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

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

March 28, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

135812 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

IN RE STEVEN ZIMMERMAN, a/k/a 

THOMAS LUJAN JOHNSON, Minor. 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices ______________________________________ 

SHANE EDWARD JOHNSON, and

PATRICIA JOHNSON, 

Petitioners, 

and 

KASSANDRA ZIMMERMAN, 

Petitioner-Appellant, 

v SC: 135812 

 COA: 279696 

Ottawa CC Fam Div: 

 07-057516-AD 

SHAUN ALAN BYRON, a/k/a

SHAWN ALAN BYRON,

Respondent-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 3, 2008 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in 

lieu of granting leave to appeal, we VACATE that portion of the Court of Appeals 

judgment addressing “The Grant of Immediate Custody to Byron [respondent],” and we 

REMAND this case to the Ottawa Circuit Court Family Division. The Court of Appeals 

erred in reviewing the circuit court’s order as one that gave respondent custody of the 

minor child. Instead, the circuit court ruled that it was awarding “temporary placement” 

of the child with respondent and further urged the parties to act quickly to settle the 

custody issue. We AFFIRM that ruling and DIRECT that court to resolve the custody 

dispute in an expeditious manner, if that has not already occurred. In all other respects, 

the Court of Appeals judgment is affirmed. 

l0325 

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. 

March 28, 2008 

Clerk
```
 
 
CRUDE OIL, LIGHT SWEET - ICE FUTURES EUROPE                          Code-067411
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 04/24/12                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 1,000 BARRELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:      433,733
COMMITMENTS
  47,609   51,444   95,901  267,590  267,644  411,100  414,989   22,633   18,744

CHANGES FROM 04/17/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:     -3,624)
   7,329   -4,582     -105  -10,826   -1,147   -3,602   -5,834      -22    2,210

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    11.0     11.9     22.1     61.7     61.7     94.8     95.7      5.2      4.3

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      131)
      26       31       37       65       63      117      109
```

----

Updated April 27, 2012
Mario DE VERA, petitioner, v. UNITED AIRLINES, INC.

No. 17-8719.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* denied. Petitioner allowed until October 22, 2018, within which to pay the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) and to submit a petition in compliance with Rule 33.1 of the Rules of this Court.
Exhibit 32(a)

               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 Beard Company's (the "Company") Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2003, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, William M. Beard,
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

     1.   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities and 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 Company.


                                         THE BEARD COMPANY

                                         /s/ William M. Beard
(Date)   November 14, 2003               ___________________________________
                                         William M. Beard, Chairman of the Board
                                         and Chief Executive Officer
Melvin GRAYER, petitioner, v. James FILLIYAW, Warden, et al.

No. 18-8563.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 28, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Larry HOWARD, petitioner, v. Daniel LESATZ, Warden.

No. 18-7850.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 24, 2019.

Petition for rehearing denied.
Steven M. JACOB, petitioner, v. Scott R. FRAKES, Director, Nebraska Department of Correctional Services.

No. 18-5631.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

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 Eighth Circuit dismissed. See Rule 39.8. As petitioner has repeatedly abused this Court's process, the Clerk is directed not to accept any further petitions in noncriminal matters from petitioner unless the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) is paid and petition submitted in compliance with Rule 33.1. See *Martin v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals,*506 U.S. 1, 113 S.Ct. 397, 121 L.Ed.2d 305 (1992)*(per curiam )* .
Andrea Joy JAMES, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-9434.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

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

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1377 Engrossed Amendment Senate (EAS)]

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

                  In the Senate of the United States,

                                                     November 19, 1999.
    Resolved, That the bill from the House of Representatives (H.R. 
1377) entitled ``An Act to designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service at 13234 South Baltimore Avenue in Chicago, Illinois, as 
the `John J. Buchanan Post Office Building'.'', do pass with the 
following

                              AMENDMENTS:

            Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert:

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The facility of the United States Postal Service, located at 9308 
South Chicago Avenue, Chicago, Illinois, 60617, is designated as the 
``John J. Buchanan Post Office Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, regulation, map, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be considered to be a reference to the ``John J. Buchanan Post 
Office Building''.

