1460 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

2 The facility of the United States Postal Service lo3 cated at 6200 Rolling Road in Springfield, Virginia, shall 

4 be known and designated as the ‘‘Captain Mark 

5 Stubenhofer Post Office Building’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

7 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

8 paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

9 referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference 

10 to the ‘‘Captain Mark Stubenhofer Post Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives April 6, 2005. 

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL, 

Clerk.