alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 96-41157

Conference Calendar

 

GERALD ANTHONY WRIGHT,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

TIM WEST ET AL.,

Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:95-CV0464

- - - - - - - - - -

April 17, 1997

Before REAVLEY, DAVIS, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The motion filed by Gerald Anthony Wright, Texas prisoner

#424861, to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal is GRANTED. 

Pursuant to the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (PLRA), we

assess an initial partial filing fee against Wright of $6.91. 

See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). Following payment of the initial

partial filing fee, the remainder will be deducted from Wright’s
No. 96-41157

- 2 -

prison trust-fund account until the entire filing fee is paid. 

§ 1915(b)(2).

IT IS ORDERED that Wright pay the appropriate filing fee to

the Clerk of the District Court for the Eastern District of

Texas. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the agency having custody of

Wright forward the initial partial filing fee to the Clerk.

Thereafter, the agency shall forward, in accordance with 

§ 1915(b)(2), to the Clerk of the District Court for the Eastern

District of Texas monthly payments of 20 percent of the preceding

month’s income each time the amount in Wright’s account exceeds

$10, until the appellate filing fee of $105 is paid. 

Regarding Wright’s challenge to the district court’s

dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suit as frivolous, we have

reviewed Wright’s brief and the record, and we AFFIRM for

essentially the reasons set forth by the magistrate judge and

adopted by the district court. Wright v. West, No. 1:95cv464

(E.D. Tex. Sept. 16 and Oct. 17, 1996). 

Wright’s appeal is without arguable merit and is DISMISSED

as frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir.

1983). We caution Wright that future frivolous civil suits and

appeals filed by him or on his behalf will invite the imposition

of sanctions. Wright is cautioned further to review any pending

suits and appeals to ensure that they do not raise arguments that

are frivolous.
No. 96-41157

- 3 -

APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTIONS WARNING ISSUED. 5th Cir. R.

42.2.
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT UNITED STATES OF AM ERIC A, Plaintiff - Appe lle e , v. EFR AIN TREVIZO-C OR ONA, De fe nda

nt - Appe lla

nt. No. 13-10398

D.C . No. 2:13-c r-00492-DGC M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Distric t of Ariz o na R ona ld S. W . Le w, Distric t Judge , Pre siding * * Subm itte d April 7, 2014 *** B e fore : TASHIM A , GR AB ER , a nd IKUTA, C irc uit Judge s. Efra in Tre viz o-C orona

a ppe a ls from

the distric t c ourt’ s judgm e nt a nd c ha lle nge s the 87-m onth se nte n c e im pose d following his guilty -ple a c onvic tion for 

# FIL ED APR 16 2014 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S . CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The Honora

ble R ona ld S. W . Le w , Se nior Unite d State s Distric t Judge for the C e ntra l Distric t of C a l ifornia , sitting by de signa tion. *** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se eFe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).re e ntry

of a re m ove d a l ie n, in viola

tion of 8 U.S.C § 1326. W e have jurisdic tion unde r 28 U.S.C . § 1291, a n d we a ffirm . Tre viz o-C orona

c onte nds tha

t his se nte nc e is substa

ntive l y unre a s ona

ble unde r Unite d State

s v . Ame z c u a-Vasque

z , 567 F.3d 1050 (9th C ir. 2009), given the sta le ne s s of his prior c onvic tions, his age , a nd there m ote ne ss of his viole nt a c ts. He a lso a rgue s tha t the distric t c ourt should not ha ve im pose d a se nte nc e 23 m onths longer tha

n the 64-m onth se nte nc e he pre viously se rve d for a

re e ntry offe nse . The distric t c ourt did not a buse its disc re tion in im

posing Tre viz o-C orona ’ s se nte nc e . S

e eGall v . Unite d State

s , 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The 87-m onth se nte nc e , at the top of theGuide line s ra n ge , is substa

ntive ly re a sona b le in light of the 1 8 U.S.C . § 3553(a) se nte nc ing fa c tors a nd thetota lity

of the c irc um sta

n c e s, inc l uding Tre viz o-C orona ’ s im m igration history and his signific ant c rim ina l history . Se eid. AFFIRM E D.

1 3 - 1 0 3 9 8 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 the Quarterly Report of Lexmark International, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Paul A. Rooke, 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, that:




(1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); 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:  August 8, 2011





/s/ Paul A. RookePaul A. RookeChairman and Chief Executive Officer














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.
Exhibit 32.1

DIVALL INSURED INCOME PROPERTIES 2

LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

Certification of Periodic Financial Report

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Divall Insured Income Properties 2 Limited Partnership (the Company) certifies that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2005
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in that Form 10-K/A fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Company.



|                      |  |                                        |  |                                       
|--------------------- |  | -------------------------------------- |  | --------------------------------------
|                      |  | THE PROVO GROUP, INC., General Partner
|                      |  |                                       
|Dated: March 22, 2006 |  | By                                     |  | /s/ Bruce A. Provo                    
|                      |  |                                        |  | President, Chief Executive Officer and
|                      |  |                                        |  | Chief Financial Officer               

This certification is made solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, subject to the
knowledge

standard contained therein, and not for any other purpose.
(7 Misc. Rep. 571.)

