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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-6595

REGINALD C. SWEAT,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

DORRIS COOK, Head Nurse, Individual and Official Capacity; 

HARRY MCKENN, Dr., Individual and Official Capacity,

Defendants – Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Beaufort. Henry F. Floyd, District Judge. 

(9:09-cv-01255-HFF)

Submitted: November 18, 2010 Decided: November 30, 2010

Before SHEDD and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Reginald C. Sweat, Appellant Pro Se. James E. Parham, Jr., 

Irmo, South Carolina, for Appellees. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Reginald C. Sweat appeals the district court’s order 

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying 

his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the 

record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for 

the reasons stated by the district court. Sweat v. Cook, 

No. 9:09-cv-01255-HFF (D.S.C. Apr. 9, 2010). We deny Sweat’s 

motion to appoint counsel and 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.

AFFIRMED
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A20A1856. MIKE REDFORD v. THERESA REDFORD.

Mike Redford filed this civil action against his ex-wife, seeking among other

things a change of custody for the parties’ children. When he filed the action, Redford

was incarcerated in the Douglas County Jail; he is now confined at Calhoun State

Prison. The trial court dismissed Redford’s petition to change custody, ruling that it

lacked jurisdiction because the children are now adults. Redford then filed this direct

appeal. We, however, lack jurisdiction.

Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, any appeal in a civil case initiated by

a prisoner must come by discretionary application. See OCGA § 42-12-8; Jones v.

Townsend, 267 Ga. 489, 490 (480 SE2d 24) (1997). Because Redford was

incarcerated when he initiated this action, he was required to file an application for

discretionary appeal to seek review of the trial court’s order. See In the Interest of K.

W., 233 Ga. App. 140, 140-141 (1) (503 SE2d 394) (1998). “Compliance with the

discretionary appeals procedure is jurisdictional.” Smoak v. Dept. of Human

June 03, 2020
Resources, 221 Ga. App. 257, 257 (471 SE2d 60) (1996). Redford’sfailure to follow 

the proper appellate procedure deprives us of jurisdiction over this appeal, which is

hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

06/03/2020
### NUMBER 13

- 10

- 053

- CV



## COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

- 

## EDINBURG

RICARDO VELA, Appellant,

v.

FLAVIO SALINAS, Appellee.

On appeal from the 430th District Court

of Hidalgo County, Texas.



## MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Benavides, Vela, and Perkes

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

This case is before the Court on a n agreed motion to reverse and remand the

cause to the trial court for settlement and entry of an order of dismissal. The parties have

reached an agreement with regard to the disposition of the matters currently on appeal

and have attached a copy of a Rule 11 agreement to their motion. Pursuant to

agreement, the parties request this Court to reverse the trial court = s judgment and remand2

this case for entry of an order of dismissal consistent with the terms of the settleme nt.

We GRANT the motion and REVERSE and REMAND this case to the trial court for entry

of judgment in accordance with the settlement agreement. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P

.

42.1(a)(2)(B), 43.2(d).

In accordance with the agreement of the parties, costs are taxe d ag ainst the party

incurring same. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.1(d) (“Absent agreement of the parties, the court

will tax costs against the appellant.”).

PER CURIAM

D elivered and filed the

7th day of July , 20 11

.
ELECTRONIC RECORD

COA# 05-13-01482-CR OFFENSE: 2.04

Erick Eugene Ford v. The State of

STYLE: Texas COUNTY: Dallas

I5Z-/S*

COA DISPOSITION: MODIFY TRIAL COURT: 195th Judicial District Court

DATE: 01/26/2015 Publish: NO TC CASE #: F-1355893-N

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

Erick Eugene Ford v. The State of

STYLE: Texas

PRQ fiE Petition

FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IN CCA IS:

DATE:

JUDGE:

CCA#: \5%-/f

CCA Disposition:

DATE:

JUDGE:

SIGNED:

PUBLISH:

REHEARING IN CCA IS:

JUDGE:

PC:_

DNP:

MOTION FOR

ELECTRONIC RECORD
Daniel PRINCE, petitioner, v. LOUISIANA.