            Amend the title so as to read: ``An Act to designate the 
        facility of the United States Postal Service located at 9308 
        South Chicago Avenue, Chicago, Illinois, as the `John J. 
        Buchanan Post Office Building'.''.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
106th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 1377

_______________________________________________________________________

                               AMENDMENTS
```
Obinna OBIORA, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-8392.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied.
John STURGEON, petitioner, v. Bert FROST, in His Official Capacity as Alaska Regional Director of the National Park Service, et al.

No. 17-949.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Motion of petitioner to dispense with printing the joint appendix granted.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, et al., petitioners, v. REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, et al.

No. 18-587.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 28, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari in No. 18-587 granted. Petition for writ of certiorari before judgment in No. 18-588 and No. 18-589 granted. The case is consolidated, and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument.
```
 
 
CRUDE OIL, LIGHT SWEET - ICE FUTURES EUROPE                          Code-067411
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 03/13/12                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 1,000 BARRELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:      404,083
COMMITMENTS
  45,689   36,400   86,554  250,812  263,181  383,055  386,135   21,028   17,948

CHANGES FROM 03/06/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:     17,719)
   1,886    7,505      114   17,756   12,092   19,756   19,711   -2,037   -1,992

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    11.3      9.0     21.4     62.1     65.1     94.8     95.6      5.2      4.4

