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. 1:15-cr-9

)

MIGUEL RIVERA HERNANDEZ, a/k/a )

Noe Montoya, a/k/a Noe Hernandez, a/k/a )

Noel Hernandez-Rivera, a/k/a Miguel Molinez, )

a/k/a Luis Hernandez-Montoya, a/k/a )

Noe Hernandez-Rivera, )

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 Susan Collins, on

April 16, 2015, 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 charges 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 Count 1 of 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 16th day of April 2015.

/s Susan Collins 

Susan Collins

United States Magistrate Judge

2
##### 



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 Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report of Maxtor Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-Q/A for the period ended
September 25, 2004, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Dr. C.S. Park, Chairman 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 (Section 906), that: (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); 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/ Dr. C.S. ParkDr. C.S. ParkChairman and Chief Executive
Officer Date: June 9, 2005 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 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.
A photo. Senior leaders meet with CEDP participants to discuss their first year. Pictured are Rich Brown, Rex Taylor, Maureen Sweeney, Laura Lapin, Kathy Norcross, Mickey Collins, Steve Mosier, Rus Pittman, Erica Bovenzi, Andrew Stirling, Bob Mooney, and Ira Kitmacher. Executive advisors and host supervisors not shown are Glen Bjorklund, Jim LaPierre, and Lisa Roy.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE MESA
OFFSHORE TRUST 1999 FIRST QUARTER REPORT AND FORM 10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH 1999 FIRST QUARTER REPORT AND FORM 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                       1,764,874
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   19,148
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,784,022
<PP&E>                                     380,905,000
<DEPRECIATION>                             380,848,599
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,840,423
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      56,401
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,840,423
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                19,148
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                19,148
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     .000
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     .000
        

</TABLE>
1

Initial Compliance 

Assessment

•Request GFE support

•Review GFE

•Positive review 

results? (Y/N)

•No – proceed to 

Compliance 

Assistance

Compliance 

Assistance

•Obtain clarification on 

GFE support

•Provide technical 

assistance

•Positive review 

results? (Y/N)

•No – proceed to Final 

Compliance Review

Final Compliance 

Review

•FDIC request GFE 

plan

•Contractor provide 

GFE plan

•OMWI review GFE 

plan

•Positive results? 

(Y/N)

•No – proceed to 

Final Compliance 

Review

Final Compliance 

Determination

•Contractor has 

failed to 

demonstrate GFE.

•Final agency 

determination:

•Terminate the 

contract

•Refer to OFCCP

•Other 

Administrative 

Action

The good faith effort (GFE) review procedures consist of four phases designed to assess a contractor’s performance in complying 

with DFA’s Section 342(c)(2). At the end of each phase, a decision will be made whether or not to proceed to the next phase. When 

the results of Phase I are inconclusive, the process will continue into Phase II. Only if it is determined that the contractor has failed 

to provide “satisfactory” good faith effort support documentation despite OMWI assistance, will the assessment proceed to Phases 

III and IV.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

OSCAR GUILLEN, SR., )

)

Plaintiff, )

) CAUSE NO.: 2:13-CV-71-TLS

v. )

)

MANUAL BARAGEN, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

OPINION AND ORDER

Oscar Guillen, Sr., a prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a complaint in Lake County

Superior Court, which was removed to this Court by the Defendants [ECF Nos. 1, 2]. Guillen

cannot litigate in this Court, however, because he is a restricted filer. On October 29, 2009, the

Court entered an order directing the Clerk “to return, unfiled, any papers filed in any case by or

on behalf of Oscar Guillen, Sr. (except for a notice of appeal or unless filed in a criminal or

habeas corpus proceeding) until he has paid in full all outstanding fees and sanctions in all civil

actions in any federal court.” Guillen v. Hoppe, 2:09-CV-345 (N.D. Ind. filed Oct. 19, 2009).

That sanction was imposed because Guillen is an abusive litigator who filed at least nine

frivolous cases or appeals, and then attempted to “bamboozle” the Court to evade his obligation

to pre-pay the filing fee. Guillen v. Hoppe, 2:09-CV-345 (N.D. Ind. filed Oct. 19, 2009); 28

U.S.C. § 1915(g); Support Sys. Int’l, Inc. v. Mack, 45 F.3d 185 (7th Cir. 1995). The filing

restriction is still in place because Guillen owes this Court about $3,465 in unpaid filing fees.

The Defendants removed the complaint because it contains federal claims, and it was

their right to do so. See 28 U.S.C. § 1441. However, because Guillen is unable to file anything in

this Court, it is impossible for him to litigate here. Accordingly, the federal claims contained in

the complaint will be dismissed without prejudice. They cannot be litigated unless and until the
filing restriction is lifted. Guillen’s state law claims will be remanded to the state court for

further proceedings. See Doe-2 v. McLean Cnty. Unit Dist. No. 5 Bd. of Dirs., 593 F.3d 507, 513

(7th Cir. 2010) (“Ordinarily, when a district court dismisses the federal claims conferring

original jurisdiction prior to trial, it relinquishes supplemental jurisdiction over any state-law

claims under 28 U.S.C. 1367(c)(3).”) (citing Hansen v. Bd. Of Trs. of Hamilton Se. Sch. Corp.,

551 F.3d 599, 607 (7th Cir. 2008)).

For the foregoing reasons, the Plaintiff’s federal claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT

PREJUDICE as stated herein, and the case is REMANDED to Lake County Superior Court for

further proceedings on his state law claims.

