alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cr-00066-JVB-JEM document 1 filed 05/17/13 page 1 of 26
USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cr-00066-JVB-JEM document 1 filed 05/17/13 page 2 of 26
USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cr-00066-JVB-JEM document 1 filed 05/17/13 page 3 of 26
USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cr-00066-JVB-JEM document 1 filed 05/17/13 page 4 of 26
USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cr-00066-JVB-JEM document 1 filed 05/17/13 page 5 of 26
USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cr-00066-JVB-JEM document 1 filed 05/17/13 page 6 of 26
USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cr-00066-JVB-JEM document 1 filed 05/17/13 page 7 of 26
USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cr-00066-JVB-JEM document 1 filed 05/17/13 page 8 of 26
USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cr-00066-JVB-JEM document 1 filed 05/17/13 page 9 of 26
USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cr-00066-JVB-JEM document 1 filed 05/17/13 page 10 of 26
USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cr-00066-JVB-JEM document 1 filed 05/17/13 page 11 of 26
USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cr-00066-JVB-JEM document 1 filed 05/17/13 page 12 of 26
USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cr-00066-JVB-JEM document 1 filed 05/17/13 page 13 of 26
USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cr-00066-JVB-JEM document 1 filed 05/17/13 page 14 of 26
USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cr-00066-JVB-JEM document 1 filed 05/17/13 page 15 of 26
USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cr-00066-JVB-JEM document 1 filed 05/17/13 page 16 of 26
USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cr-00066-JVB-JEM document 1 filed 05/17/13 page 17 of 26
USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cr-00066-JVB-JEM document 1 filed 05/17/13 page 18 of 26
USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cr-00066-JVB-JEM document 1 filed 05/17/13 page 19 of 26
USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cr-00066-JVB-JEM document 1 filed 05/17/13 page 20 of 26
USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cr-00066-JVB-JEM document 1 filed 05/17/13 page 21 of 26
USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cr-00066-JVB-JEM document 1 filed 05/17/13 page 22 of 26
USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cr-00066-JVB-JEM document 1 filed 05/17/13 page 23 of 26
USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cr-00066-JVB-JEM document 1 filed 05/17/13 page 24 of 26
USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cr-00066-JVB-JEM document 1 filed 05/17/13 page 25 of 26
USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cr-00066-JVB-JEM document 1 filed 05/17/13 page 26 of 26
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED November 9, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-20478 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ADEBAYO MOHAMMED, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:04-CR-421-ALL

-------------------- Before BARKSDALE, DeMOSS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Adebayo Mohammed raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense, by United States v. Stone , 306 F.3d 241, 243 (5th Cir. 2002), which held that no Sixth Amendment violation arises when a district court considers the nature of a prior conviction rather than presenting the question to a jury in sentencing the defendant under the Armed Career Criminal Act, and by UnitedNo. 05-20478 -2- States v. Austin , 432 F.3d 598, 599-600 (5th Cir. 2005), which held that the application of the remedial opinion of United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220 (2005), to a sentencing hearing where the underlying offense was committed pre- Booker did not violate constitutional due process or ex post facto requirements. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
UNITE HERE LOCAL 355, petitioner, v. Martin MULHALL, et al.

No. 12-99.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 24, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit granted.
EXHIBIT
      32




CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
      AND


CHIEF
      FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18
      U.S.C.


SECTION
      1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
      SECTION


906
      OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
      2002








The
      undersigned certify, pursuant to 18
      U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of National Energy Services Company, Inc.
      (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007 fully
      complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such Annual Report
      on
      Form 10-KSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition
      and
      results of operations of the Company.








January
                29,
                2008
            /s/
                John T. O’NeillJohn
                T.
                O’NeillChief
                Executive
                Officer/s/
                John A. GrilloJohn
                A.
                GrilloChief
                Financial
                Officer








This
      certification accompanies the
      Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall
      not
      be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.





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.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2084 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2084

               To extend the duty suspension on Wakil XL.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 4, 2005

  Mr. Coble introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
               To extend the duty suspension on Wakil XL.

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

SECTION 1. WAKIL XL.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.02.04 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to Wakil XL) is amended by 
striking ``12/31/2006'' and inserting ``12/31/2008''.
    (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 the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 10.21

Compensatory Arrangements with Executive Officers

Compensation for executives at TECO Energy, Inc. (the “Corporation”) consists of several components. Included among these are base salary and an annual incentive award program.