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      130)
      24       31       42       64       61      117      110
```

----

Updated March 16, 2012
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

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

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

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LUIS ALBERTO ALVAREZHURTADO,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 07-73747

Agency No. A099-577-159

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted September 13, 2010** 

Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Luis Alberto Alvarez-Hurtado, a native and citizen of Peru, petitions for

review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an

immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for withholding of

removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have

FILED

SEP 24 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 07-73747

jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the

agency’s factual findings, applying the new standards governing adverse

credibility determinations created by the REAL ID Act, Shrestha v. Holder, 590

F.3d 1034, 1039 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition.

The IJ found Alvarez-Hurtado not credible based on discrepancies between

his claim for asylum in the United States, and his claim for refugee status in

Canada regarding the dates of his arrest, which guerilla group the Peruvian

government suspected he was linked to, and whether the government shot his

friend in front of him. The IJ also found Alvarez-Hurtado not credible based on

the discrepancy between his testimony and documentary evidence concerning his

employment with Centromin Peru. In light of these findings, which are supported

by the record, and the IJ’s reasonable rejection of Alvarez-Hurtado’s explanations,

see Rivera v. Mukasey, 508 F.3d 1271, 1275 (9th Cir. 2007), substantial evidence

supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination, see Shrestha, 590 F.3d at

1045-48 (adverse credibility determination was reasonable under the Real ID Act’s

“totality of the circumstances”). In the absence of credible evidence,

Alvarez-Hurtado has failed to show eligibility for withholding of removal. See

Shrestha, 590 F.3d at 1048.
3 07-73747

Because Alvarez-Hurtado’s CAT claim is based on the same evidence the IJ

found not credible, and Alvarez-Hurtado does not point to any other evidence in

the record that compels the finding that it is more likely than not he would be

tortured if returned to Peru, his CAT claim also fails. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348

F.3d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 2003).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
Steve ZINNEL, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-8854.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 28, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
EXHIBIT 10.15


<TABLE>

                 AMENDED SCHEDULE OF OPTIONS GRANTED
                UNDER 1994 DIRECTOR STOCK OPTION PLAN
                     (THROUGH OCTOBER 31, 1996)
<CAPTION>
                      Number of      Date of   Option     Option
Grantee           Options Granted*    Grant    Price*     Period
<S>                     <C>         <C>       <C>      <C>

Joseph C. Cook, Jr.     550         1/31/95  $12.09    1/30/2000

                        1,100       4/30/95   16.73    4/29/2000

                        550         7/31/95   13.75    7/30/2000

                        1,100       10/31/95   9.08    10/30/2000

                        825         01/31/96   5.90    1/30/2001

                        550         04/30/96   8.75    04/29/2001

                        550         07/31/96   6.98    07/30/2001

                        550         10/31/96   7.63    10/30/2001


David L. Swider         825         1/31/95   $9.95    1/30/2000
                                    (for the quarter
                                    ended 10/31/94)

                        1,100       1/31/95   12.09    1/30/2000

                        1,100       4/30/95   16.73    4/29/2000

                        550         7/31/95   13.75    7/30/2000

                        1,100       10/31/95   9.08    10/30/2000

                        1,100       01/31/96   5.90    01/30/2001

                        1,100       04/30/96   8.75    04/29/2001

                        825         07/31/96   6.98    07/30/2001

                        825         10/31/96   7.63    10/30/2001

                                                                               

Richard L. VonDerHaar   825         1/31/95   $9.95    1/30/2000
                                                       (for the quarter
                                                       ended 10/31/94)

                        1,100       1/31/95   12.09    1/30/2000

                        1,100       4/30/95   16.73    4/29/2000

                        550         7/31/95   13.75    7/30/2000

                        1,100       10/31/95   9.08    10/30/2000

                        1,100       01/31/96   5.90    01/30/2001

                        550         04/30/96   8.75    04/29/2001

                        825         07/31/96   6.98    07/30/2001

                        825         10/31/96   7.63    10/30/2001


Max K. DeJonge          550         10/31/95  $9.08    10/30/2000

                        550         01/31/96   5.90    01/30/2001

                        550         04/30/96   8.75    04/29/2001

                        550         07/31/96   6.98    07/30/2001

                        550         10/31/96   7.63    10/30/2001
</TABLE>


*All grants prior to April 24, 1995 retroactively adjusted for ten percent stock
dividend paid on that date.
James E. WHITNEY, petitioner, v. ARKANSAS.

No. 18-5956.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 15, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Arkansas denied.
# Euroopa Liidu C 522A/28.

| | ISSN 1977-0898 |
| --- | --- |
| Euroopa Liidu
  Teataja | C 522A |
| | |
| Eestikeelne väljaanne | Teave ja teatised | 64. aastakäik28. detsember 2021 |

ISSN 1977-0898

Euroopa Liidu

Teataja

C 522A

Eestikeelne väljaanne

Teave ja teatised

64. aastakäik28. detsember 2021

---

| Sisukord | Lehekülg |
| --- | --- |
| | Parandused |
| 2021/C 522 A/01 | Töölevõtmise teadaanne PE/269/S – Direktor (tegevusüksus AD, palgaaste 14) – Turvalisuse ja ohutuse peadirektoraat – turva- ja infotehnoloogia direktoraat, parandus ( ELT C 505 A, 15.12.2021 ) | 1 |

