alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN

NO. 03-0 7 -00 714 -CR

St e phe n Wi nnic ki , A ppe lla nt

v. The State of Texas, App ellee

F ROM THE DISTRICT CO URT OF WI LLIAM SO N COUNTY , 277TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 95- 092- K2 77 , HO NORAB LE KEN ANDERSO N , JUDGE PRESIDI NG

M E M O R

A N D UM O P I N I O N Stephen Winn i ck i pleade d g uilty to the offe nse of c redit ca rd abuse
. See Tex. P enal Code Ann. § 32.31 (Wes t Supp. 2007). The district court a ssessed punishment at two y ear s’ conf

inement in state jail a

nd a $2,500 fine but suspe nded imposit ion of the sentenc e and place d Winni cki on community supervision for f

ive y ear s. The State subseque ntly filed a motion to revoke probation, alleging that Winni cki violated the ter ms and conditions of his probation. At a hea ringon the State’s m o t i o n to revoke , Winni cki pleade d true to the violations alleg ed. The dis tr ic t c ourt

se nte nc e d Winnic ki t o 2 4 mo nth s’ c on fi ne me nt i n s tate ja il. Appellant’s court-a

ppointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw and a b ri ef concludingthat the appe al i s fr i v o l o u s and without merit. The brie f mee ts the require ments of An de rs v . Cal if

or nia , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by prese nting a

profe ssional evaluation of the
rec ord demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be adva nced. Se e als o P e ns on v . O hio ,2

48 8 U.S . 7 5 (1 988) ; Hi

gh v . S tate , 5 73 S.W. 2d

80 7 ( Te x. Cr im. Ap p. 19 78 ); Cur riev . S tate , 51 6 S. W.2 d 6 84 (T e x. Cr im. Ap p. 19 74 ); J ac k so n v . S tate , 485 S.W .2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Ga ino us v . S

tate , 436 S.W .2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). Appellant rece ived a c opy of counse l’s brief a nd was a dvised of his rig ht to ex amine the appellate r ecor d and to file a pro se br ief. No pr o se brief has bee n filed. We have r eviewe d the re cord a nd counsel’s br ie f

a n d ag ree that the appe al is frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the rec ord that mig ht arguably support the appe al. Counsel’s motion to wit hdrawis gr anted.

The judg ment of convic tion is affirmed.

__________

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __________ Bob Pembe rton, J ustice Be fore Chief J ustice L aw, Justi ces Pembe rton and Waldrop Affir med Filed: August 21, 2008 Do No t Pu

bli sh
---

EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, 
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Amended Annual Report of Theron Resource Group (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the quarter ended May 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Amended Annual
Report”), I, Jerry R. Satchwell, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|1. | the Amended Annual 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 Amended Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: March 14, 2011

/s/ “Jerry R. Satchwell”

Jerry R. Satchwell 
Chief Financial Officer

---
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1292

To make technical corrections to the Veterans Benefits Improvement Act 

of 2004. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 15, 2005

Mr. BUYER (for himself and Mr. EVANS) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL

To make technical corrections to the Veterans Benefits 

Improvement Act of 2004.

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

3 SECTION 1. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO VETERANS BEN4 EFITS IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2004. 

5 Section 2101 of title 38, United States Code, as 

6 amended by section 401 of the Veterans Benefits Improve7 ment Act of 2004 (Public Law 108–454; 118 Stat. 3614), 

8 is amended—

9 (1) by redesignating subsection (c) as sub10 section (d); 
2

•HR 1292 IH 

1 (2) by inserting after subsection (b) a new sub2 section (c) consisting of the text of subsection (c) of 

3 such section 2101 as in effect immediately before 

4 the enactment of such Act, modified—

5 (A) in paragraph (1)—

6 (i) in the first sentence, by striking 

7 ‘‘paragraph (1), (2), or (3)’’ and inserting 

8 ‘‘subparagraph (A), (B), (C), or (D) of 

9 paragraph (2)’’; and 

10 (ii) in the second sentence, by striking 

11 ‘‘the second sentence’’ and inserting ‘‘para12 graph (3)’’; and 

13 (B) in paragraph (2)—

14 (i) in the first sentence, by striking 

15 ‘‘paragraph (1)’’ and inserting ‘‘paragraph 

16 (2)’’; and 

17 (ii) in the second sentence, by striking 

18 ‘‘paragraph (2)’’ and inserting ‘‘paragraph 

19 (3)’’; and 

20 (3) in subsection (a)(3), by striking ‘‘subsection 

21 (c)’’ in the matter preceding subparagraph (A) and 

22 inserting ‘‘subsection (d)’’. 

