alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Joseph TRUESDELL, petitioner, v. NEVADA.

No. 13-6696.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 18, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Nevada denied.
Scott A. CONZELMANN, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-10452.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 24, 2013.

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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-6474

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

DAVID MARTIN HAMRICK, a/k/a The Old Man,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (CR-92-67, CA-01-7-4)

Submitted: June 21, 2001 Decided: July 3, 2001

Before WIDENER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

David Martin Hamrick, Appellant Pro Se. Helen F. Fahey, OFFICE OF

THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia; Timothy Richard

Murphy, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Hampton, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
* We recently held in United States v. Sanders, 247 F.3d 139

(4th Cir. 2001), that the new rule announced in Apprendi v. New

Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), is not retroactively applicable to

cases on collateral review. Accordingly, Hamrick’s Apprendi claim

is not cognizable.

2

PER CURIAM:

David Martin Hamrick appeals the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2000).

We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal substantially on the reasoning

of the district court.* United States v. Hamrick, Nos. CR-92-67;

CA-01-7-4 (E.D. Va. Jan. 18, 2001). 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.

DISMISSED
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 1995 / Sunshine Act Meetings 25769

Date Issued: May 5, 1995.

Patricia D. Batie,

Corporate Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–11844 Filed 5–10–95; 9:31 am]

BILLING CODE 7050–01–M

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

Notice of Meeting

TIME AND DATE: 10:00 a.m. Thursday,

April 20, 1995.

PLACE: Board Conference Room,

Eleventh Floor, 1099 Fourteenth St.,

N.W., Washington, D.C. 20570.

STATUS: Closed to public observation

pursuant to 5 U.S.C. Section 552b(c)(2)

(internal personnel rules and practices);

(c)(6) (personal information where

disclosure would constitute a clearly

unwarranted invasion of personal

privacy) and (9)(B) (disclosure would

significantly frustrate implementation of

a proposed A proposed Agency Action).

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Personnel

Matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

Joseph E. Moore, Acting Executive

Secretary, Washington, D.C. 20570,

Telephone: (202) 273–1940.

Dated: Washington, DC., May 9, 1995.

By direction of the Board.

Joseph E. Moore,

Acting Executive Secretary, National Labor

Relations Board.

[FR Doc. 95–11882 Filed 5–10–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7540–01–M
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                              MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                        167,436
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              167,436
<PP&E>                                              0
<DEPRECIATION>                                      0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                167,436
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               0
<BONDS>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                      371,322 
<OTHER-SE>                                   (203,866)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  167,436 
<SALES>                                             0 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                4,852 
<CGS>                                               0 
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       0 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               31,535
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  0 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (26,683)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 0
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (26,683)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       0
                                                      

</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 23-0444

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

NICOLE LEE HUNT,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including January 5, 2024, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

November 28 2023

11/28/2023

Case Number: DA 23-0444
Dale Scott OLTEN, Sr., petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 13-5820.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 18, 2013.

On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* and petition for writ of certiorari granted. Judgment vacated, and case remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit for further consideration in light of *Descamps v. United States,* 570 U.S. ----, 133 S.Ct. 2276, 186 L.Ed.2d 438 (2013).
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

July 30, 2013

s0722 

# Order

Clerk 

### July 30, 2013

146895

GREGORY V. YOUNG,

Plaintiff,

v SC: 146895

AGC: 0038

- 13

ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION,

Defendant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the complaint for superintending control is considered, and

relief is DENIED, because the Court is not pe rsuaded that it should grant the requested

relief.
. - -- -.- _~-__-__I 

## 60

**OFFICE.OF THE**  **ATTORNEY GENERAL**  **OF TEXAS**  **AUSTIN**

EOaorobl8 Bmt YOra Allmlalrtntor 

### Fy~.?ga~ Oontroi Beard *x.8 1, Tonr Dear sir: Oplnlon no. o-ml8

5Undsr thisprodalon OS law, would it be unlawful t.2have a mlgn advertlslngwhiskey located In ao area zhere It 1s only leEa to sell aloohollo 

