alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Laurence C. JONES, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jo Anne B. BARNHART, Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Defendant-Appellee,

Docket No. 03-6113.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

May 19, 2004.

Laurence C. Jones, Jr., New Haven, CT, for Appellant, pro se.

Patrick F. Caruso, Assistant United States Attorney (Jeffrey A. Meyer, Assistant United States Attorney, of counsel, Kevin J. O’Connor, United States Attorney, on the brief), United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Connecticut, New Haven, CT, for Appellee.

PRESENT: FEINBERG, CABRANES Circuit Judges and KRAVITZ,* District Judge.

*

 The Honorable Mark R. Kravitz, of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, sitting by designation.

SUMMARY ORDER

Plaintiff-Appellant Laurence C. Jones, Jr. appeals from a judgment of the District Court dismissing his claim that he was denied reinstatement or appointment to competitive federal service in violation of the Veterans Preference Act of 1944. The District Court, accepting the recommendation of Magistrate Judge William I. Garfinkel, granted the defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings on the grounds that (1) it lacked jurisdiction over Jones’ claim, and (2) Jones failed to state a claim under the Veterans Preference Act upon which relief could be granted.

For substantially the reasons stated in Magistrate Judge Garfinkel’s Recommended Ruling, we affirm the judgment of the District Court.

We have considered all of plaintiffs claims on appeal and we hereby AFFIRM the judgment of the District Court.
In re Willie Ray BUSH, petitioner.

No. 12-9122.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2013.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* denied, and petition for writ of mandamus dismissed. See Rule 39.8.
USDC IN/ND case 3:14-cv-00315-RL   document 36-30   filed 07/14/15   page 1 of 13

USDC IN/ND case 3:14-cv-00315-RL   document 36-30   filed 07/14/15   page 2 of 13

USDC IN/ND case 3:14-cv-00315-RL   document 36-30   filed 07/14/15   page 3 of 13

USDC IN/ND case 3:14-cv-00315-RL   document 36-30   filed 07/14/15   page 4 of 13

USDC IN/ND case 3:14-cv-00315-RL   document 36-30   filed 07/14/15   page 5 of 13

USDC IN/ND case 3:14-cv-00315-RL   document 36-30   filed 07/14/15   page 6 of 13

USDC IN/ND case 3:14-cv-00315-RL   document 36-30   filed 07/14/15   page 7 of 13

USDC IN/ND case 3:14-cv-00315-RL   document 36-30   filed 07/14/15   page 8 of 13

USDC IN/ND case 3:14-cv-00315-RL   document 36-30   filed 07/14/15   page 9 of 13

USDC IN/ND case 3:14-cv-00315-RL   document 36-30   filed 07/14/15   page 10 of 13

USDC IN/ND case 3:14-cv-00315-RL   document 36-30   filed 07/14/15   page 11 of 13

USDC IN/ND case 3:14-cv-00315-RL   document 36-30   filed 07/14/15   page 12 of 13

USDC IN/ND case 3:14-cv-00315-RL   document 36-30   filed 07/14/15   page 13 of 13
John Eric SANDLES, petitioner, v. Phillip MILLER.

No. 12-9055.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
Daniel Henderson JONES, petitioner, v. David SEXTON, Warden.

No. 12-10208.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 17, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
Exhibit 32.1



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 Thunder Mountain Gold Inc, (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, E. James Collord, President, Director and Chief Executive 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 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.





/s/ E. James Collord

By  __________________________________

E.  James Collord

President, Director and Chief Executive Officer

Date:  August 15, 2005
HILL, Senior Circuit Judge, specially concurring: I concur because: (1) In United States v. Burke , 113 F.3d 211, our court adopted the reasoning of the Fourth Circuit (per J. Wilkins) in United States v. Pierce , 75 F.3d 173 which aligns us with the approach taken by the district judge in the case, and (2) the district court did, in sentencing, what ought to have been done for the good of the public, the victims and the defendant.
Yet, I am less than satisfied that, in doing th e right thing here, we are doing what we should do. Florida law is “assimilated” into federal law inthis case. The distri ct judge found Florida law inadequate to the task before him. He did what federal judges have done in these “assimilated” cases with inadequate state law in the past – the stat e law is found to be in “. . . conflict with federal sentencing policy,” so it is dis- assimilated, so to speak, and replaced. Perhaps the Congress meant for this to be the law. See footnote 5 of our opinion. I hope so.
Tim WOOD and Rob Savage, petitioners, v. Michael MOSS, et al.

No. 13-115.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 26, 2013.

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

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA 

FORT WAYNE DIVISION 

 

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) 

 ) 

 v. ) CAUSE NO.: 1:14-CR-4-TLS

 ) 

SHAWN C. NORMAN ) 

 

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 

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

Magistrate Judge [ECF No. 115], filed on October 30, 2018. The Defendant has waived 

objection to the Findings and Recommendation. 

The Court being duly advised, ADOPTS the Findings and Recommendation [ECF No. 