#### KIRKPATRICK v. LIVINGSTON.

(City Court of New York, General Term.

March 31, 1894.)

Principal* and Agent—Ratification—Evidence.

In an action for goods sold to defendant’s son, plaintiff may show that defendant’s wife, daughter, and son had been accustomed to buy goods at plaintiff’s store, which were always charged to defendant; that the bills were paid by him; and that the goods so purchased and paid for were similar to those, in suit.

Appeal from trial term.

Action by Thomas Kirkpatrick against William Livingston for goods sold and delivered. From a judgment of nonsuit, plaintiff appeals. Reversed.

Argued before VAN WYCK and McCARTHY, JJ.

James Flynn, for appellant.

Chas. H. Griffen, for respondent.

VAN WYCK, J.

The plaintiff, who is in the retail jewelry business on Broadway, sues the defendant, a resident of this city, to recover the unpaid balance of the value of certain jewelry that William Livingston, Jr., a son of the defendant, being duly authorized by, and acting under the instructions of, the defendant, purchased of him during the year 1891; and to maintain his cause plaintiff made proof that the defendant has had for 14 years a running account with plaintiff at his jewelry store; that such running account of defendant was for his family matters, purchases made by any one of his family; that his family consisted of his wife, a daughter, and this son, William, Jr., and the account referred to was for the purchases made by these different members of his family from time to time; that this son had been in the habit of coming to plaintiff’s store, and buying goods, for years, and that such goods so purchased were charged to defendant, and the bills therefor rendered to him, and. these bills were paid by him from time to time; and that the goods sued for were purchased by this son, charged, as usual, to the defendant, to whom a bill for these goods was sent, and that he paid $165 on account of this bill. The plaintiff made proper effort, but was not allowed, to prove that defendant’s wife, daughter, and son had from time to time during these years purchased goods from defendant at his jewelry store, which were always charged to the defendant, and bills for the same rendered to and paid by him; and that the goods so purchased, billed, and paid for were similar to those purchased by the son, and herein sued for. The plaintiff was nonsuited, on the ground "that nothing has been proven, either agency or promise.” However, defendant contends that the complaint does not state a cause of action against defendant, and hence the nonsuit was proper. No attack was made, before or at trial, against the complaint upon any ground whatever; and moreover, the complaint, although somewhat carelessly drawn, sets forth the cause of action against defendant. The plaintiff was improperly, nonsuited, and the judgment is reversed, with costs to appellant to abide the event.
Exhibit 23



INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the  incorporation  by reference in  Registration  Statement  Nos.
333-54092,  333-36462 and 333-45511 of Altair International Inc. on Form S-3 and
Registration  Statement  No's.  333-64495 and 333-33481 of Altair  International
Inc. on Form S-8 of our report dated March 30, 2001  appearing in this Amendment
No. 4 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Altair  International  Inc. for the
year ended December 31, 2000.


/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
-------------------------
    Deloitte & Touche LLP

Salt Lake City, Utah
June 7, 2001
#### In the Matter of the Arbitration between Starpoint Central School District, Appellant, and CSEA, Inc., Local 872, Starpoint Central School District Buildings and Grounds Unit #7698, Respondent.

[948 NYS2d 841]

Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied. Present — Scudder, P.J., Smith, Carni and Sconiers, JJ.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jonathan Dean, Appellant.

Submitted April 30, 2007;

decided May 3, 2007

Motion for assignment of counsel granted and Jaime C. Louridas, Esq., care of Louridas *&*Louridas, Esqs., 3034 Patrick Road, *971Schenectady, New York 12303 assigned as counsel to the appellant on the appeal herein.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-6790
JOHN HENRY WEST, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus D. A. BASS, Acting Personnel Director; P. A. TERRANGI; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER ELEY; MR. MOHEAD, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, District Judge. (CA-96-511) Submitted: October 31, 1996 Decided: September 29, 1997 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John Henry West, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order dismissinghis 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint as frivolous. We have reviewed the record and the d istrict court’s opinion and find noreversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the dismissal substantially on the reasoning of the district court. West v. Bass , No. CA-96-511 (E.D. Va. Apr. 20, 1996). In addition, we note that Appellant's claim that a female correctional officer saw him while he was urinating was properly dismissed for failure to allege any routine or regular invasion of his privacy. See Strickler v. Waters , 989 F.2d 1375, 1387-88 (4th Cir. 1993). We dispense withoral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Justo Richards, Appellant, v Calvin West, Respondent. In the Matter of Justo Richards, Appellant, v Calvin West, Respondent.

