alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### GREEN, Respondent, v. MIDDLESEX VAL. RY. CO., Appellant.

(Supreme Court, General Term, Fifth Department.

June 20, 1894.)

Action by Ida •Green against the Middlesex Valley Railway Company.

No opinion. Motion to strike case from the calendar and for affirmance granted, with costs, unless printed papers are served on or before the second Thursday of the term.
## In T he Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07 - 24 - 00168 - CR EX PARTE CHRISTOPHER BRANTLEY ORIGINAL PROCEEDING 

### May 1 7 , 2024 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before PARKER and DOSS and YARBROUGH, JJ. Christopher Brantley, proceeding pro se, filed documents with this Court titled “Injunction Relief in Improper Grand Jury Indictments,” requesting dismiss al of his pending criminal charges and release from incarceration . W e have construed the documents as an application for writ of habeas corpus. I ntermediate courts of appeals do not have original habeas corpus jurisdiction in criminal law matters. See T EX . G OV ’ T C ODE A NN . § 22.221(d) (limiting original habeas jurisdiction of intermediate appellate courts to civil cases); Ex parte Hawkins , 885 S.W.2d 586, 588 – 89 (Tex. App.
— El Paso 1994, orig. proceeding) (per curiam). That jurisdiction instead rests with the Court of Criminal Appeals, the district courts, and the county courts.2

See T EX . C ODE C RIM . P ROC . A NN . art s . 11.05 , 11.08, 11.09; Ex parte Hawkins , 885 S.W.2d at 588. Consequently , we dismiss Brantley’s applicatio n for writ of habeas corpus for want of jurisdiction. Per Curiam Do not publish .
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-03-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-28-1997
<CASH>                                          16,591
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   21,316
<ALLOWANCES>                                       810
<INVENTORY>                                     19,120
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                58,732
<PP&E>                                         101,074
<DEPRECIATION>                                  64,890
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 107,700
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           18,754
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                         1,210
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                      86,182
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   107,700
<SALES>                                         76,937
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                76,937
<CGS>                                           51,008
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   64,124
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   217
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   5
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 13,454
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,503
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              7,951
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,951
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.38
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.35
        

</TABLE>
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZClear

Clear All

-  Mr. Matthew H. SwartzEXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND CHIEF OF STAFF, U.S. Fleet Forces Command 

#####  

##### Navy.mil  |  Navy.com  |  Navy FOIA  |  DoD Accessibility/Section 508  |  No Fear Act  |  Open Government  |  Plain Writing Act USA.gov  |  Veterans Crisis Line  |  VA Vet Center  |  FVAP  |   DoD Safe Helpline  |  Navy SAPR  |  NCIS Tips  |  Privacy Policy  |  Site Map  |  Contact US

###### Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command   |   1562 Mitscher Ave., Suite 250   |   Norfolk, Virginia 23551-2487

###### Official U.S. Navy Website
PROMISSORY
NOTE (“NOTE”) - 10% SIMPLE INTEREST


 


 


$10,000


8/22/2019


 


 


For
VALUE RECEIVED, Bio Matrix Scientific Group, Inc. (“Borrower”) promises to pay to Bostonia Partners (“Lender”)
the principal sum of Ten Thousand Dollars [$10000.00] with accrued simple interest at the rate of 10% percent per annum on the
balance. The said principal and accrued interest shall be payable in lawful money of the United States of America on August 22,
2020. This Note may be prepaid in whole or in part at any time without premium or penalty. The Borrower hereby waives any notice
of the transfer of this Note by the Lender or by any subsequent holder of this Note, agrees to remain bound by the terms of this
Note subsequent to any transfer, and agrees that the terms of this Note may be fully enforced by any subsequent holder of this
Note. All terms and conditions of this Note shall be interpreted under the laws of the state of California and venue shall be
the state of California.


 


 


Borrower


 


By:/s/Timothy
Foat


 


Its:CEO


 


Accepted
By:


 


Lender


 


By:/s/Timothy
Foat


 


Its:President
Case 1:07-cv-05712-MHD     Document 22-3      Filed 03/26/2008     Page 1 of 4

Case 1:07-cv-05712-MHD     Document 22-3      Filed 03/26/2008     Page 2 of 4

Case 1:07-cv-05712-MHD     Document 22-3      Filed 03/26/2008     Page 3 of 4

Case 1:07-cv-05712-MHD     Document 22-3      Filed 03/26/2008     Page 4 of 4
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 9 (Friday, January 12, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 2946]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-1085]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 3537]


Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition; 
Determinations: ``Vincent van Gogh and the Painters of the Petit 
Boulevard''

DEPARTMENT: Department of State.

