alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Emmanuel MAXIME, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-6737.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
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 GenVec, Inc. (the Company) on Form
10-K as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the Report), I, Paul H. Fischer, as President and Chief Executive Officer 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, to the best of my
knowledge, 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 results of operations of the Company for
the dates and periods covered by the Report. This certificate is being made for the exclusive purpose of compliance by the
Chief Executive Officer of the Company with the requirements of Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and may not be disclosed, distributed or used
by any person or for any reason other than as specifically required by law. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to GenVec, Inc. and will be retained by GenVec, Inc. and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. March 15, 2004 /s/Paul H. FischerPaul H. FischerPresident and Chief Executive Officer
Raymond CLARK, petitioner, v. CALIFORNIA.

No. 16-6079.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 17, 2017.

Petition for rehearing denied.
Petition for Writ of Mandamus Denied and Memorandum Opinion filed

November 21 , 2019.

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14- 19 -00911- CR

IN RE CHRISTOPHER KEITH HANDY, Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING WRIT OF MANDAMUS 182nd District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1481109



### MEMORANDUM OPINION
On November 13, 2019, relator Christopher Keith Handy filed a petition for
writ of mandamus in this court

. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221; see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. In the petition, relator complains that the Honorable Danilo Lacayo ,2

presiding judge of the 182nd District Court of Harris County, denied his motion for a nunc pro tunc order for pre

- trial jail time credit

. To be entitled to mandamus relief, a relator must show (1) that the relator has no adequate remedy at law for obtaining the relief the relator seeks; and (2) what the relator seeks to compel involves a ministerial act rather than a discretionary act. In
re Powell , 516 S.W.3d 488, 494–95 (Tex. Crim. App. 2017) (orig. proceeding).

A nunc pro tunc order is appropriate to correct clerical errors in the judgment the trial court actually rendered, but not errors that were the result of judicial reasoning. Co llins v. State , 240 S.W.3d 925, 928 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). The failure to award jail time credit in accordance with a mandatory statutory duty is a clerical error that may be corrected by a nunc pro tunc order. Ex parte Ybarra , 149 S.W.3d 147, 148 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004). If the trial court fails to issue a nunc pro
tunc order to award mandatory jail time credit , relief may be sought by petition for
writ of mandamus

. Id. at 149. It is a relator’s burden to provide a sufficient record to establish that relator is
entitled to relief. In re Henry , 525 S.W.3d 381, 382 (Tex. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] 2017, orig. proceeding). Relator has failed to do so. Relator has not attached any documents to his petition. Rules 52.3 and 52. 7 require the relator to provide “a certified or sworn copy” of any order complained of, any other document showing the matter complained of, and every document that is material to relator’s claim for
relief that was filed in any underlying proceeding. Tex. R. App. P. 52.3(k)(1)(A),
52.7 (a)(1). Relator has not provided the proof necessary to show that the trial court violated a ministerial duty by denying his motion for a nunc pro tunc order.3

Relator has not established that he is entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus.

PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Wise, Jewell, and Poissant. Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 206 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 206

  Honoring the efforts and contributions of the Montgomery, Alabama, 
     Chapter of the National Association of Women in Construction.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 4, 2009

 Mr. Bright submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
            the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  Honoring the efforts and contributions of the Montgomery, Alabama, 
     Chapter of the National Association of Women in Construction.

Whereas the National Association of Women in Construction (``NAWIC'') consists 
        of some 5,500 members who are employed actively in various areas of the 
        construction industry;
Whereas the NAWIC's goal is to unite, for their mutual benefit, women who are 
        employed actively in the construction industry;
Whereas the NAWIC seeks to promote cooperation, fellowship, and a better 
        understanding among members of its association;
Whereas the NAWIC seeks to encourage women to pursue and establish their careers 
        in the construction industry;
Whereas the NAWIC seeks to provide its members with an awareness of the 
        legislative process and legislation as it relates to the construction 
        industry;
Whereas the NAWIC has a Chapter in Montgomery, Alabama, which is actively 
        involved in service to the construction industry; and
Whereas the Montgomery Chapter of the NAWIC is celebrating its 30th anniversary: 
        Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representative honors the Montgomery, 
Alabama, Chapter of the National Association of Women in Construction 
and the contributions of its members to the improvement of the quality 
of life for all residents of Montgomery, Alabama.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32.1


                             INFINEX VENTURES, INC.
                             OFFICER'S 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 Infinex Ventures, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for
the fiscal year ending October 31, 2004 and 2003 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael De Rosa
Chief Executive Officer, and Chief Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that to the best of our knowledge:

     (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 results of operations
          of the Company.




Dated:  February 14, 2005           /s/ Michael De Rosa
                                    ----------------------------------
                                    Michael De Rosa, Chief Executive Officer
                                    Michael De Rosa, Chief Financial Officer
Serajul HAQUE, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-6829.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* denied, and petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit dismissed. See Rule 39.8.