23 SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. 

24 The amendments made by section 1 shall take effect 

25 as of December 10, 2004, as if enacted immediately after 
3

•HR 1292 IH 

1 the enactment of the Veterans Benefits Improvement Act 

2 of 2004 on that date.

Æ
Exhibit 32.02   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 Annual Report of Pacific Blue Energy Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Joel Franklin, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:  (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/ Joel Franklin By: Joel Franklin Chief Financial Officer  Dated: April 8, 2010  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 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.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA 

SOUTH BEND DIVISION 

THOMAS LEGG, JR., ) 

 ) 

 Plaintiff, ) 

 ) 

v. ) Cause No. 3:12-CV-844-JTM-CAN 

 ) 

NEW ENGLAND COMPOUNDING ) 

PHARMACY, INC. a/k/a NEW ) 

ENGLAND COMPOUNDING CENTER; ) 

AMERIDOSE, LLC; ALAUNUS ) 

PHARMACEUTICAL, LLC; BARRY ) 

CADDEN; LISA CADDEN; ) 

and GREGORY CONIGLIARO, ) 

 ) 

 Defendants. ) 

APPEARANCE BY ATTORNEY IN CIVIL CASE

To the Clerk of this Court and all parties of record: 

Please enter my appearance as counsel in this case for Defendants, ALAUNUS 

PHARMACEUTICAL, LLC; BARRY CADDEN; LISA CADDEN; and GREGORY 

CONIGLIARO. 

I certify that I am admitted to practice in this Court. 

LEWIS WAGNER LLP 

By: /s/ Robert M. Baker, IV 

ROBERT M. BAKER, IV #25471-49 

 Attorneys for Defendants 

 

case 3:12-cv-00844-JTM-CAN document 12 filed 01/09/13 page 1 of 2
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 This is to certify that a copy of the foregoing has been filed with the Clerk of the Court 

on January 9, 2013 using the CM/ECF system which sent notification of this filing to the 

following: 

Douglas A. Mulvaney 

Stutsman & Mulvaney 

1300 Cassopolis Street 

P.O. Box 1337 

Elkhart, Indiana 46515 

/s/ Robert M. Baker, IV 

 ROBERT M. BAKER, IV 

LEWIS WAGNER, LLP 

501 Indiana Avenue, Suite 200 

Indianapolis, IN 46202 

Phone: (317) 237-0500 

FAX: (317) 630-2790 

rbaker@lewiswagner.com Q:\NECC\15 - Legg\Federal Court Action\appearance_rb4_Alaunus.docx

case 3:12-cv-00844-JTM-CAN document 12 filed 01/09/13 page 2 of 2
|   | (a) | the Form 10-Q of the Company for the Quarterly Period Ended June 30, 2009, filed on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|--------|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (b) | information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|--------|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | /s/ Joseph E. Sutaris                              |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Joseph E. Sutaris                                                                                                                                                                                   |
|   | Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer,                                                                                                                                                  |
|   | Treasurer, and Secretary                                                                                                                                                                            |
|   | Date:  August 6, 2009                                                                                                                                                                     |
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

HAMMOND DIVISION

MARK ROMERO, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. ) 2:13-cv-00426

)

THE REFINERY BAR AND GRILL, INC., )

)

Defendant. )

OPINION AND ORDER

Plaintiff Mark Romero filed his Complaint on November 21, 2013, and served it

and a summons on Defendant Refinery Bar and Grill on January 23, 2014 after Refinery

failed to waive service under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d)(1). Refinery’s responsive pleading was

due February 13, 2014. When Refinery blew that deadline, Romero filed a “Motion for

Default” on February 18, 2014, seeking a default judgment. (Docket Entry 6 at ¶ 8.) That

apparently lit a fire under Refinery, and on February 19, 2014 its counsel filed an

appearance and a request for an extension of time to file an answer. (DE 9, 10.) I denied

default and granted the extension on February 20, 2014. (DE 11.) 