ACTION:  Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: 
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985, 22 U.S.C. 2459), the Foreign Affairs Reform and 
Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681, et seq.), Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, and Delegation of Authority No. 
236 of October 19, 1999, as amended, I hereby determine that the 
objects to be included in the exhibition ``Vincent van Gogh and the 
Painters of the Petit Boulevard'' imported from abroad for the 
temporary exhibition without profit within the United States, are of 
cultural significance. These objects are imported pursuant to a loan 
agreement with a foreign lender. I also determine that the exhibition 
or display of the exhibit objects at the Saint Louis Art Museum, Saint 
Louis, MO, from on or about February 17, 2001, through on or about May 
13, 2001, is in the national interest. Public Notice of these 
Determinations is ordered to be published in the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a 
list of exhibit objects, contact Jacqueline Caldwell, Attorney-Adviser, 
Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202/
619-6982). The address is U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th 
Street, S.W., Room 700, Washington, D.C. 20547-0001.

    Dated: January 5, 2001.
William B. Bader,
Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs, United States 
Department of State.
[FR Doc. 01-1085 Filed 1-11-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-08-P
Motion Granted ; Order filed August 9 , 2022

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 22

- 00390

- CR

____________ RICHARD DOTSON , Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 177th District Court

Harris County, Texas Tr i al Court Cause No. 1192825

ORDER This appeal is related to an appeal previously filed in this court: No. 14

- 09

- 00213

- CR , Richard Dotson v. The State of Texas

. Appellant has filed a motion requesting the record from the previous appeal be transferred int o this appeal. The motion is granted. The clerk of t his court is directed to file a copy of the appellate record in appeal number 14

- 09

- 00213

- CR into this appeal. Appellant ’ s brie f is d ue 30 days after the clerk of this court transfers the record.
PER CU R IAM
Panel consists of Chief Justices Christopher and Justices Wise and Hassan.
Case 1:07-cv-05710-RJH Document 62 Filed 10/05/2007 Page 1 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-05710-RJH Document 62 Filed 10/05/2007 Page 2 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-05710-RJH Document 62 Filed 10/05/2007 Page 3 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-05710-RJH Document 62 Filed 10/05/2007 Page 4 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-05710-RJH Document 62 Filed 10/05/2007 Page 5 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-05710-RJH Document 62 Filed 10/05/2007 Page 6 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-05710-RJH Document 62 Filed 10/05/2007 Page 7 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-05710-RJH Document 62 Filed 10/05/2007 Page 8 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-05710-RJH Document 62 Filed 10/05/2007 Page 9 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-05710-RJH Document 62 Filed 10/05/2007 Page 10 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-05710-RJH Document 62 Filed 10/05/2007 Page 11 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-05710-RJH Document 62 Filed 10/05/2007 Page 12 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-05710-RJH Document 62 Filed 10/05/2007 Page 13 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-05710-RJH Document 62 Filed 10/05/2007 Page 14 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-05710-RJH Document 62 Filed 10/05/2007 Page 15 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-05710-RJH Document 62 Filed 10/05/2007 Page 16 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-05710-RJH Document 62 Filed 10/05/2007 Page 17 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-05710-RJH Document 62 Filed 10/05/2007 Page 18 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-05710-RJH Document 62 Filed 10/05/2007 Page 19 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-05710-RJH Document 62 Filed 10/05/2007 Page 20 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-05710-RJH Document 62 Filed 10/05/2007 Page 21 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-05710-RJH Document 62 Filed 10/05/2007 Page 22 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-05710-RJH Document 62 Filed 10/05/2007 Page 23 of 23
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Kenneth L. Rieman, Appellant.

Casey, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Crew, III, J.), rendered August 10, 1987 in Chemung County, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of escape in the first degree.