Base salary information for the Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and the other executive officers named in our  most recently filed proxy statement who are currently serving as executive offers of the Corporation (together, the “named executive officers”) is set forth in the table below.

The Corporation’s annual incentive plan is filed as Exhibit 10.4 to the Corporation’s Annual Report on Form 10-K to which this document is an exhibit (the “Report”). The 2015 target award percentages for awards under the annual incentive plan for the named executive officers are set forth in the table below.

Compensatory arrangements relating to other aspects of the Corporation’s executive compensation program are filed as exhibits to the Report.   

Named Executive Officer Salary and Target Award Percentage Information for 2015

 


	
Name
	
 
	
Title
	
 
	
Salary
	
 
	
 
	
Target

Award %
	
 

	
John B. Ramil
	
 
	
President and Chief Executive Officer
	
 
	
$
	
855,000
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
100
	
%

	
Gordon L. Gillette
	
 
	
President of Tampa Electric Company
	
 
	
$
	
546,000
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
70
	
%

	
Sandra W. Callahan
	
 
	
Senior Vice President-Finance and Accounting and Chief Financial Officer
	
 
	
$
	
489,250
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
70
	
%

	
Charles A. Attal III
	
 
	
Senior Vice President – General Counsel and Chief Legal Officer
	
 
	
$
	
391,400
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
60
	
%

	
Phil L. Barringer
	
 
	
Senior Vice President – Corporate Services and Chief Human Resources Officer
	
 
	
$
	
380,000
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
55
	
%
CTSH Exhibit 10.14 12/31/2014




EXHIBIT 10.14
SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE
COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS CORPORATION
2009 INCENTIVE COMPENSATION PLAN


Cognizant Technology Solutions Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the “Corporation”), originally adopted the Cognizant Technology Solutions Corporation 2009 Incentive Compensation Plan (as amended from time to time, the “Plan”) effective as of April 16, 2009, and the Plan was approved by the stockholders of the Corporation on June 9, 2009.  The Board of Directors of the Corporation subsequently amended the Plan in certain respects effective as of March 1, 2014.  Article Five, Section V.B of the Plan allows the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of the Corporation to amend the Plan in certain respects at any time or from time to time.
In order to further amend the Plan in certain respects, this Second Amendment to the Plan has been adopted and approved by a resolution of the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of the Corporation on September 18, 2014, effective as set forth below.  This Second Amendment to the Plan, together with the Plan, constitutes the entire Plan as amended to date.
1.    Effective as of September 18, 2014, Article Two, Section V.C of the Plan is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows: 
C.     Any Optionee who is subject to taxation in the United Kingdom may, in the Corporation’s sole discretion, be required to pay all secondary Class 1 National Insurance Contributions which may otherwise be payable by the Corporation (or the Parent or Subsidiary employing such Optionee) arising in connection with the grant, vesting or exercise of an Award under the Discretionary Grant Program or the issuance of shares of Common Stock thereunder (the “Employer Option NIC”). If so required by the Corporation, the Optionee must pay such Employer Option NIC at such times and in such form as determined by the Corporation (or such Parent or Subsidiary).
2.    Effective as of September 18, 2014, Article Three, Section III.F of the Plan is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:
F.    Any Participant who is subject to taxation in the United Kingdom may, in the Corporation’s sole discretion, be required to pay all secondary Class 1 National Insurance Contributions which may otherwise be payable by the Corporation (or any Parent or Subsidiary employing or retaining or previously employing or retaining the Participant) arising in connection with the Award or the issuance of shares of Common Stock thereunder (the “Employer Issuance NIC”). If so required by the Corporation, and until such time as the Corporation provides the Participant with written or electronic notice to the contrary, the Employer Issuance NIC shall be collected through the Share Withholding Method.
#### THE STATE V. ROACH.

*Habeas Corpus.*

(Decided Feb. 12, 1907.)

Appeal from order of W. L. Parks, chancellor, admitting defendant to bail.

Massey Wilson, Attorney General, for the State.

F. B. Brioken, for appellee.

Simpson, J.