Justice KAGAN took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion and this petition.
# C_2010051EN.01002402.xml

| 27.2.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 51/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.2.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51/24

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Regeringsrätten (Sweden) lodged on 21 December 2009 — Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB Momsgrupp v Skatteverket

(Case C-540/09)

2010/C 51/40

Language of the case: Swedish

Referring court

Referring court

Regeringsrätten

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB Momsgrupp

Applicant:

Defendant: Skatteverket

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Is Article 13B of the Sixth VAT Directive (Article 135(1) of the Council Directive on a common system of value added tax (1)) to be interpreted as meaning that the tax exemptions provided for therein also include services (underwriting) which involve a credit institution providing, for consideration, a guarantee to a company which is about to issue shares, where under that guarantee the credit institution undertakes to acquire any shares which are not subscribed within the period for share subscription?

1

---

(1)  Council Directive 77/388/EEC (OJ L 145, p. 1).

1

---
II-01062

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Mark Straka <zeugitai@gmail.com>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 8:39 AM

dfadefinitions <dfadefinitions@CFTC.gov>

Re: No loopholes in Dodd-Frank

1) Securities and Exchange Commission/Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Commercial Risk (CFTC RIN

3235-AK65, SEC File Number $7-12-10)

Dear Commissioners Shapiro and Gensler: Don’t let the American Bankers Association (ABA) redefine important terms like

"commercial risk" to keep banks that engage in risky derivatives trading from complying with transparency and business

conduct requirements. Commercial risk should not be expanded to include financial risk. Accepting the ABA argument

would open the door for exemptions for risky hedge funds and insurance companies.

2) Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Position Limits (RIN 3038-AD 17 )

Dear Commissioner Gensler: The CFTC needs to set strong position limits to crack down on the energy and food commodity

speculation that serves no productive purpose. I urge the Commission to define limits that will address not only manipulation,

but also excessive speculation, which will require a stricter approach.

3) U.S. Department of the Treasury, Re: FX Swaps (75 FR 66426 Document Number 2010-27274)

Dear Secretary Geithner: Just say "no" to foreign exchange traders who want to exempt foreign currency derivatives from the

clearing and transparency requirements of the

Dodd-Frank Act. $4 trillion dollars a day is traded in these highly-leveraged swaps and this number may increase to over $10

trillion in a decade. As the head of the Financial

Stability Oversight Board your job is to decrease risk in the system, not encourage off-book trading and opaque markets.

Mark Straka

3252 240th St

Sac City, IA 50583
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 12

RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES We have calculated PBG's ratio of earnings to
fixed charges in the following table by dividing earnings by fixed charges. For
this purpose, earnings are before taxes, minority interest and cumulative effect
of change in accounting principle, plus fixed charges (excluding capitalized
interest) and losses recognized from equity investments, reduced by
undistributed income from equity investments. Fixed charges include interest
expense, capitalized interest and one-third of net rent which is the portion of
the rent deemed representative of the interest factor.

                              (dollars in millions)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                   FISCAL YEAR
                                                  2003      2002      2001      2000      1999
                                                  ----      ----      ----      ----      ----
<S>                                               <C>       <C>       <C>    <C>          <C>
NET INCOME BEFORE TAXES, MINORITY INTEREST AND
       CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF CHANGE IN
       ACCOUNTING  PRINCIPLE                      $710      $700      $482      $397      $209

Undistributed (income) loss from equity
       investments                                 (1)        --        --        --        --
Fixed charges excluding capitalize interest        270       221       217       222       227
                                                  ----      ----      ----      ----      ----

EARNINGS AS ADJUSTED                              $979      $921      $699      $619      $436
                                                  ====      ====      ====      ====      ====


FIXED CHARGES:

       Interest expense                           $247      $200      $204      $208      $209
       Capital interest                             --        --         1         1         1
       Interest portion of rental expense           23        21        13        14        18

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

TOTAL FIXED CHARGES                               $270      $221      $218      $223      $228
                                                  ====      ====      ====      ====      ====


RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES                3.63      4.17      3.20      2.78      1.91

</TABLE>
II-00324

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Michael Moeller <moellermichael@sbcglobal.net>

Friday, December 3, 2010 2:22 AM

dfadefinitions <dfadefinitions@CFTC.gov>

Re: No loopholes in Dodd-Frank

1) Securities and Exchange Commission/Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Commercial Risk (CFTC PIN

3235-AK65, SEC File Number $7-12-10)

Dear Commissioners Shapiro and Gensler: Don’t let the American Bankers Association (ABA) redefine important terms like

"commercial risk" to keep banks that engage in risky derivatives trading from complying with transparency and business

conduct requirements. Commercial risk should not be expanded to include financial risk. Accepting the ABA argument

would open the door for exemptions for risky hedge funds and insurance companies.

2) Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Position Limits (PIN 3038-AD 17 )

Dear Commissioner Gensler: The CFTC needs to set strong position limits to crack down on the energy and food commodity

speculation that serves no productive purpose. I urge the Commission to define limits that will address not only manipulation,

but also excessive speculation, which will require a stricter approach.