Sisukord

Lehekülg

Parandused

2021/C 522 A/01

Töölevõtmise teadaanne PE/269/S – Direktor (tegevusüksus AD, palgaaste 14) – Turvalisuse ja ohutuse peadirektoraat – turva- ja infotehnoloogia direktoraat, parandus ( ELT C 505 A, 15.12.2021 )

( ELT C 505 A, 15.12.2021 )

1

---

| ET | |
| --- | --- |

ET

---

Parandused

| 28.12.2021 | ET | Euroopa Liidu Teataja | CA 522/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.12.2021

ET

Euroopa Liidu Teataja

CA 522/1

---

Töölevõtmise teadaanne PE/269/S – Direktor (tegevusüksus AD, palgaaste 14) – Turvalisuse ja ohutuse peadirektoraat – turva- ja infotehnoloogia direktoraat, parandus

(
  Euroopa Liidu Teataja C 505 A, 15. detsember 2021
  )

(2021/C 522 A/01)

| 1. | Lehekülgedel 7 ja 8 pärast joonealust märkust 5 nummerdatakse joonealused märkused 1, 6, 7, 8, 9 ümber joonealusteks märkusteks 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | Kaanel sisukorras ja leheküljel 6 pealkirjas |
| --- | --- |

2.

| asendatakse | „turva- ja infotehnoloogia direktoraat“ |
| --- | --- |

asendatakse

„turva- ja infotehnoloogia direktoraat“

| järgmisega: | „tehnoloogia ja informatsiooni direktoraat“. |
| --- | --- |

järgmisega:

järgmisega:

„tehnoloogia ja informatsiooni direktoraat“.

| 3. | Leheküljel 6 esimeses lõigus |
| --- | --- |

3.

Leheküljel 6 esimeses lõigus

| asendatakse | „turva- ja infotehnoloogia direktoraat“ |
| --- | --- |

asendatakse

asendatakse

„turva- ja infotehnoloogia direktoraat“

| järgmisega: | „tehnoloogia ja informatsiooni direktoraat“. |
| --- | --- |

järgmisega:

järgmisega:

„tehnoloogia ja informatsiooni direktoraat“.

| 4. | Leheküljel 9 lisa pealkirjas |
| --- | --- |

4.

Leheküljel 9 lisa pealkirjas

| asendatakse | „turva- ja infotehnoloogia direktoraat“ |
| --- | --- |

asendatakse

asendatakse

„turva- ja infotehnoloogia direktoraat“

| järgmisega: | „tehnoloogia ja informatsiooni direktoraat“. |
| --- | --- |

järgmisega:

järgmisega:

„tehnoloogia ja informatsiooni direktoraat“.

---
John Frederick TATE, aka John M. Tate, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-601.

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.
The SHERWIN-WILLIAMS COMPANY, petitioner, v. CALIFORNIA.

No. 18-86.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 15, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, Sixth Appellate District denied.
Derrick KNIGHT, petitioner, v. Julie L. JONES, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections.

No. 18-5855.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 29, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Richard Alan Haase v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. and Deutsche 

Bank National Trust Company

Appellate case number: 01-20-00854-CV

Trial court case number: 07-DCV-161177

Trial court: 400th District Court of Fort Bend County

On October 12, 2021, Appellee Deutsche Bank National Trust Company filed an opposed

Motion to Abate Appeal and to Direct the District Court [to] Take Up the Second Motion for 

Judgment Nunc Pro Tunc Under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 316. To the extent it seeks 

abatement of the present appeal, Appellee’s motion is granted. 

This case is abated, treated as a closed case, removed from this Court’s active docket, and 

remanded to the trial court. This appeal will be reinstated on this Court’s active docket when the 

trial court rules on Appellee’s Second Motion for Judgment Nunc Pro Tunc and either party 

informs the Clerk of this Court of the ruling with a certified copy of the order. This Court will 

also consider a motion to reinstate by either party or may reinstate on its own order.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Veronica Rivas Molloy

Acting individually 

Date: November 2, 2021
VILLAGE OF LINCOLNSHIRE, ILLINOIS, et al., petitioners, v. INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL 399, et al.

No. 18-1070.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 10, 2019.

On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Petition for writ of certiorari granted. Judgment vacated, and case remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit with instructions to direct the District Court to dismiss the case as moot. See *United States v. Munsingwear, Inc.,*340 U.S. 36, 71 S.Ct. 104, 95 L.Ed. 36 (1950).
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1457 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1457

  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the credit for 
        producing electricity from certain renewable resources.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 15, 1999

  Mr. Minge (for himself and Mr. Gilchrest) introduced the following 
      bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the credit for 
        producing electricity from certain renewable resources.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF CREDIT FOR PRODUCING ELECTRICITY FROM CERTAIN 
              RENEWABLE RESOURCES.

    (a) Credit for Producing Electricity From Poultry Waste.--Section 
45(c)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (defining qualified 
energy resources) is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of 
subparagraph (A), by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (B) 
and inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the end the following:
                    ``(C) poultry waste.''
    (b) Extension of Placed in Service Date.--Section 45(c)(3) of such 
Code (defining qualified facility) is amended by striking ``1999'' and 
inserting ``2004''.
    (c) Credit Allowed to Operator of Facility in Certain Cases.--
Subsection (d) of section 45 of such Code is amended by adding at the 
end the following new paragraph:
            ``(6) Credit allowed to operator in certain cases.--In the 
        case of a facility which produces electricity exclusively from 
        poultry waste and which is owned by a governmental unit, such 
        facility shall be treated for purposes of this section as owned 
        solely by the operator of such facility. Subsection (b)(3) 
        shall not apply to any facility with respect to which an 
        election under the preceding sentence is in effect.''
    (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to facilities placed in service after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Jonathan S. WILLIAMS, petitioner, v. Dr. KURK, et al.

No. 18-8756.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 10, 2019.

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