Affirmed on the authority of *Ex parte*Richardson, 96 Ala. 110; *Ex parte*Sloan, 95 Ala. 22; *Ex parte Nettles,*58 Ala. 275; *Ex parte McAnally,*53 Ala. 495.

Tyson, C. J., Haralson and Denson, JJ., concur.
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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2009 of Boeing Capital Corporation (the Company) as filed with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report) and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Kevin R. Millison, Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, certify, that:



| | (1) |  | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                 |  |  |  |                                                             
|---------------- |  |  |  | ------------------------------------------------------------
|October 21, 2009 |  |  |  | /s/ KEVIN R. MILLISON                                       
|                 |  |  |  | Kevin R. Millison Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer



26
GENERAL 

March 24, 1939 

Ron.-Thos. R. Chandler 

coiintg Attoflley 

Robertson CoMitg 

Franklin, Texas' 

Dear Sir: 

_i 

. ~~ Qpinioii No a, Q-glQ 

"Re: Are @at oicaun~y~~ltnesees'en; 

~tltled to fees ana &p&nses for. 

appearing befors,a:&Ourt‘of Inquiry Investigating a felony case? 

Your'tibquestfor an 6plnlbn on then %~bovti stated question 

has ~been received by this office. 

Your'Gtter.r&aas~ in’ p&&t 6s~foll6wal 

__ "A short time ago 1% was nec&ssa+y for 

me to determine whether or not certaln.pu~- 

ported wltne&3es~,weM Ln poasess,i,on of lnfor- 

&iatlon ~that was~tiery~lmpbrtant‘ln a felony 

matte&In this Coutitg and I request&l our ~' 

JustI& of the Peace In the Ptieclnct‘nearest 

to this County to'hola a court of Inquiry ana 

subpoenaed sala uitnesses and he issued a subpobna'&ummonlng said witnesses~ beford him at '~ 

that date and said witnesses were summon'ed by 

the Sheriff of the adj,olnlng County and'said 

witnesses appearing and testified under Oath 

and their testimony was reduced to writing." 

Articles 886 and 887, Code of Crimlnal,Procedure read 

as follows: 

“Art. 886. When a justlee of the peace 

has.good cause t.o believe that an offense tia~s 

been, 6r Is about to be, committea against 

the laws of this State, he may tiummon and 

examine any witness in relation, thereto. If 

It appears from the statement Of any witness 

that an offense has b,een committed, the justice shall reduce said statements to writing 

and cause ,the same to be sworn to,by each witness 

making the same; andi issue & w&rant for the 

arrest Of the offender, the same as if complaint 

had been made and filed." 
\-.--..- 

Hon. Thos. R. Chandler, March 24, 1939, page 3 O-510 

,, 

hW:AW:wc 

Very truly yours 

ATTORNEYGENERAL OF TEXAS .~ 

By s/drcIell Wlllliims 

Ardel~~Wllllams 

Assistant 

APPROvEDi ~' 

s/W.F. Moore 

fwroRRxY GErwuL OF TExAs (FIRST ASSISTANT) 

., :
#### WEINSTEIN v. SINGER MFG. CO.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

October 18, 1907.)

Action by Sofi Weinstein against the Singer Manufacturing Company.

No opinion. Motion granted. Order filed.
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T F R E DY AL E J AN DR O H I DA L GO S AN T AC R UZ a n dE L E NA MAGO HI DA L GO , P et i t i o n ers, v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 09- 72084 A ge nc yN os . A 096- 066- 964

A 096- 066- 965 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

a n O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls A pr i l 20, 2011 ** B e f o r e : R Y M E R , T H O M A S , an dP A E Z , C ir c u it Ju d g e s . F r e dyA l e

j andr o H i da l go- S ant a c ruz a nd E l e naM a go H i da l go, na t i ve s a nd c i t i z e ns of

M e xi c o, pe t i t i on pr o s e f orr e vi e w of

the B oar d of

I m m i gr a t i on A ppe a l s ’ or de rdi s m i s s i ng the i rappe a l f r om a n i m m i gr a t i on j udge ’ s de c i s i on



