alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
*

 This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally

disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may

be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

** After examining the briefs and appellate record, this three-judge panel has

determined unanimously that oral argument would not be of material assistance in the

determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. 34.1.9. The case is

therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

F I L E D

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

DEC 10 1997

PATRICK FISHER

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. No. 97-5101

GAYLE SCHREIER and IRWIN

SCHREIER,

 Defendant-Appellants.

(D.C. No. 88-CR-57-B)

(N.D. Okla.)

 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

 

Before BALDOCK, MCKAY, and LUCERO, Circuit Judges.**

 

Defendants, Gayle and Irwin Schreier, appear before this court for the third time.

See United States v. Schreier, 908 F.2d 645 (10th Cir. 1990) (Schreier I); United States v. 

Schreier, 81 F.3d 173, 1996 WL 159945 (10th Cir. 1996) (unpublished) (Schreier II). In
1

“The writ of coram nobis is an extraordinary remedy available to a

petitioner no longer in custody who seeks to vacate his conviction in circumstances where

the petitioner can demonstrate that he is suffering civil disabilities as a consequence of

the criminal convictions and that the challenged error is of sufficient magnitude to justify

the extraordinary relief.” United States v. Castro, 26 F.3d 557, 559 (5th Cir. 1994)

(citations omitted).

2

this appeal, Defendants seek to revisit the precise issue decided in Schreier II, namely,

whether the district court erroneously denied their request for a writ of coram nobis.1

Specifically, Defendants contend that: (1) the government failed to present any evidence

to prove essential elements of the crime charged; (2) Defendants were denied due process

because their convictions were based “on wholly insufficient evidence”; and (3) the

district court erred in summarily dismissing Defendants’ petition.

 We have reviewed the Defendants’ prior appeals, the parties’ briefs, including

Defendants’ reply brief, and the entire record before us. We conclude the district court

committed no reversible error.

AFFIRMED. 

Entered for the Court,

Bobby R. Baldock

Circuit Judge
**Exhibit
      32.2**





Written
      Statement of the Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350





Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, the undersigned officer of Traffix, Inc.
      ("Registrant"), hereby certifies that the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form
      10-Q for the three months ended August 31, 2006 (the "Report") fully complies
      with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report
      fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
      of operations of the Registrant.


/s/
              Daniel HarveyDANIEL
              HARVEYChief
                Financial Officer
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v William Smith, Appellant.

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Beldock, J.), rendered November 11, 1980, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

*615Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People *(People v Kennedy,*47 NY2d 196), it was proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the acts for which he was convicted *(see, People v Malizia,*62 NY2d 755, 757, *cert denied*469 US 932; *People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620, 621).

Moreover, we reject the defendant’s contention that he was prejudiced by the People’s opening statement tending to show that he engaged in the sale of narcotics, an uncharged crime. Objections were sustained and prompt curative instructions were given with reference to most of the challenges. There is no reason to doubt that the clear and immediate curative instructions were followed by the jury *(see, People v Lopez,*100 AD2d 555, 556). In light of the curative instructions, and given the overwhelming evidence of guilt, there is no significant probability that the jury would have acquitted the defendant were it not for the comments in question *(see, People v Crimmins,*36 NY2d 230). Weinstein, J. P., Rubin, Kooper and Sullivan, JJ., concur.
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Ruminant Diseases and Immunology Research: Ames, IA
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Midwest Area Ames, Iowa National Animal Disease Center Ruminant Diseases and Immunology Research People & Locations







David  Holthausen
                        Ruminant Diseases and Immunology Research

                        




                        
                        Research Microbiologist
                        Phone: (515) 337-7338
                        
                        
                        Fax: (Employee information on this page comes from the REE Directory. Please contact your front office staff to update the REE Directory.)
                            ProjectsIntervention Strategies to Prevent and Control Viral Respiratory Pathogens of Ruminants
                                                    In-House Appropriated
                                                                    (D)Accession Number: 441143


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
#### In the Matter of Jamel W. Young, Appellant, v Alina Espada et al., Respondents. (And Two Other Related Proceedings.)

[944 NYS2d 664] —

Lathinen, J.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Broome County (Pines, J.), entered June 3, 2911, which, among other things, dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant Family Ct Act article 6, for supervised visitation with his children.

While incarcerated at the Broome County Jail, petitioner commenced this proceeding seeking supervised visitation with his children at that facility. Family Court dismissed his petition without prejudice to his right to reapply once assigned to a state correctional facility. On this appeal, petitioner’s counsel seeks to be relieved of her assignment on the ground that there are no nonfrivolous issues to be raised on appeal.

Petitioner’s transfer from the Broome County Jail to a state correctional facility, where he is now serving a 20-year sentence for second degree murder, renders this appeal moot *(cf. Matter of Boore v Parks,*63 AD3d 1307, 1307 [2009]). The proper course would be for petitioner to file a new petition that would afford Family Court an opportunity to evaluate the children’s best *1479interests under petitioner’s current circumstances *(see id.*at 1307-1308). Because the appeal is moot, we need not address counsel’s application to be relieved of her assignment *(see Matter of Kimberly C. [Norman C.],*92 AD3d 985 [2012]; *Matter of Alexander K. [Jennifer N.],*77 AD3d 1023, 1024 [2010]).

