alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Steven EDELMAN, petitioner, v. Donald SCHULTZ.

No. 17-134.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

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

Justice SOTOMAYOR took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
Darru HSU, petitioner, v. UBS FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC.

No. 17-157.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
In Re Leonard T. WALKER, petitioner.

No. 17-5118.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of habeas corpus denied.
EXHIBIT 32-2
                                                                   -------------
                             YTB International, Inc.


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


     In connection with the accompanying Report of YTB International,
Inc. (the "Registrant") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2005 (the
"Report"), I, Derek J. Brent, Chief Financial and Accounting Officer of the
Registrant, hereby certify that to my knowledge:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) as
applicable 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 Registrant.

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


Date: 08/15/2005
/s/ Derek J. Brent

------------------------------------------------
[Signature] Chief Financial and Accounting Officer
Gordon J. KLINGENSCHMITT, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 15-1445.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 3, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied.
Miguel ALVARADO-LINARES, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-6116.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 23, 2018.

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

 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

January 30, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

129053 Michael F. Cavanagh 

& (62) Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, TERRA ENERGY, LTD., Justices 

Plaintiff-Counter 

Defendant-Appellee, 

v SC: 129053 

 COA: 254159 

Antrim CC: 99-007582-CK 

WHITE PINE ENTERPRISES, 

L.L.C., and STAR ENERGY, INC., 

Defendants-Counter 

Plaintiffs-Appellants. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the motion for miscellaneous relief is GRANTED. The 

application for leave to appeal the May 26, 2005 judgment of the Court of Appeals is 

considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented 

should be reviewed by this Court. 

l0123 

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

January 30, 2006 

Clerk
Melissa VEATCH, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-8293.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 30, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Rheashad Lamar LOTT, petitioner, v. Lorie DAVIS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

No. 16-6802.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 17, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.2


[LOGO WESTPOINT STEVENS INC.] WESTPOINT STEVENS INC.
                              INTEROFFICE COMMUNICATION


DATE:    February 18, 2002

FROM:    Holcombe Green.

TO:      Dupuy Sears

SUBJECT:


This letter will confirm and document that for valuable consideration,
including without limitation the agreements and covenants herein contained and
my continued employment with the Company, my employment agreement with the
Company dated July 1, 2000 (the "Agreement") is amended. As mutually agreed,
after allowing for changes in my housing arrangements in New York City and
after including the appropriate annual review adjustment, effective January 1,
2002, my base salary shall be at the annual rate of $825,000. My base salary
shall continue to be subject to later review by the Board or Compensation
Committee thereof as provided in the Agreement.

It is further agreed that the terms of the Aircraft Use Policy (the "Policy")
which we recently adopted for the Company are incorporated into the Agreement
by this reference and personal use of Company aircraft as allowed under the
Agreement shall be in accordance with and subject to the Policy.

It has been my pleasure to work with you in documenting our understanding
regarding the amendment to the Agreement. Except as hereby specifically
amended, all terms and conditions of the Agreement remain in effect.


                                    Very truly yours,

                                    /s/ HTG Jr.
                                    -------------------------------------------


Agreed to by WestPoint Stevens Inc.


/s/ Lester D. Sears
------------------------------------
WESTERNGECO LLC, petitioner, v. ION GEOPHYSICAL CORPORATION.

No. 16-1011.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 13, 2018.

Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as *amicus curiae* and for divided argument granted.
Emiliano SAUCEDO-RIOS, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-6562.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 30, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
# L_2004374EN.01007301.xml

| 22.12.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 374/73 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.12.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 374/73

---

DECISION No 30/2004 OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE ESTABLISHED UNDER THE AGREEMENT ON MUTUAL RECOGNITION BETWEEN THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

of 2 December 2004

related to the listing of a Conformity Assessment Body under the Sectoral Annex on Telecommunication Equipment

(2004/885/EC)

THE JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on Mutual Recognition between the European Community and the United States of America and in particular Articles 7 and 14,

| | |
| --- | --- |

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

| 1. | The Conformity Assessment Body in Attachment A is added to the list of Conformity Assessment Bodies in Section V of the Sectoral Annex on Telecommunication Equipment. |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | The specific scope of listing, in terms of products and conformity assessment procedures, of the Conformity Assessment Body indicated in Attachment A has been agreed by the Parties and will be maintained by them. |
| --- | --- |

2.

This Decision, done in duplicate, shall be signed by representatives of the Joint Committee who are authorised to act on behalf of the Parties for purposes of amending the Agreement. This Decision shall be effective from the date of the later of these signatures.