# FI LED MA Y04 2 011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS09- 72084 2 d e n y in g th e irm o tio n to r e o p e n r e m o v a l p r o c e e d in g s c o n du c te din ab s e n tia . W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on unde r8 U . S . C . § 1252. W e r e vi e w f orabus e of

di s c r e t i on the d e n ia l o f am o tio n to r e o p e n . Moh am m ed v. G on zales , 40 0 F . 3d 78 5, 79 1 (9th C i r. 2 0 0 5 ) . W e d e n yth e p e titio n f o rr e v ie w . T h e a g e n c yd idn o t ab u s e its d is c r e tio n in d e n y in g p e titio n e r s ’ m o tio n to r e ope n be c aus e the m ot i on w a s f i l e d m or e than f

i ve y e ar s a f

t e rthe J anua ry15, 2 0 0 3 , r e m o v a l o r d e r , se e 8 C . F . R . § 1 00 3. 23 (b)( 4)(i )( A )( 1), and p et i t i on er s f ai l ed t o e s t abl i s h tha tthe ya c t e d w i th the due di l i ge nc e r e qui r e d f ore qui t abl e t ol l i ng, se e I tu rr i b a rr i a v . I

NS , 321 F . 3d 889, 897 ( 9th C i r . 2003) , orf e l l w i thi n the e xc e pt i ons to th e f ilin g d e a d lin e , se e 8 C . F . R . § 1 00 3. 23 (b)( 4)(i i i )( A )( 2); 8 U . S . C . § 1 22 9(a) ; Flo r es - Ch a v ezv . A s c h c r o ft , 36 2 F . 3d 11 50 , 11 56 n. 4 (9th C i r. 20 04 ) ( “ C urre ntl aw do es no tre qu i re thatthe N ot i ce of A pp ear. . . be i n any l angu age other than E n g lis h .” ) . P E T I T I ON F OR RE V I E W DE NI E D.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             MAY-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1996
<CASH>                                           3,502
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   42,314
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,355
<INVENTORY>                                     36,986
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                88,299
<PP&E>                                          61,735
<DEPRECIATION>                                  34,203
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 134,135
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           23,725
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           149
<OTHER-SE>                                      61,879
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   134,135
<SALES>                                         64,655
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                82,252
<CGS>                                           37,523
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   74,149
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (135)<F1>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   169
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,052
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,557
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,901
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,656
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,656
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .31
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .31
<FN>
<F1>This is income
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

HAMMOND DIVISION

APRIL JOHNSON, )

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CAUSE NO.: 2:15-CV-417-JD-PRC

)

MICHAEL FRYZEL, FREDERICK FREGO, )

STEPHEN KIL, JAMES TURTURILLO, and )

TOWN OF ST. JOHN, )

Defendants. )

OPINION AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court on a “Notice of Scrivener’s Error, & If Deemed Necessary

by the Court, This Notice Is Sought to Be Treated as a Motion by Plaintiff for Leave to Correct the

Caption in the Above Captioned Matter” [DE 33], filed by Plaintiff April Johnson on April 13, 2016. 

No response has been filed, and the time to do so has passed.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 10 provides, in relevant part, that the “title of the complaint

must name all the parties.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(a). The caption of neither the Complaint, filed on

November 15, 2015, nor the Amended Complaint, filed on April 7, 2016, lists the Town of St. John

as a defendant in the caption. However, both pleadings contain allegations against the Town of St.

John. Plaintiff issued a summons as to the Town of St. John with the Amended Complaint. Counsel

has entered an appearance on behalf of the Town of St. John. On April 22, 2016, Defendant Town

of St. John filed a Partial Motion to Dismiss and/or Strike of Defendants Frego, Kil, Town of St.

John, and Turturillo.

In the interests of justice and judicial efficiency, the Court hereby GRANTS the relief sought

in the “Notice of Scrivener’s Error, & If Deemed Necessary by the Court, This Notice Is Sought to

Be Treated as a Motion by Plaintiff for Leave to Correct the Caption in the Above Captioned Matter
[DE 33] and ORDERS that the Amended Complaint [DE 30] is amended by interlineation to include

Town of St. John as a defendant in the caption. The Court notes that the electronic docket already

lists Town of St. John as a defendant. No further action is required by Plaintiff.

All future filings in this case shall include Town of St. John as a defendant in the caption.

So ORDERED this 4th day of May, 2016.

s/ Paul R. Cherry 

MAGISTRATE JUDGE PAUL R. CHERRY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2