Peters, PJ., Rose, Malone Jr. and Garry, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.
#### Yvette B. HARRIS, Plaintiff, v. Norman CARLSON, U. S. Bureau of Prisons; Warden Charles Turnbo, F.C.I. Pleasanton; Capt. Bill Cowan; Lt. Hazel Marshall; Lt. Dave Vananetti; Counselor Marilyn Boniel; Correctional Staff Members, Pleasanton, Defendants. Mrs. Yvette B. HARRIS and Mr. Eric Pecot, Plaintiffs, v. FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Pleasanton, et al., Defendants.

Nos. C 81-1844 SAW, C 81-3014 SAW.

United States District Court, N. D. California.

Sept. 2, 1982.

Federal Public Defender’s Office, Geoffrey Hansen, San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiff.

Yvette Harris, in pro. per.

ORDER

WEIGEL, District Judge.

In both of the above entitled cases, plaintiff claims, *inter alia,*that her release from prison has been delayed because the Parole Commission retaliated against her for suing the government over an alleged forced surgery and alleged medical malpractice. On February 26, 1982, the Court issued an Order pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(g) directing the Federal Public Defender for the Northern District of California to represent plaintiff Harris with respect to that claim. The Federal Public Defender now moves to be relieved as counsel of record on the ground that, having reviewed plaintiff’s files and conducted substantial legal research, he has concluded that “there is no evidence contained in any of [plaintiff’s] files that would support her claim...” (Hansen Decl., ¶ 7.) Plaintiff has given her counsel permission to withdraw from these cases.

*111In light of the foregoing, the motion of plaintiff’s counsel should be granted. Plaintiff has requested that the Court appoint another attorney to represent her. Under 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(g), the Court is authorized to appoint counsel to an individual seeking review of a parole commission decision if the Court determines that “the interests of justice so require...” Here, the Federal Public Defender has investigated plaintiff’s claim and concluded that it is without merit. Further, he has provided plaintiff with relevant case authority addressing the issues that were raised in her original complaints (Hansen Deck, ¶ 8). Under these circumstances, it cannot be concluded that the interests of justice require the appointment of another attorney. Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion of plaintiff’s counsel, Geoffrey A. Hansen, to be relieved as counsel of record is granted.

IT IS FURTHER HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s request for an appointment of counsel is denied.
Exhibit 32.3


                                  CERTIFICATION
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                    AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


      The undersigned 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
undersigned's best knowledge and belief, the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
Geodyne Energy Income Limited Partnership II-C ("Issuer") for the period ending
December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"):

      (a)   fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
            the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

      Dated this 29th day of March, 2006.

                                   GEODYNE ENERGY INCOME LIMITED
                                   PARTNERSHIP II-C
                                   ("Issuer")

                                    //s// Dennis R. Neill
                                    -----------------------------------
                                    Dennis R. Neill
                                    President (Chief Executive Officer)

                                    //s// Craig D. Loseke
                                    -----------------------------------
                                    Craig D. Loseke
                                    Chief Accounting Officer
                                    (Chief Financial Officer)
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack

, Chief Justice

David F. Viviano,

Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh,

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.

September 8, 2020

s0831 

# Order

Clerk September 8, 2020

160392 & (18)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 160392

COA: 349843

Wayne CC: 84

- 004264

- FC

ANTHONY LEVELL HICKS

, Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appea l the September 10, 2019

order of the Court of Appeals is considered and, it appearing to this Court that the case of

People v Manning ( Docket No. 160034) is pending on appeal before this Court and that

the decision in that case may resolve an issue raised in the present application for leave to

appeal, we ORDER that the application be held in ABEYANCE pending the decision in

that case . The motion to consolidate is DENIED.
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 158 (Thursday, August 19, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 46750]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-17812]



[[Page 46750]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD

[Docket No. FD 32365 (Sub-No. 1)]


Decatur Junction Railway Co.--Amended Lease and Operation 
Exemption--Lines in Illinois