Signed in Washington DC, 26 November 2004.

On behalf of the United States of America

James C. SANFORD

Signed in Brussels, 2 December 2004.

On behalf of the European Community

Joanna KIOUSSI

---

ATTACHMENT A

EC Conformity Assessment Body added to the list of Conformity Assessment Bodies in Section V of the Sectoral Annex on Telecommunication Equipment

| AmericanTCB, Inc. |
| --- |
| 6731 Whittier Avenue, Suite C110 |
| McLean, Virginia 22101 |
| Tel. (703) 847 4700 |
| Fax (703) 847 6888 |

AmericanTCB, Inc.

6731 Whittier Avenue, Suite C110

McLean, Virginia 22101

Tel. (703) 847 4700

Fax (703) 847 6888

---
EXHIBIT  99.1

                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 AIRFUND II International Limited
Partnership  Liquidating  Trust (the "Trust"), on Form 10-Q for the period ended
September  30,  2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date  hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer of the
Trust,  hereby  certifies  pursuant  to  18  U.S.C.  1350 as adopted pursuant to
Section  906  of  the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of  2002  that:
(1)     the Report of the Trust filed today 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 Trust.

                    /s/  Gary  D.  Engle
                    --------------------
                    Gary  D.  Engle
                    President  (Chief  Executive  Officer)
Equis  Corporation, as Manager of the Trust, under a Liquidating Trust Agreement
dated  as  of  July  18,  2002,  Wilmington  Trust  Company,  as Trustee and not
Individually

                    November  14,  2002
#### C. L. Beugnot, *Plaintiff in Error,*v. F. E. Gober, *Defendant in Error.*

Division B.

Decision filed February 19, 1929.

Petition for rehearing denied April 24, 1929.

*James T.*Vocelle, for Plaintiff in Error;

*Alto Adams,*for Defendant in Error.

Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the judgment herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said judgment; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said judgment of the circuit court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

*231Whitfield, P. J., Buford, J., and Lons, Circuit Judge, concur.

Long (Circuit Judge) :

The petition for rehearing in this cause suggests that this Court in affirming the judgment of the lower court overlooked the opinion in Fagan v. Robbins, 96 Fla. 91, 117 So. R. 863, because at the time of the entry of the deficiency decree complained of the Circuit Judge was of the opinion that under the provisions of Chapter 7839, Acts of 1919, it became mandatory for him to do so. Irrespective of what might have been in the mind of the lower court, the fact remains that an affidavit of illegality is not applicable to a decree that was not illegal, and while the chancellor may have labored under the belief that he had no discretion in the matter, that fact alone would not render the deficiency decree illegal.

No appeal having been taken from the entry of the deficiency decree such decree is still binding on the plaintiff in error.

Rehearing denied.

Whitfield, Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.
# L_2007209EN.01001601.xml

| 9.8.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 209/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.8.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 209/16

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE

No 9/2007

of 27 April 2007

amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, as amended by the Protocol adjusting the Agreement on the European Economic Area, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agreement’, and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Annex II to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 147/2006 of 8 December 2006 (1). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Annex II to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 147/2006 of 8 December 2006 (1).

| (2) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 780/2006 of 24 May 2006 amending Annex VI to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2092/91 on organic production of agricultural products and indications referring thereto on agricultural products and foodstuffs (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 780/2006 of 24 May 2006 amending Annex VI to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2092/91 on organic production of agricultural products and indications referring thereto on agricultural products and foodstuffs (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The following indent shall be added in point 54b (Council Regulation (EEC) No 2092/91) of Chapter XII of Annex II to the Agreement:

| ‘— | 32006 R 0780: Commission Regulation (EC) No 780/2006 of 24 May 2006 (OJ L 137, 25.5.2006, p. 9).’ |
| --- | --- |

‘—

32006 R 0780: Commission Regulation (EC) No 780/2006 of 24 May 2006 (OJ L 137, 25.5.2006, p. 9).’

Article 2

The text of Regulation (EC) No 780/2006 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 28 April 2007, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the Agreement have been made to the EEA Joint Committee (*1).

Article 4

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 27 April 2007.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Alan SEATTER

---

(1)  
  OJ L 89, 29.3.2007, p. 17.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 137, 25.5.2006, p. 9.