No. 17-9016.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1355 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1355

To make available funds appropriated for the payment of United Nations 
                              arrearages.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 25, 1999

     Mr. Shays (for himself, Mrs. Lowey, Mr. Leach, and Mr. Engel) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                        International Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To make available funds appropriated for the payment of United Nations 
                              arrearages.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``United Nations Arrears Payment 
Act''.

SEC. 2. AVAILABILITY OF FISCAL YEAR 1998 FUNDS FOR ARREARAGES TO 
              INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND CONFERENCES.

    (a) Contributions to International Organizations.--In title IV of 
the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and 
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1998 (Public Law 105-119), under 
the heading ``Contributions to International Organizations'', the first 
and second provisos shall not apply.
    (b) Contributions for International Peacekeeping Activities.--In 
title IV of the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the 
Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1998 (Public Law 
105-119), under the heading ``Contributions for International 
Peacekeeping Activities'', the first proviso shall not apply.

SEC. 3. AVAILABILITY OF FISCAL YEAR 1999 FUNDS FOR ARREARAGES TO 
              INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND CONFERENCES.

    Pursuant to the first proviso under the heading ``Arrearage 
Payments'' in title IV of the Commerce, Justice, and State, the 
Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999 (as contained 
in section 101(b) of division A of the Omnibus Consolidated and 
Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1999; Public Law 105-277), 
the obligation and expenditure of funds appropriated under such heading 
for payment of arrearages to meet obligations of membership in the 
United Nations, and to pay assessed expenses of international 
peacekeeping activities are hereby authorized, and the second proviso 
under such heading shall not apply.
                                 <all>
```
Jaques J. SULLIVAN, petitioner, v. Scott LEWIS, Warden.

No. 18-7937.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 1, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
Michael MARQUARDT, petitioner, v. FLORIDA.

No. 17-9246.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District denied.
Guadalupe CHAIDEZ CAMPOS, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-234.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 18, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Mark L. HALPER, petitioner, v. COLORADO.

No. 17-9454.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the District Court of Colorado, Ouray County denied.
**Exhibit 12.1****IPC HOLDINGS, LTD. AND SUBSIDIARIES**RATIOS OF EARNINGS TO COMBINED FIXED CHARGES AND PREFERRED SHARE DIVIDENDS     Our consolidated ratios of earnings to fixed charges for each of the five fiscal yearsended December 31, 2006 and the quarter ended March 31, 2007, are as follows:                           Quarter ended Year ended December 31,  March 31, 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002  ($ in thousands)Net income (loss) $77,207  $394,585  $(623,399) $138,613  $260,629  $157,906 Preferred share dividends  4,186   17,176   2,644   —   —   — Fixed charges  —   —   —   —   —   —                          Ratio of earnings tocombined fixed chargesand preferred sharedividends  18.4: 0   23.0: 1   (1)   —   —   —  (1) Earnings for the year ended December 31, 2005 were insufficient to covercombined fixed charges and preferred share dividends by $626.0 million.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Commission on Civil Rights

# AGENCY:

Commission on Civil Rights.

# ACTION:

Notice; revision to meeting type, update time and agenda.

# SUMMARY:

                        The Commission on Civil Rights published a notice in the                         **Federal Register**                         on Wednesday, April 6, 2022, concerning a web briefing of the California Advisory Committee.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Brooke Peery,                         *bpeery@usccr.gov.*

*Update:*                         In the                         **Federal Register**                         on Wednesday, April 6, 2022, in FR Document Number 2022-07262, on page 19852, first and second columns, change the May 16, 2022, web Briefing into a Business Meeting.                    

*Date:*                         Monday, May 16, 2022, from 1:30 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. Pacific Time.                    

*Webex Registration Link: https://tinyurl.com/​mrfyk6xn.*

## Agenda

I. Welcome & Roll Call

II. Approval of Minutes

III. Committee Discussion

IV. Public Comment

V. Adjournment

      ( print page 27987)    
Dated: May 5, 2022.

David Mussatt,

Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.

[FR Doc. 2022-09975 Filed 5-9-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P
Richard SHARP, petitioner, v. Justin HAMMERS.

No. 17-6485.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 8, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
|   | (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. |

| Date:      March 2, 2010 | By:    | /S/      ROBERT N. BRISCO                                                                |
|--------------------------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                     |   | Robert      N. Brisco                                                                    |
|                     |   | President,      Chief Executive Officer, and Director (Principal Executive      Officer) |
|                     |   | Internet      Brands, Inc.                                                               |
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                          11,921
<SECURITIES>                                    43,122
<RECEIVABLES>                                   12,283
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,230
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                77,459
<PP&E>                                          21,342
<DEPRECIATION>                                  11,655
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 119,618
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           23,375
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           435
<OTHER-SE>                                      94,755
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   119,618
<SALES>                                         42,636
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                42,636
<CGS>                                            2,913
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,913
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                38,374
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (34,189)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (34,189)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (34,189)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.79)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.79)
        

</TABLE>
```
 