3) U.S. Department of the Treasury, Re: FX Swaps (75 FR 66426 Document Number 2010-27274)

Dear Secretary Geithner: Just say "no" to foreign exchange traders who want to exempt foreign currency derivatives from the

clearing and transparency requirements of the

Dodd-Frank Act. $4 trillion dollars a day is traded in these highly-leveraged swaps and this number may increase to over $10

trillion in a decade. As the head of the Financial

Stability Oversight Board your job is to decrease risk in the system, not encourage off-book trading and opaque markets.

Michael Moeller

415 N. Sycamore Ave. #103

Los Angeles, CA 90036
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
AMTRUST CAPITAL CORP. AND SUBSIDIARY All
All numbers in thousands except per share data.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           1,515
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           1,093
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     12,149
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           2,067
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                         50,167
<ALLOWANCE>                                        523
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  72,245
<DEPOSITS>                                      53,523
<SHORT-TERM>                                     9,222
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                357
<LONG-TERM>                                      1,680
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             6
<OTHER-SE>                                       7,458
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                  72,245
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  3,997
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                1,075
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    55
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 5,127
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               2,257
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 913
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            1,957
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       33
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  2,299
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    181
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     47
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       134
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .27
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .27
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.61
<LOANS-NON>                                      2,440
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  2,440
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   494
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        4
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  523
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                               523
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            523
        

</TABLE>
II-01039

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

David Whitehouse <whitehouse.dr@gmail. com>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 8:51 AM

dfadefinitions <dfadefinitions@CFTC.gov>

Re: No loopholes in Dodd-Frank

1) Securities and Exchange Commission/Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Commercial Risk (CFTC RIN

3235-AK65, SEC File Number $7-12-10)

Dear Commissioners Shapiro and Gensler: Don’t let the American Bankers Association (ABA) redefine important terms like

"commercial risk" to keep banks that engage in risky derivatives trading from complying with transparency and business

conduct requirements. Commercial risk should not be expanded to include financial risk. Accepting the ABA argument

would open the door for exemptions for risky hedge funds and insurance companies.

2) Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Position Limits (RIN 3038-AD 17 )

Dear Commissioner Gensler: The CFTC needs to set strong position limits to crack down on the energy and food commodity

speculation that serves no productive purpose. I urge the Commission to define limits that will address not only manipulation,

but also excessive speculation, which will require a stricter approach.

3) U.S. Department of the Treasury, Re: FX Swaps (75 FR 66426 Document Number 2010-27274)

Dear Secretary Geithner: Just say "no" to foreign exchange traders who want to exempt foreign currency derivatives from the

clearing and transparency requirements of the

Dodd-Frank Act. $4 trillion dollars a day is traded in these highly-leveraged swaps and this number may increase to over $10

trillion in a decade. As the head of the Financial

Stability Oversight Board your job is to decrease risk in the system, not encourage off-book trading and opaque markets.

David Whitehouse

5091 Landis Road

Hornell, NY 14843
Richard Allan SCOTT, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-7164.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 23, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Page 1 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

CEA CASES 

NAME: J. H. KENT, THE KENT CO., AND EDWARD C. EPPERSON 

DOCKET NUMBER: 137 

DOCUMENT TYPE: ISSUANCE OF AMENDED COMPLAINT 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Commodity Exchange Authority 

Washington, D. C. 20250 

ISSUANCE OF AMENDED COMPLAINT -- CEA DOCKET NO. 137 

(Administrative Hearing Under the Commodity Exchange Act) 

An amended complaint and notice of hearing has been signed by the Assistant 

Secretary of Agriculture charging violation of the Commodity Exchange Act by: 

J. H. Kent, 

The Kent Co., and 

Edward C. Epperson 

(Greenville, Mississippi) 

The original complaint in this matter was issued on May 4, 1966, and sets 

forth charges covering the period of December 20, 1965, through February 28, 

1966. The complaint has been amended to include charges of violations of the 

Commodity Exchange Act occurring subsequent to the issuance of the original 

complaint. 

The complaint, as amended, charges that the respondents, acting pursuant to 

an agreement or understanding, exceeded the limits on speculative positions in 

wheat futures during the period from December 20, 1965, through April 5, 1966, 

in soybean futures during the period from January 11 through September 19, 1966, 

and in potato futures during the period from July 26, 1966, through October 12, 

1966. It also charges that on January 11, 1966, the respondents exceeded the 

speculative transaction limits in soybean futures and that on July 26, August 1 

and August 12, 1966, they exceeded the speculative transaction limits in potato 

futures. 

The issuance of a complaint under the Commodity Exchange Act does not 

constitute proof of violation of the law. Such violation is established only 

when the Judicial Officer of the Department has made a determination that the 

evidence substantiates allegations in the complaint. Complaints are filed in 

the Office of the Hearing Clerk of the Department of Agriculture and are a 

matter of public record. Pending disposition by the Judicial Officer, it is the 

policy of the Commodity Exchange Authority not to comment or elaborate on 

charges contained in complaints or to discuss evidence on which they are based. 

A public hearing on the complaint is scheduled to be held before a referee at 

10:00 a.m., local time, December 20, 1966, in Greenville, Mississippi. 

LOAD-DATE: June 12, 2008 
Page 2