### borerages csntainlncnot zore tbnr 4; of alcohol by weight as in the above qucstlor!of Cak cliff?~-__ ._. .__ . . -

--.-

. Bonof,ab& Bort Tord,AQinirtrator, ksgr 3

. Would a nlakllar 8lgn adrrrtl8lng 14% bermage8 bo logal inM area or xmo 

### when It 18 only lagal to eel1 l

loohollabororagas more than 43 

### of aloohol by 

### wol&ht?oontaielng not alFoul a ain.ilar rign advertlring liquor br legal ln an 

### area whore it 18 only legal to rell l looholla beverage8 oootalnlngnot 5or4 then 14$ of aloohol by roluae? xoferrlngto the above eeotlon of law, you will note the languqe 1s ‘where t&e ralo of aloohollo beremr,er 18 poohlblted **by**

. law.*“. . . .a It is the oplnlon of thlr department that the abo~r q.uote4

atfituto In your reque8t, appearln(: ae A.-tlcls667-f%+(3) OSVernon'8 ,mnotated kenal Cc&o, is both clear and unambiguoue, therefore,not beily eubieot to oonstruotion. Th4 term aloohello bevrrage used therein 18 dofined in Seotlon 3a oi Artlolr 668,v. A. r. c. as roiiowr:

*Souo.Sa. 'tiooholioBenrage* shallmean alcohol aai any bsreraco oontalnlng o;ore than onahalf or one paroent

## or lloohol by volume rhioh la capable of use ror bsvera&rpurpoees, rltber alone or when diluted.* SeOtlon Z4a-1 ofArt1010 667, V.A.F.C., reads a4 fOiiOW8I "Billboard. The word 'billboard'as used herein 8hZll man a rtruotun dlreotly attached to tb lad, or to say houw or builblng, and havlIL: one 

### or moregaoo8 used for displaying thereon a slqp

### or advertlssnent oS the aloohollobevoraes buslnes6 

### of any person eqp3gea ln th4 a4nurciotur4,4aal4 or amkrlbutlon of filcohollo boveraqas, or ror tBc advertlsement of any t14rera~4 oontxlning alcohol In 4x04~9 or one-half or one (l/2 or 15) wr cant by ~411~x3, whether or not suoh rtruoture or elm be illtimtod by artlfloialmans. The tot.3'billboard' shallmt be lnoluslve of any wall or otter pat of any struoture used as a bullding, Genoa, soreon, front or barr1er.O 

## 6:. 

## 62

BonorabltiBsrt lord, Admlnlstrator, tam 3

Tlootrlo Sign. Tba 

### term *olrotrio riga* am us44 honln rhall l4m1 a 4truoturo or 44rio4, otkmr than l alllumlnatod billboard, by moana of rhloh l rtlrlolal llaht amatod throuuh th4 4mllo4tlon

half iS one phaSi8 ad&O&I

i/2 or 1%) pit ornt by v01ume.~
In oonoluslon, It 16 the opinion of this d4:artmr.t thatwhere, as in the Oak Cliff section of 3alla8, the salr of 

### hoer, an “tiooholloBsvoragog, 1s not prohlbltsd,a slm adrertlslng the sale of whlsksy and oor~orrnln(2 to all other psrtlnent seotlons at the aot, 1s local.

Trustlnc that tha above satisfaotorllyanswers your lnqulry, we remain Yours very tnily ATTORNEY G’XZ?,U OF T”.LCJ

'e4 + 

## U EugsnoAl+18

Adrtant By

Bob brad&ox ~osrearsoh

k !mldonoo .~sslstant

**OPINION**

**Lvmnu7xx**
Yi Qing CHEN, aka Seal B, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 13-7089.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 2, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Kathleen SEBELIUS, Secretary of Health and Human Services, et al., petitioners, v. HOBBY LOBBY STORES, INC., et al.