 
WHEAT - MINNEAPOLIS GRAIN EXCHANGE                                   Code-001626
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 07/05/11                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:       60,686
COMMITMENTS
  19,564    1,963    6,436   20,593   38,450   46,593   46,849   14,093   13,837

CHANGES FROM 06/28/11 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:       -444)
     270      914      227     -146     -752      351      389     -795     -833

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    32.2      3.2     10.6     33.9     63.4     76.8     77.2     23.2     22.8

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       83)
      26       10       19       31       27       67       52
```

----

Updated July 8, 2011
Pepi SCHAFLER, petitioner, v. MERRILL LYNCH, PIERCE, FENNER, & SMITH, INC.

No. 18-26.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

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

No. 21-30442

Mark Doyle Construction, L.L.C.,

Plaintiff—Appellant/Cross-Appellee ,

versus

First Standard Asurety, L.L.P.; David Harris,

Defendants—Appellees/Cross-Appellants

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 5:17-CV-674

Before King, Elrod, and Southwick, Circuit Judges

. Per Curiam: *
Appellant fails to present any non-frivolous arguments on appeal. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED

. See 5th
Cir. R. 47.6.

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit 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 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED July 19, 2022
Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 21-30442 Document: 00516398946 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/19/2022
Michael A. YOUNG, petitioner, v. Carol CHAPDELAINE, Warden;

Michael A. Young, petitioner, v. Carol Chapdelaine, Warden; and Michael A. Young, petitioner, v. Carol Chapdelaine, Warden, et al.

No. 18-7321.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 29, 2019.

Petition for rehearing denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM THE HANOVER COMPRESSOR COMPANY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF AND FOR THE THREE
MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                          14,553
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   46,698
<ALLOWANCES>                                        90
<INVENTORY>                                     36,492
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               118,084
<PP&E>                                         501,017
<DEPRECIATION>                                  84,726
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 553,100
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           41,778
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       268,460
<OTHER-SE>                                      25,919
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   553,100
<SALES>                                         25,242
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                61,449
<CGS>                                           19,754
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   48,200
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,085
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 10,164
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,913
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,251
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,251
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.22
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.21
        

</TABLE>
```

```

----

Updated July 1, 2011
Robert Fitzgerald RODGERS, petitioner, v. ALABAMA.

No. 17-9289.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama denied.
Eriese Alphonso TISDALE, petitioner, v. FLORIDA.

No. 18-7912.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2019.

*1560Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Florida denied.
**Exhibit 32.1**
**CERTIFICATION**
     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), theundersigned officer of IPC Holdings, Ltd. (the “Company”), hereby certifies, tosuch officer’s knowledge, that:
The Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30,2004 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of the Company.     Dated: November 9, 2004 /s/ James P. Bryce   Name:James P. Bryce Title:Chief Executive Officer
The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350,chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed as part ofthe Report.
Jesus Pacheco ESTUDILLO, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-7849.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 18, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          44,361
<SECURITIES>                                    85,170
<RECEIVABLES>                                   11,099
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               108,714
<PP&E>                                          11,868
<DEPRECIATION>                                   7,806
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 178,050
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           31,360
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           697
<OTHER-SE>                                     144,761
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   178,050
<SALES>                                         53,353
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                53,353
<CGS>                                            2,777
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,777
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                56,465
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    827
<INCOME-TAX>                                         8
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       819
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .01


</TABLE>
YOUNG SUNG LEE, et al., petitioners, v. Katelyn GARVEY.

No. 18-22.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

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