I also ordered Refinery to respond to Romero’s motion for fees and expenses

incurred due to Refinery’s refusal to waive the service of process, writing:

Due to Refinery’s failure to waive service of the

complaint and summons, Romero also moved for fees and

expenses to cover service pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d)(2).

(DE 7.) I must impose those expenses on Refinery if the

failure to waive service was done without good cause.

Refinery has not yet addressed whether it had good cause
for its failure to return the waiver of service, so it is

ORDERED to do so in a response filed concurrently with its

answer. Romero may then file a reply if he chooses.

(DE 11) (emphasis in original). Refinery answered the complaint, but never responded

to Romero’s motion for fees and expenses. Refinery was warned that the motion would

be granted if refusal to waive service was without good cause. No explanation has been

offered, so the motion for expenses and attorney fees is GRANTED. (DE 7.)

Plaintiff Romero is therefore awarded, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d)(2), the

expenses Romero incurred in making service and the reasonable expenses, including

attorney’s fees, of Romero’s motion to collect service expenses. Romero’s motion seeks

$332.00 in service expenses and $375.00 for attorney fees for filing the motion. Those

amounts appear reasonable, and are hereby AWARDED.

SO ORDERED.

ENTERED: July 11, 2014

/s/ Philip P. Simon 

PHILIP P. SIMON, CHIEF JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2
James FRANCIS, petitioner, v. KENTUCKY RIVER COAL CORPORATION.

No. 12-9009.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 29, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Kentucky denied.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

FORT WAYNE DIVISION

THOMAS CHARLES BIBE, JR., )

 )

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) No. 1:12 CV 378

)

ALLEN COUNTY NURSING )

DEPARTMENT, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

O R D E R

Plaintiff Charles Bibe, Jr., was a prisoner confined at the Allen County Jail when

he filed his complaint in this case. The court’s last mailing to the plaintiff was returned

as undeliverable because he is no longer at the Allen County Jail (DE # 9). When he

signed his complaint, Mr. Bibe initialed the portion of the form complaint agreeing to

promptly notify the clerk of any change of address, but he has not done so. “The

demand that plaintiffs provide contact information is no esoteric rule of civil procedure,

but rather the obvious minimal requirement for pursuing a lawsuit.” Tylicki v. Ryan, 244

F.R.D. 146, 147 (N.D.N.Y 2006) (quotation marks and citation omitted). Because it

appears that Mr. Bibe has abandoned this lawsuit, the court DISMISSES this action

without prejudice pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b).

SO ORDERED.

Date: March 21, 2013

s/James T. Moody________________

JUDGE JAMES T. MOODY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

USDC IN/ND case 1:12-cv-00378-JTM-RBC document 10 filed 03/21/13 page 1 of 1
Richard GULLEY, petitioner, v. OREGON.

No. 12-966.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Oregon, Washington County, denied.
UNITED STATES
 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 Washington, D.C. 20549
 
 Form 10-K Abbreviated Amendment No. 1
 (Mark One)
 
 x      ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 
 For the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010
 o    TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 
 For the transition period from           to
 
 Commission file number 000-52759
   FIRST QUANTUM VENTURES, INC.
 (Name of small business issuer in its charter)
  Nevada

20-4743354(State or other jurisdiction ofincorporation or organization)

(I.R.S. EmployerIdentification No.)
  2101 Vista Parkway., Suite 292

West Palm Beach, Florida

33411(Address of principal executive offices)

(Zip Code)
 
 Issuer’s telephone number:    (561) 228-6148
  Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Exchange Act:
 None
  Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act:
 Common Stock, Par Value $0.001 Per Share
 
 This abbreviated Amendment No. 1 is being filed pursuant to a February 28, 2011, comment letter from the Securities & Exchange Commission.
  