115] in its entirety and ACCEPTS the recommended disposition. Subject to this Court’s 

consideration of the Plea Agreement pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c), if 

applicable and necessary, the plea of guilty to the offense charged in Count 2 of the Superseding 

Indictment is hereby ACCEPTED, and the Defendant is adjudged GUILTY of the offense. 

 The Sentencing Scheduling Order scheduling sentencing-related deadlines and hearings 

will be issued by separate order.

SO ORDERED on November 14, 2018. 

s/ Theresa L. Springmann 

CHIEF JUDGE THERESA L. SPRINGMANN 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
AO 450 (Rev. 01/09) Judgment in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

Northern District of Indiana

JASON R. CRAIG, Rev., 

Plaintiff 

v. Civil Action No. 2:13-CV-92 JVB

DAVID LANE, Sheriff/Porter County 

Sheriff’s Dept; PORTER COUNTY 

SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT (Termed

4/26/2013); KIMBERLY HOUSE, ExMedical Director/PCJ; ADVANCED

CORRECTIONAL HEALTH CARE,

Healthcare Provider/PCJ; MICHELLE

HARRIS, Nurse; CASHAN WALKER,

Ex-Nurse/PCJ; DAWN MARTIN,

Nurse/PCJ; DR. AISHAMI, Jail

Doctor/PCJ; JOHN WIDUP, Jail

Warden; RON TAYLOR, Captain; and

RON GAYDOS, Assistant Warden;

Defendants

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL ACTION

The court has ordered that (check one):

 the plaintiff 

recover from the defendant the amount of 

 dollars $ , which includes prejudgment interest at the rate of % plus postjudgment interest at the rate of % along with costs.

 the plaintiff recover nothing, the action is dismissed on the merits, and the defendant 

recover costs from the plaintiff .

 X Other: Judgment is entered in favor of Defendants John Widup, Ron Taylor, Ron Gaydos, Michelle

Harris, Kimberly House, Dr. Aishami and Advanced Correctional Health Care. Defendant David Lane is

DISMISSED. Plaintiff Jason R. Craig’s claims against Defendants Cashan Walker and Dawn Martin remain

pending as to failure to provide adequate dental care. 

This action was (check one):

 tried to a jury with Judge presiding, and the jury has rendered

a verdict.

USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cv-00092-JVB-APR document 123 filed 09/03/15 page 1 of 2
 tried by Judge without a jury and the above decision was

reached.

 X decided by Judge Joseph S. Van Bokkelen on Motions for

Summary Judgment. 

DATE: September 3, 2015 ROBERT N. TRGOVICH, CLERK OF COURT

By s/C. Reed 

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cv-00092-JVB-APR document 123 filed 09/03/15 page 2 of 2
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 19

- 2522

_____________________________
H ENRY E UGENE J ACKSON , Appellant,

v.

S TATE O F F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Okaloosa County

. Michael A. Flowers , Judge

. September 11, 2020

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
L EWIS , N ORDBY , and L ONG , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________

Henry Eugene Jackson, pro se
, Appellant.2 Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Damaris E. Reynolds
, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
Exhibit
      32.1





CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO


18
      U.S.C.
      SECTION 1350,


AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





Each
      of
      the undersigned hereby certifies, in his capacity as an officer of Fushi
      International, Inc. (the "Company"), for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section
      1350,
      as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to
      the
      best of his knowledge:





(1)
      The
      Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September
      30,
      2006 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:
      May 15, 2007





/s/
      Li
      Fu


Li
      Fu


Chief
      Executive Officer





/s/
      Wenbing Chris Wang


Wenbing
      Chris Wang


Chief
      Financial Officer





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      Fushi International, Inc. and will be retained by Fushi International, Inc.
      and
      furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
      request.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not

be published and is not prec e dent except under the limit ed circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R.

47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FIFTH CIRCUIT

_________________

No. 02-50622

(Summary Calendar)

_________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ANGEL LATORRE,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Western District of Texas

SA-01-CR-644-ALL-EP

March 3, 2003

Before DAVIS, WIENER and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Angel Latorre was convicted of attempting to coerce and entice a minor to engage in sexual

activity, in vio lat ion of 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b) and § 2423(b). He was sentenced to 105 months in-2-

prison and three years of supervised release. Latorre now challenges one condition of his supervised

release. The condition prohibits him from “visit[ing] any areas that are near schools, day-care centers,

parks or other places where minors

. . . under the age of 18, congregate.” Latorre contends that this

restriction is unconstitutionally vague.

B ecause Latorre failed to raise this issue in the district court, we review the court’s

determination only for plain error. U nited States v. Edwards

, 303 F.3d 606, 640-41 (5th Cir. 2002).

We have stated that an error is “plain” when it is “clear or obvious under current law.” I d. at 641

(internal quotati on marks omitted). Latorre has not demonstrated that the district court committed

plain error when it imposed the condition in question. See United States v. Paul

, 274 F.3d 155, 166-

67 (5th Cir. 2001) (analyzing a similar condition and noting that, while the condition must provide

fair notice of the prohibited conduct, lack of specificity is no t necessary fatal to the validity of the

restriction).