    Decatur Junction Railway Co. (DJR), a Class III rail carrier, has 
filed a verified notice of exemption under 49 CFR 1150.41 to renew its 
lease and continue to operate a line of railroad owned by Central 
Illinois Shippers, Inc., located between milepost 728.00 at Assumption, 
Ill., and milepost 745.54 near Elwin, Ill. (the Line).
    According to the verified notice, DJR has leased and operated the 
Line since 1993.\1\ DJR states that pursuant to a recently signed Lease 
& Operating Agreement, the parties agreed to extend DJR's existing 
lease operations over the Line through December 31, 2025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Decatur Junction Ry.--Lease & Operation Exemption--Lines 
in Ill., FD 32365 (I.C.C. served Oct. 18, 1993, as corrected Oct. 
26, 1993).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DJR states that the Lease & Operating Agreement does not include 
any interchange commitments. Further, DJR certifies that its projected 
annual revenues from this transaction will not result in DJR's becoming 
a Class I or Class II rail carrier and will not exceed $5 million.
    The earliest this transaction may be consummated is September 2, 
2021, the effective date of the exemption (30 days after the verified 
notice was filed).
    If the notice contains false or misleading information, the 
exemption is void ab initio. Petitions to revoke the exemption under 49 
U.S.C. 10502(d) may be filed at any time. The filing of a petition to 
revoke will not automatically stay the effectiveness of the exemption. 
Petitions to stay must be filed no later than August 26, 2021 (at least 
seven days before the exemption becomes effective).
    All pleadings, referring to Docket No. FD 32365 (Sub-No. 1), should 
be filed with the Surface Transportation Board via e-filing on the 
Board's website. In addition, a copy of each pleading must be served on 
DJR's representative, William A. Mullins, Baker & Miller PLLC, 2401 
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Suite 300, Washington, DC 20037.
    According to DJR, this action is categorically excluded from 
environmental review under 49 CFR 1105.6(c) and from historic reporting 
under 49 CFR 1105.8(b).
    Board decisions and notices are available at www.stb.gov.

    Decided: August 16, 2021.

    By the Board, Scott M. Zimmerman, Acting Director, Office of 
Proceedings.
Raina S. White,
Clearance Clerk.
[FR Doc. 2021-17812 Filed 8-18-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>

          This schedule  contains summary financial  information  extracted from
          Pen  Interconnect,  Inc.  March 31, 1998  financial  statements and is
          qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.

</LEGEND>

<CIK>                         0001000266
<NAME>                        Pen Interconnect, Inc.

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS

<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1998

<CASH>                                         111,311
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  3,002,498
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (116,196)
<INVENTORY>                                    4,319,519
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               8,577,475
<PP&E>                                         3,829,819
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (1,447,938)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 15,792,119
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          6,184,018
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       43,850
<OTHER-SE>                                     7,592,040
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   15,792,119
<SALES>                                        7,603,444
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               7,603,444
<CGS>                                          5,897,521
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  7,399,860
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (220,370)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             254,707
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (16,786)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (5,677)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (11,109)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (11,109)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  .00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .00
        


</TABLE>
I

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2041

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 8, 1998

Referred to the Committee on Resources

AN ACT

To amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater

Study and Facilities Act to authorize the Secretary of

the Interior to participate in the design, planning, and

construction of the Willow Lake Natural Treatment System Project for the reclamation and reuse of water,

and for other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

S 2041 RFH

1 SECTION. 1. WILLOW LAKE NATURAL TREATMENT SYSTEM

2 PROJECT.

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Reclamation Wastewater and

4 Groundwater Study and Facilities Act (43 U.S.C. 390h

5 et seq.) is amended—

6 (1) by redesignating sections 1631, 1632, and

7 1633 as sections 1632, 1633, and 1634, respectively;

8 and

9 (2) by inserting after section 1630 the following

10 new section 1631:

11 ‘‘SEC. 1631. WILLOW LAKE NATURAL TREATMENT SYSTEM

12 PROJECT.

13 ‘‘(a) AUTHORIZATION.—The Secretary, in coopera14 tion with the City of Salem, Oregon, is authorized to par15 ticipate in the design, planning, and construction of the

16 Willow Lake Natural Treatment System Project to re17 claim and reuse wastewater within and without the service

18 area of the City of Salem.

19 ‘‘(b) COST SHARE.—The Federal share of the cost

20 of a project described in subsection (a) shall not exceed

21 25 percent of the total cost.

22 ‘‘(c) LIMITATION.—The Secretary shall not provide

23 funds for the operation and maintenance of a project de24 scribed in subsection (a).’’.

25 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—That Act is fur26 ther amended—
3

S 2041 RFH

1 (1) in section 1632 (43 U.S.C. 390h–13) (as

2 redesignated by subsection (a)(1)), by striking ‘‘sec3 tion 1630’’ and inserting ‘‘section 1631’’;

4 (2) in section 1633(c) (43 U.S.C. 390h–14) (as

5 so redesignated), by striking ‘‘section 1633’’ and in6 serting ‘‘section 1634’’; and

7 (3) in section 1634 (43 U.S.C. 390h–15) (as so

8 redesignated), by striking ‘‘section 1632’’ and insert9 ing ‘‘section 1633’’.

10 (c) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of contents

11 in section 2 of the Reclamation Projects Authorization and

12 Adjustment Act of 1992 is amended by striking the items

13 relating to sections 1631 through 1633 and inserting the

14 following:

‘‘Sec. 1631. Willow Lake Natural Treatment System Project.

‘‘Sec. 1632. Authorization of appropriations.

‘‘Sec. 1633. Groundwater study.

‘‘Sec. 1634. Authorization of appropriations.’’.

Passed the Senate October 7 (legislative day, October 2), 1998.

Attest: GARY SISCO,

Secretary.