No. 13-354.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 26, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit granted.
----

----

| (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. |
|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:  October 28, 2011 | By:    |   /s/ Armando Garcia                                                      |
|-----------------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                              |   | Armando Garcia                                                                 |
|                              |   | President, Secretary and Treasurer (Principal Executive and Financial Officer) |

----

----
Exhibit 32



CERTIFICATIONS UNDER SECTION 906



Pursuant to section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), undersigned
officer of XpresSpa Group, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to such officer’s
knowledge, that:



The Amendment No. 1
to Annual Report for the year ended December 31, 2018 (the “Form 10-K”) of the Company fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|Dated: April 30, 2019 | /s/ DOUGLAS SATZMAN                                                                        
|--------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                      | Chief Executive Officer                                                                    
|                      | (Principal Executive Officer, Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)
|Exhibit-23.2
|------------

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

|The Board of DirectorsEcoBlu Products, Inc.(formerly N8 Concepts, Inc.)
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (File#333-164345 filed January 15, 2010) of our report dated October 1, 2009, appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of EcoBlu
Products, Inc. for the period ended June 2009, and to the reference to our firm in that Registration Statement.

|/s/ Jonathon P. Reuben CPAJonathon P. Reuben, CPA, An AccountancyTorrance, CAOctober 13, 2010
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---
Exhibit 32.2








CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Amendment No. 2 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Entia Biosciences, Inc. (the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2014, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Marvin S. Hausman, M.D., Acting Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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 for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014.





Dated:  August 31, 2015








By:  /s/ Marvin S. Hausman, M.D.


Acting Chief Financial Officer


(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
EXHIBIT 32.2


                           CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


         I, Lisa K. Vansickle, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
of First Banks,  Inc. (the "Company"),  certify,  pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

         (1)   The  Quarterly  Report  on  Form  10-Q  of the  Company  for  the
               quarterly  period  ended  March  31,  2007 (the  "Report")  fully
               complies with the  requirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the
               Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


Date:  May 14, 2007

                                   By:  /s/ Lisa K. Vansickle
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                            Lisa K. Vansickle
                                            Senior Vice President and
                                            Chief Financial Officer
                                            (Principal Financial and  Accounting
                                            Officer)
case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM document 61 filed 07/21/14 page 1 of 4
case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM document 61 filed 07/21/14 page 2 of 4
case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM document 61 filed 07/21/14 page 3 of 4
case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM document 61 filed 07/21/14 page 4 of 4
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 45 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

<DOC>
117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. CON. RES. 45

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That, in the enrollment of H.R. 6833, the Clerk of the House of 
Representatives shall amend the title so as to read: ``Making 
continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2023, and for other 
purposes.''.

            Passed the Senate September 29, 2022.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
117th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                            S. CON. RES. 45

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

       Providing for a correction in the enrollment of H.R. 6833.
```
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

FORT WAYNE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) CAUSE NO. 1:12-CR-3

)

MICHAEL L. FLORES )

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 August 1, 2012, 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 1st day of August, 2012.

/s/ Roger B. Cosbey 

Roger B. Cosbey

United States Magistrate Judge

2
<PAGE>


                                                                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 Alpha Technologies Group, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q/A-1 for the period ending April 25, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof ("Report"),
Lawrence Butler, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and James J.
Polakiewicz, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section. 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.



Date: July 28, 2004             By: /s/ Lawrence Butler
                                   -------------------------
                                    Lawrence Butler
                                    Chief Executive Officer
                                    (Principal Executive Officer)


Date: July 28, 2004             By: /s/ James J. Polakiewicz
                                    ------------------------
                                    James J. Polakiewicz
                                    Chief Financial Officer
                                    (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)

     The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350,
Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed as part of
the Form 10-Q/A-1 or as a separate disclosure document.

     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.