 
 Item 9A. Controls and Procedures
 
 Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
 
 (a)   Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
 
 Management of the Company with the participation of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures (as such term is defined in Rule 13a-15(e) and Rule 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) pursuant to Rule 13a-15 under the Exchange Act.  The Company’s disclosure controls and procedures are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by the Company in the reports it files or submits under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported on a timely basis and that such information is communicated to management, including the Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and the Company’s Board of Directors, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
 
 Based upon that evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures were not effective as of June 30, 2010. As a result we have made modifications to our disclosure controls and procedures with the expectation that these changes will ensure that the reports filed by the Company contain the proper disclosure.
 
 SIGNATURES
 
 In accordance with the Exchange Act, this report has been signed below by the following persons on our behalf and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
  First Quantum Ventures, Inc.(Registrant)Date: March 14, 2011
By:
/s/ Andrew GodfreyAndrew Godfrey, President and Chairman
  Pursuant to the requirements of the Exchange Act, this Report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the Registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
  Signature

Title

Date/s/ Andrew Godfrey

President & Chairman

March 14, 2010Andrew Godfrey
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1465 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1465

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain pimientos (capsicum anuum), 
            prepared or preserved by vinegar or acetic acid.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 5, 2005

  Mr. Garrett of New Jersey introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To suspend temporarily the duty on certain pimientos (capsicum anuum), 
            prepared or preserved by vinegar or acetic acid.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN PIMIENTOS, PREPARED OR PRESERVED BY VINEGAR OR 
              ACETIC ACID.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.20.01      Pimientos           Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         (capsicum anuum),                                                  31/2008
                         prepared or
                         preserved by
                         vinegar or acetic
                         acid (provided
                         for in subheading
                         2001.90.35)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Felicia Nicole JONES, petitioner, v. TOLL BROTHERS.

No. 12-9840.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 24, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-7084

GEORGE SAMUEL GREEN, JR., and family on behalf of Virginia Green, mother, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. PHILIP MORRIS, tobacco manufacturers; BROWN & WILLIAMSON TOBACCO CORPORATION, tobacco manufacturers; B.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY, tobacco manufacturers, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (2:03-cv-00157-RGD) Submitted: July 31, 2008 Decided: August 28, 2008 Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. George Samuel Green, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: George Samuel Green, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Green v. Philip Morris , No. 2:03-cv-00157-RGD (E.D. Va. June 18, 2007). We deny Green’s motion to appoint counsel and to “interduct evidence.” 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
E. Scott PRUITT, Attorney General of Oklahoma, et al., petitioners, v. NOVA HEALTH SYSTEMS, dba Reproductive Services, et al.

No. 12-1170.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 12, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Oklahoma denied.
<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, 1995 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
INCLUDED IN SUCH REPORT.
</LEGEND>

<CIK>   0000711604
<NAME>  CARLYLE REAL ESTATE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP - XIII

       
<S>                                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                                    SEP-30-1995

<CASH>                                            4,145,141 
<SECURITIES>                                      2,166,910 
<RECEIVABLES>                                     1,141,110 
<ALLOWANCES>                                              0 
<INVENTORY>                                               0 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 14,638,962 
<PP&E>                                          432,177,193 
<DEPRECIATION>                                  159,698,642 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  305,055,321 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            69,941,554 
<BONDS>                                         370,138,208 
<COMMON>                                                  0 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0 
<PREFERRED>                                               0 
<OTHER-SE>                                     (218,589,980)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    305,055,321 
<SALES>                                          47,921,257 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 48,632,517 
<CGS>                                                     0 
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    39,329,562 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  1,003,222 
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0 
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               28,852,133 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (20,552,400)
<INCOME-TAX>                                              0 
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (35,370,872)
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  15,490,116 
<CHANGES>                                                 0 
<NET-INCOME>                                    (19,880,756)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        (51.93)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (51.93)

        


</TABLE>
Michael LIMING, petitioner, v. Denday DAMOS.

No. 12-8378.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 20, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Ohio denied.