SO ORDERED on February 26, 2013.

 s/ Theresa L. Springmann 

THERESA L. SPRINGMANN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FORT WAYNE DIVISION

2
10

FDIC S

Seated (left to right): Acting Chairman Martin Gruenberg, Former Chairman Shelia Bair, Director Thomas Curry. First Row (left to right): Arleas Upton Kea, 

James Angel, Jr., Mark Pearce, Thom Terwilliger, Craig Jarvill. Second Row (left to right): James Wigand, Fred Carns, Jon Rymer, Russell Pittman, Sandra 

Thompson, Alice Goodman. Third Row (left to right): Jesse Villarreal, Bret Edwards, Steven App, Andrew Gray, Cottrell Webster, Paul Nash.

Not pictured: Michael Krimminger, D. Michael Collins, Stephen Quick.
FDIC  003  2009

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

550 17th Street, NW

Washington, DC 20429-9990
Nicholas PERA, petitioner, v. EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF NEVADA, CLARK COUNTY, et al.

No. 12-9173.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2013.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* denied. Petitioner allowed until June 3, 2013, within which to pay the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) and to submit a petition in compliance with Rule 33.1 of the Rules of this Court.
Exhibit 4.21
English Translation




---



##### 



Noah Education Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. (Noah)
 Shenzhen Jinyinhe Investment Co., Ltd. (Designated Party)
 
 
 
 
  Shenzhen Wentai Education Industry Development Co., Ltd. (Wentai Education)




---



##### 



Upon completion of registration of the equitytransfer and capital increase with the State
    
    
    Contribution to the registeredShareholder
    
    Administration for Industry and Commerce
    
    
    capital by each shareholderNoah
    
    
    70
    %
    
    
    4,200Qicai Du
    
    
    16.446
    %
    
    
    986.76Yuzhang He
    
    
    6.042
    %
    
    
    362.52Xing Liang
    
    
    6.012
    %
    
    
    360.72Ming Yin
    
    
    1.500
    %
    
    
    90Total
    
    
    100
    %
    
    
    6,000




---



##### 



[Signature page to follow]




---



##### 



Noah Education Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd.
 /s/
 [Company seal of Noah Education Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. is affixed]
 Shenzhen Jinyinhe Investment Co., Ltd.
 /s/
 [Company seal of Shenzhen Jinyinhe Investment Co., Ltd. is affixed]
 Qicai Du
 /s/ Qicai DuYuzhang He
 /s/ Yuzhang HeXing Liang
 /s/ Xing LiangMing Yin
 /s/ Ming Yin
 Shenzhen Wentai Education Industry Development Co., Ltd.
 /s/
 [Company seal of Shenzhen Wentai Education Industry Development Co., Ltd. is affixed]
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1340 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1340

 To amend title 38, United States Code, to increase the reporting fee 
      payable by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to educational 
   institutions for reports or certifications which such educational 
    institutions are required by law or regulation to submit to the 
                               Secretary.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 16, 2005

  Mr. Evans introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 38, United States Code, to increase the reporting fee 
      payable by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to educational 
   institutions for reports or certifications which such educational 
    institutions are required by law or regulation to submit to the 
                               Secretary.

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

SECTION 1. INCREASE IN AMOUNT OF REPORTING FEE PAYABLE TO EDUCATIONAL 
              INSTITUTIONS.

    (a) Increase.--Subsection (c) of section 3684 of title 38, United 
States Code, is amended--
            (1) by striking ``$7'' in the second sentence and inserting 
        ``$10''; and
            (2) by striking ``$11'' in such second sentence and 
        inserting ``$15''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) shall 
apply to fees payable under section 3684(c) of such title during months 
beginning after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
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
annual report for the year ended December 31, 2009 on Form 10-K (the Annual Report) of HUGHES Telematics, Inc. (the Company) as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Craig J. Kaufmann,
Vice President Finance and Treasurer of the Company, hereby 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 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 Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



By:

/S/    CRAIG J.
KAUFMANNName:

Craig J. KaufmannTitle:

Vice President Finance and Treasurer(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)Date:

March 16, 2010
Ariel ANTONMARCHI, petitioner, v. CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK, INC.

No. 13-6713.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 9, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
EXHIBIT 31.2

                            SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION

      I, Patrick L. Milton, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of YDI
Wireless, Inc., certify that:

      1. I have reviewed this amended quarterly report on Form 10-Q of YDI
Wireless, 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; and

      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 registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report.