Submitted May 7, 2007;

decided June 7, 2007

On the Court’s own motion, appeal dismissed, without costs, upon the ground that the orders appealed from do not finally determine the proceedings within the meaning of the Constitution. Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the orders sought to be appealed from do not finally determine the proceedings within the meaning of the Constitution. Motion for poor person relief dismissed as academic.
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1920 

To require the Secretary of State to provide relevant Foreign Service officers 

with training related to medical graduates in the countries in which 

such officers are serving, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 21, 2015 

Ms. MENG (for herself and Mr. EMMER of Minnesota) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

A BILL 

To require the Secretary of State to provide relevant Foreign 

Service officers with training related to medical graduates in the countries in which such officers are serving, 

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, 

3 SECTION 1. TRAINING FOR FOREIGN SERVICE OFFICERS. 

4 The Secretary of State shall provide to relevant For5 eign Service officers training related to medical graduates 

6 and medical graduate programs in the countries in which 

7 such officers are serving. Such training shall be part of 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1920 IH

1 the training provided to such officers under section 701 

2 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 (22 U.S.C. 4021). 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND> 
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL  INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE AUDITED
CONSOLIDATED  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AT DECEMBER 31, 1998 AND FOR THE TWELVE MONTH
PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1998 WHICH ARE INCLUDED IN THE  REGISTRANT'S FORM 10-K
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0001016439
<NAME>                        Intelligroup, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   Year
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         4,245
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  42,314
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (1,053)
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               49,877
<PP&E>                                         12,296
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (2,790)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 65,728
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          20,266
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       136
<OTHER-SE>                                     44,784
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   65,728
<SALES>                                        144,861
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               144,861
<CGS>                                          94,203
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  94,203
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               38,688
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             120
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                12,090
<INCOME-TAX>                                   4,416
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            7,674
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   7,674
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  .57 <F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .55 <F2>
<FN>
<F1>      This amount represents Basic Earnings per Share in accordance with the
          requirements of Statement of Financial  Accounting Standards No. 128 -
          "Earnings per Share".

<F2>      This amount  represents  Diluted Earnings per Share in accordance with
          the  requirements of Statement of Financial  Accounting  Standards No.
          128 - "Earnings per Share".
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO REVOKE DETENTION Page 1

Terri Wood, OSB #883325

Law Office of Terri Wood, P.C.

730 Van Buren Street

Eugene, Oregon 97402

541-484-4171

Fax: 541-485-5923

Email: contact@terriwoodlawoffice.com

Attorney for Jon Ritzheimer

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff,

-VSJON RITZHEIMER,

 Defendant

Case No. 3:16-CR-00051-02-BR

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO REVOKE 

DETENTION ORDER

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3142, defendant Jon Ritzheimer, through counsel 

Terri Wood, moves the Court to revoke the pretrial detention order by the 

Magistrate Judge in the District of Arizona, entered in this cause, and to order 

Mr. Ritzheimer’s pretrial release. The defense will timely file a supplemental 

motion with exhibits to support this request.

DATED this 10th day of March, 2016.

/s/ Terri Wood

TERRI WOOD OSB 883325

Attorney for Ritzheimer

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR Document 291 Filed 03/10/16 Page 1 of 1
CONSENT OF MERIT CONSULTANTS INTERNATIONAL INC.





Reference is made to the Annual Report on Form 40-F for the year ended December 31, 2006 (the Annual Report) of Cumberland Resources Ltd. (the Company), filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.



We hereby consent to the references to our name under the heading Narrative Description of Business -- Meadowbank Gold Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada in the Companys Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2006 which is included as part of the Annual Report, and to all other references to our name included or incorporated by reference in the Annual Report.







Merit Consultants International Inc.







By: /s/ Jay Collins



Name:

Jay Collins, P.Eng.

Title:

President





March 27, 2007
PROLONG INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES



EXHIBIT 32



Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of

the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



Elton Alderman, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of Prolong International Corporation (the Company), and Nicolaas M. Rosier, Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, each certifies, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:



|(1) |  | the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 780(d); 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: April 14, 2004 |  |  |  | /s/    ELTON ALDERMAN              
|                      |  |  |  |                                    
|                      |  |  |  | Elton Alderman, Chairman, President
|                      |  |  |  | and Chief Executive Officer        
|                      |  |  |  | (Principal Executive Officer)      



|                      |  |  |  |                                             
|--------------------- |  |  |  | --------------------------------------------
|                      |  | 
|Dated: April 14, 2004 |  |  |  | /s/    NICOLAAS M. ROSIER                   
|                      |  |  |  |                                             
|                      |  |  |  | Nicolaas M. Rosier, Chief Financial Officer 
|                      |  |  |  | (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)