On this appeal, defendant initially claims that the sentence of 2 *Vx*to 5 years’ imprisonment that he received as a second felony offender on his negotiated plea of guilty of the crime of escape in the first degree is invalid because the predicate felony conviction was obtained in violation of his constitutional rights. This court has already considered this issue and decided it against defendant on his appeal from the denial of his CPL 440.10 motion to set the predicate felony conviction aside *(People v Rieman,*144 AD2d 110, 111).

There remains, therefore, only defendant’s claim that his judgment of conviction here on appeal should be reversed because the prosecution did not appear at the time of his sentencing. At that time, defendant received the sentence that he had been promised. Since there is no statutory requirement that the prosecution appear at sentencing, and since defendant has demonstrated no prejudice as a result of the prosecution’s nonappearance, defendant’s judgment of conviction should be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed. Kane, J. P., Casey, Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., and Harvey, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                           PROVINCE HEALTHCARE COMPANY

                           CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO

       RULE 13a-14(b) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED,
               AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      In connection with the Report of Province Healthcare Company (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2004, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") on the date hereof (the
"Report"), Martin S. Rash, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and
Christopher T. Hannon, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of
Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) that:

      (1)   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
            15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act");
            and

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

Date: May 10, 2004,

                                                /s/  Martin S. Rash
                                                --------------------------------
                                                Martin S. Rash
                                                Chief Executive Officer

                                                /s/ Christopher T. Hannon
                                                    ----------------------------
                                                Christopher T. Hannon
                                                Chief Financial Officer
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JULIO CUXUM-ALVARADO, 

Petitioner, 

 v. 

MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney 

General, 

Respondent.

No. 20-73809 

Agency No. A201-030-311 

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of an

Immigration Judge

Submitted July 29, 2022**

Pasadena, California

Before: PAEZ and WATFORD, Circuit Judges, and BENNETT,*** District Judge.

Julio Cuxum-Alvarado, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for 

review of a decision of an immigration judge (IJ) upholding an asylum officer’s 

negative reasonable fear determination. We deny the petition for review. 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

*** The Honorable Richard D. Bennett, United States District Judge for 

the District of Maryland, sitting by designation.

FILED

AUG 8 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
Page 2 of 3

 

1. Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s determination that the harm 

Cuxum-Alvarado feared was not related to a protected ground. A petitioner in a 

reasonable fear proceeding must show a “reasonable possibility” that he will be 

persecuted in the country of removal on account of his race, religion, nationality, 

membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. 8 U.S.C. 

§ 1231(b)(3); 8 C.F.R. § 208.31(c). 

During his reasonable fear interview, Cuxum-Alvarado expressed a fear of 

harm inflicted by his step-nephew in retaliation for Cuxum-Alvarado’s inquiry into 

the step-nephew’s potential role in the murder of Cuxum-Alvarado’s brother. 

Before the IJ, Cuxum-Alvarado indicated that the step-nephew had threatened to 

“exact revenge” on him. Fear of future harm arising out of a purely personal 

dispute, without more, is not persecution on the basis of a protected ground. 

Molina-Morales v. INS, 237 F.3d 1048, 1051–52 (9th Cir. 2001). We lack 

jurisdiction to consider Cuxum-Alvarado’s proposed particular social group of 

“Guatemalan small business owners” because he failed to raise it before the 

agency. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677 (9th Cir. 2004). 

2. Cuxum-Alvarado has not challenged the IJ’s denial of his claim under the 

Convention Against Torture (CAT). Any challenge to the merits of the IJ’s CAT 

ruling is thus waived. Lopez-Vasquez v. Holder, 706 F.3d 1072, 1079–80 (9th Cir. 

2013). 
Page 3 of 3

 

3. Cuxum-Alvarado asserts for the first time before us that his interview 

with the asylum officer was hampered by “miscommunication due to telephonic 

and shoddy connections between petitioner, officer and interpreter.” CuxumAlvarado has not demonstrated error during the course of the interview or 

prejudice stemming from any alleged error, and thus he has not satisfied either of 

the required prongs of a due process claim. See Vilchez v. Holder, 682 F.3d 1195, 

1199 (9th Cir. 2012). 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
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 Annual Report of Rapid Bio Tests Corp. a Nevada
corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ending February 29,
2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), Geoffrey V.F. Seaman, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certifies to the best of his knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

         (1)      The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
                  13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Rapid Bio Tests Corp., and will be retained by Rapid Bio Tests Corp.
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.