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
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.;

OTTOMOTTO LLC; and OTTO

TRUCKING LLC,

Defendants. /

No. C 17-00939 WHA

ORDER GRANTING

PERMISSION TO FILE

MOTION FOR JURY

INSTRUCTION BASED ON

SPOLIATION

Having considered plaintiff Waymo LLC’s précis (Dkt. No. 2052) and the oppositions

thereto (Dkt. Nos. 2088, 2096), and in light of the order granting summary judgment in favor of

defendant Otto Trucking LLC (Dkt. No. 2151), the Court GRANTS permission for Waymo to

file a motion for an adverse inference jury instruction based on alleged spoliation of evidence

by defendants Uber Technologies, Inc., and Ottomotto LLC (but not by Otto Trucking). The

proposed motion must be filed by NOVEMBER 13 AT NOON, with the opposition due by

NOVEMBER 20 AT NOON and any reply due by NOVEMBER 24 AT 5:00 P.M.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 7, 2017. 

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 2177 Filed 11/07/17 Page 1 of 1
Mario A. WILLIAMS, petitioner, v. PEEL, et al.

No. 12-9205.

Supreme Court of the United States

July 22, 2013.

Petition for rehearing denied.
Exhibit 23.1

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Form 10-K of Titan Machinery Inc., of our reports dated
April 18, 2011, related to the consolidated financial statements and internal control over financial reporting, which appear in Titan Machinery Inc.'s Form 10-K for the years
ended January 31, 2011, 2010, and 2009.

We
also consent to the incorporation by reference of the above referenced reports in the Registration Statement of Titan Machinery Inc. on Form S-8 (File
No. 333-149426, effective February 28, 2008) and Form S-3 (File No. 333-171063, effective January 21, 2011).

/s/
Eide Bailly LLP

Minneapolis,
Minnesota
April 18, 2011

---
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 99.2


                            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 Alpha Technologies Group, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending April 27, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof ("Report"), I, James
J. Polakiewicz, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

     (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities and 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/ James J. Polakiewicz
--------------------------
James J. Polakiewicz
Chief Financial Officer
June 11, 2003


     A signed original 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.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

FORT WAYNE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) CAUSE NO. 1:13-CR-29

)

LEOBARDO GAONA )

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 February 3, 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 Count 1 as charged in the three-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 3rd day of February, 2014.

/s/ Roger B. Cosbey 

Roger B. Cosbey

United States Magistrate Judge

2
Case 3:17-cv-00666-TSH   Document 1   Filed 02/09/17   Page 1 of 9

Case 3:17-cv-00666-TSH   Document 1   Filed 02/09/17   Page 2 of 9

Case 3:17-cv-00666-TSH   Document 1   Filed 02/09/17   Page 3 of 9

Case 3:17-cv-00666-TSH   Document 1   Filed 02/09/17   Page 4 of 9

Case 3:17-cv-00666-TSH   Document 1   Filed 02/09/17   Page 5 of 9

Case 3:17-cv-00666-TSH   Document 1   Filed 02/09/17   Page 6 of 9

Case 3:17-cv-00666-TSH   Document 1   Filed 02/09/17   Page 7 of 9

Case 3:17-cv-00666-TSH   Document 1   Filed 02/09/17   Page 8 of 9

Case 3:17-cv-00666-TSH   Document 1   Filed 02/09/17   Page 9 of 9
Tauron EADY, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D18-2013

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed January 23, 2019. Rehearing Denied February 18, 2019

Tauron Eady, in proper person.

Ashley Brooke Moody, Attorney General, for appellee.

Before EMAS, C.J., and SALTER and FERNANDEZ, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. *See**Cox v. State*, 221 So.3d 723, 725 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (holding: "Unlike a motion for postconviction relief pursuant to rule 3.850, a motion to correct illegal sentence pursuant to rule 3.800(a) places the burden upon the defendant ... to affirmatively identify court records which, on their face, demonstrate the existence of an illegal sentence or an entitlement to relief under rule 3.800(a)"); *Llerena v. State*, 953 So.2d 31, 33 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (noting: "Concurrent sentences do not necessarily begin at the same time, and unless they are ordered to be coterminous, they will expire on different dates"); *Knight v. State*, 832 So.2d 172, 172 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (affirming order denying motion for postconviction relief where the "plea colloquy contain[ed] no indication that the sentence was to be coterminous with any other sentence").
Consent of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm









February 20, 2015





Scandium International Mining Corp.

(formerly EMC Metals Corp.)

1430 Greg Street, Suite 501

Sparks, NV 89431



Re:	Scandium International Mining
Corp. (the "Company")

Annual Report on Form 10-K



We hereby consent to the incorporation
by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-179657) of Scandium International Mining Corp., of our report dated
February 20, 2015, relating to the consolidated financial statements of Scandium International Mining Corp., which appear in this
Form 10-K. Our report contains an explanatory paragraph regarding the Company's ability to continue as a going concern.



Yours truly,





“DAVIDSON & COMPANY LLP”





DAVIDSON & COMPANY LLP

Chartered Accountants