2

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
Rodney FORD, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-5418.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

*260Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3718 

To address food and housing insecurity on college campuses. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 11, 2019 

Mrs. HAYES (for herself and Ms. FUDGE) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor 

A BILL 

To address food and housing insecurity on college campuses. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Closing the College 

5 Hunger Gap Act of 2019’’. 

6 SEC. 2. QUESTIONS ON FOOD AND HOUSING INSECURITY IN 

7 NATIONAL POSTSECONDARY STUDENT AID 

8 STUDY. 

9 The Secretary of Education shall add questions that 

10 measure rates of food and housing insecurity to the Na11 tional Postsecondary Student Aid Study. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HR 3718 IH

1 SEC. 3. INFORMATION ON SNAP ELIGIBILITY. 

2 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 483 of the Higher Edu3 cation Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1090) is amended by add4 ing at the end the following: 

5 ‘‘(i) INFORMATION ON SNAP ELIGIBILITY.— 

6 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—For each year for which a 

7 student described in paragraph (2) submits a form 

8 described in subsection (a), the Secretary shall send 

9 to such student information regarding potential eli10 gibility for assistance under, and application process 

11 for, the supplemental nutrition assistance program 

12 established under the Food and Nutrition Act of 

13 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.) in written and elec14 tronic form. Both the written and electronic commu15 nication shall include contact information for the 

16 State agency responsible for administering the sup17 plemental nutrition assistance program in the State 

18 in which the student resides. 

19 ‘‘(2) STUDENTS.—A student is described in this 

20 paragraph if the student has an expected family con21 tribution equal to zero for the year.’’. 

22 (b) CONSULTATION.—The Secretary of Education 

23 shall consult with the Secretary of Agriculture, and the 

24 head of any other applicable Federal or State agency, in 

25 designing the written and electronic communication re26 garding potential eligibility for assistance under, and apVerDate Sep 11 2014 22:01 Jul 23, 2019 Jkt 089200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H3718.IH H3718

kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
3 

•HR 3718 IH

1 plication process for, the supplemental nutrition assistance 

2 program established under the Food and Nutrition Act of 

3 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.) as described in section 

4 483(i) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 

5 1090(i)). 

6 SEC. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE. 

7 This Act and the amendment made by this Act shall 

8 take effect 120 days after the date of enactment of this 

9 Act. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
Garry COLEMAN, petitioner, v. Julie L. JONES, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, et al.

No. 17-8498.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 14, 2018.

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

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-7811

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

RAMONA MARIA DIFAZIO,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Raymond A. Jackson, District

Judge. (CR-94-2)

Submitted: April 16, 1998 Decided: April 30, 1998

Before WILKINS and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ramona Maria DiFazio, Appellant Pro Se. Kevin Michael Comstock,

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia; Stephen

Wiley Miller, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond,

Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant attempts to appeal from an order that has not yet

been entered in the district court. We dismiss the appeal for lack

of jurisdiction because this court may exercise jurisdiction only

over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1994), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (1994); Fed. R. Civ.

P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541

(1949). There is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order in this case.

We dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> BD
<RESTATED>

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999             DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999             SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                               0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                               50,375,641              56,423,017
<SECURITIES-RESALE>                                  0                       0
<SECURITIES-BORROWED>                                0                       0
<INSTRUMENTS-OWNED>                                  0                       0
<PP&E>                                               0                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              50,375,641              56,423,017
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0                       0
<PAYABLES>                                     659,700                 259,704
<REPOS-SOLD>                                         0                       0
<SECURITIES-LOANED>                                  0                       0
<INSTRUMENTS-SOLD>                                   0                       0
<LONG-TERM>                                          0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                             0                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                  49,715,941              56,163,313
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                50,375,641              56,423,017
<TRADING-REVENUE>                                    0                       0
<INTEREST-DIVIDENDS>                                 0                       0
<COMMISSIONS>                                        0                       0
<INVESTMENT-BANKING-REVENUES>              (1,134,309)               3,872,096
<FEE-REVENUE>                                        0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0                       0
<COMPENSATION>                                       0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,134,309)               3,872,096
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                 (1,134,309)               3,872,096
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,134,309)               3,872,096
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (4.93)                   14.31
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (4.93)                   14.31


</TABLE>
Juan Perez PABLO, et al., petitioners, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS, III, Attorney General.

No. 17-52.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
Franco CARACCIOLI, petitioner, v. FACEBOOK, INC.

No. 17-7378.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 14, 2018.

Petition for rehearing denied.
Geno L. HAWKINS, Sr., petitioner, v. FLORIDA.

No. 16-9715.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Florida denied.
Brenda Fay NELSON, petitioner, v. Lorie DAVIS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

No. 17-7856.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 30, 2018.

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