/s/ Geoffrey V.F. Seaman
--------------------------
Geoffrey V.F. Seaman
Chief Executive Officer
June 15, 2004
Filed 3/24/14

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

STEVEN VARGAS,

 Plaintiff and Appellant,

v.

CHERYL BALZ, as City Clerk, etc., et al.,

 Defendants and Respondents; 

CITY OF BREA et al., 

 Real Parties in Interest and

Respondents.

 G047591

 (Super. Ct. No. 30-2012-00585496)

 ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR

 REHEARING AND GRANTING IN

 PART REQUESTS FOR

 MODIFICATION; NO CHANGE IN 

 JUDGMENT

Appellant’s request for modification is granted in part and denied in part. It 

is ordered that the opinion filed herein on February 21, 2014, be modified as follows: 

1. On page 2, in the first paragraph of the Introduction section, beginning 

“The Brea City Clerk,” delete the first three sentences and replace them with the 

following three new sentences:

The Brea City Clerk is responsible for transmitting to 

the Orange County Registrar of Voters for publication 

all arguments in favor of or in opposition to municipal 
2

initiatives. In this case, we hold the city clerk does not 

have the authority to change an argument, or the 

accompanying statutorily required form statement 

identifying the author of the argument, to effectuate 

what the city clerk believed was the author’s intent. 

Under Elections Code section 9600, the “form 

statement” is a required part of a ballot measure 

argument; we also refer to the form statement as the 

signature form in this opinion.

2. On page 3, in the first paragraph of the Statement of Facts and 

Procedural History section, beginning “The Brea Accountability Act,” delete the last 

sentence and replace it with the following new sentence:

After the Orange County Registrar of Voters 

concluded both initiative petitions contained a 

sufficient number of valid signatures, the Brea City 

Council adopted resolution No. 2012-048, placing the 

measures on the next municipal election ballot.

3. On page 12, the first paragraph, beginning “The form for signatures,” is 

deleted and replaced with the following new paragraph:

The form statement for signatures of the author 

or authors of arguments in favor of or in opposition to 

ballot measures, which was used by the City of Brea 

before the November 2012 election, was defective. 

The form did not include a space for the name of the

organization on behalf of which it was being 

submitted, which is information required in an 

appropriate case by Elections Code section 9283.
3

These modifications do not effect a change in the judgment. To the extent 

appellant has petitioned for rehearing, the petition for rehearing is DENIED.

FYBEL, J.

WE CONCUR:

O’LEARY, P. J.

RYLAARSDAM, J.
l)ISMISS; Opinion hied ,Januarv 2s, 2013

In The

QEoiirt of (ppei1

jfiftlj Dttrfct of exa it it[a

____

No. 05-12-01615-CR

RANI)ALL ALLEN BOND, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal I)istrict Court No. 6

l)allas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F09-22112-X

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Wright and Justices Myers and Evans

Appellant has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal. Appellant’s counsel has approved the

motion. The Court GRANTS the motion and ORDERS that the be appeal DISMISSED and

this decision be certified below for observance. See TEx. R. App. P. 42.2(a).

PER CURIAM

Do Not Publish

TEx. R. App. •

47

121615F.U05
# CE2010286EN.01004401.xml

| 22.10.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 286/44 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.10.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 286/44

---

Wednesday 16 December 2009Conference of Committee Chairs and of Delegation Chairs (interpretation of Rules 27 and 28)

P7_TA(2009)0112

European Parliament decision of 16 December 2009 on interpretation of Rules 27 and 28 of Parliament's Rules of Procedure on replacing the Chair of the Conference of Committee Chairs or the Conference of Delegation Chairs in the event of absence

2010/C 286 E/09

The European Parliament,

The European Parliament

having regard to the letter of 2 December 2009 from the chair of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs,

having regard to Rule 211 of its Rules of Procedure,

| 1. | Decides to append the following interpretation to Rules 27(1) and 28(1):
  ‘In the absence of the Chair, the meeting of the Conference shall be chaired by the oldest Member, or, in the absence of the latter, by the oldest Member present.’; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Decides to append the following interpretation to Rules 27(1) and 28(1):

‘In the absence of the Chair, the meeting of the Conference shall be chaired by the oldest Member, or, in the absence of the latter, by the oldest Member present.’;

| 2. | Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and the Commission, for information. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and the Commission, for information.

---