Date: March 25, 2004                             /s/ Patrick L. Milton
                                         ---------------------------------------
                                         Patrick L. Milton
                                         Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
Donald G. JACKMAN, Jr., petitioner, v. Harley J. LAPPIN, et al.

No. 12-9182.

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.
**EXHIBIT 32**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 USC, SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

          In connection with this annual report of Ubiquitech Software Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended August 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, in the capacities and on the date indicated below, certifies, 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 Rule 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

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

 

 

| Dated:  February 9, 2010 | s/Young Yuen______________________

Young Yuen, Chief Executive Officer

And Chief Financial Officer |
|--------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Randy WASHINGTON, Jr., petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-9834.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 20, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
Un brote de enfermedad causado por los alimentos que se pudo evitar 

Manuel, mi bebé, tenía diarrea y fiebre. Pase Tuve que ir a trabajar para no arriesgarme a Hubiera querido quedarme en casa cuidando a Manuel. 

toda la noche cuidándolo. Al día siguiente, perder mi trabajo. Estuve todo el tiempo preocupada por el mientras 

tenia que ir a trabajar. trabajaba. 

Al día siguiente, la gente que yo atendí en el 

Mary está disfrutando un almuerzo con su El pan estaba delicioso pero ella no podía imaginar restaurante se quejó de estar enfermos con 

papá. que más estaba comiendo. vómitos y diarrea.

Mary, la cual tenía un sistema inmunológico débil, Unos días más tarde, Mary fue trasladada No fue mi intención hacer que la gente se 

se enfermó de gravedad. a la unidad de cuidado intensivo. Otras 25 enfermara. Ahora, por mi culpa, alguien puede morir.

personas se enfermaron con diarrea y vómitos. 

El restaurante cerró y yo perdí mi trabajo.

Proteja a todos. Lave sus manos con frecuencia y de la forma correcta. No toque alimentos 

listos para comer directamente con sus manos. Si está enfermo, quédese en casa.
CFPB and FDIC Partnership

+
About the collaboration

 Why we’re working together

 Build financial capability among 

America’s youth

 How we’ll do it

 Encourage parents and caregivers to 

have conversations and do activities with their kids

 Give financial educators practical tools, 

tips, and resources they can use to feel prepared and confident

 Provide hands-on learning 

opportunities through community partnerships
Coming soon! New Money Smart program

 Existing Money Smart programs have 

shown success

 FDIC will revamp Money Smart 

 Suitable for children and youth, ages 3 to 20 Aligned with state standards

 FDIC will create new Money Smart 

programs for parents and caregivers

 Can be used as an accompaniment to the 

children and youth programs

 Can be used on a standalone basis  Expected completion date: January 2015
 Starts with listening, to find out what 

parents are currently doing, what’s working, and what’s not

 Continues with a detailed strategy to 

promote existing resources for parents, repurpose existing content, and develop new materials as needed

 Delivered via outreach to national 

organizations working with parents, as well as via mass media

 12 national parent organizations 

are confirmed to participatein the campaign (as of April 2014)

For parents and caregivers: Awareness ca
For teachers: Online resource center

 Starts with listening, to find out 

what resources are currently working for teachers and what gaps exist

 Continues with a new online 

resource center, proposed to contain tips and tools to build confidence in the classroom

 Delivered via outreach to national 

organizations for teachers, principals, and administrators

 19 organizations identified (as of 

April 2014)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

SOUTH BEND DIVISION 

 

LUCKY WEAH )

Plaintiff, )

)

v ) Case No. 3:14CV1988

THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA; )

THE SOUTH BEND POLICE DEPARTMENT; )

SBPD OFFICER ANDREW HINES, PN 2178 AND )

SOUTH BEND OFFICERS CURRENTLY UNKNOWN )

Defendants. )

NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL PURSUANT TO F.R.C.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i)

Pursuant to F.R.C.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the

Plaintiff, Lucky Weah, by counsel, Jeffrey E. Kimmell, hereby gives notice that the above

captioned action is voluntarily dismissed against all Defendants. The dismissal is made with

prejudice.

 S/Jeffrey E. Kimmell 

Jeffrey E. Kimmell, 18734-71

218 West Washington St. #600

South Bend, IN 46601

Tel. 574-232-7410

Fax. 574-287-8396

USDC IN/ND case 3:14-cv-01988-PPS-CAN document 7 filed 01/22/15 page 1 of 2
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on the 22nd day of January, 2015, I electronically filed the foregoing NOTICE

OF DISMISSAL with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which sent notification

of such filing to the following: 

Jeffrey L Sanford: 

jlsattlaw@aol.com, jsanford@southbendin.gov, gpawelsk@southbendin.gov 

s/ Jeffrey E. Kimmell

-2-

USDC IN/ND case 3:14-cv-01988-PPS-CAN document 7 filed 01/22/15 page 2 of 2