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

Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, 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.

June 23, 2015 

# Order

June 2 3 , 2015

150846 ( 15 4 )

DTE ELECTRIC COMPANY, a/k/a DETROIT

EDISON COMPANY,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v

JOSEPH CONSTANT,

Defendant

- Appellant. SC: 150846

COA: 317976

Oakland CC: 2013

- 132055

- CH

________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the third motion of defendant

- appellant to extend the

time for filing his reply is GRANTED. The reply submitted on June 12 , 2015 , is

accepted for filing

.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996             DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996             DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                           2,709                   3,109
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,208                   2,628
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0                       0
<PP&E>                                         332,669                 276,818
<DEPRECIATION>                                  27,973                  20,312
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 371,986                 295,868
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0                       0
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                           131                     100
<OTHER-SE>                                     226,408                 159,886
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   371,986                 295,868
<SALES>                                              0                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                36,623                  31,362
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                15,556                  13,577
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,598                   6,977
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 16,697                  10,782
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             16,697                  10,782
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                     531
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                    16,682                  10,737
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.50                    1.22
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                       0


</TABLE>
<PAGE>


                                                                      Exhibit 32


                                  CERTIFICATION

         Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18
U.S.C.ss.1350, as adopted), Linda H. Masterson, Chief Executive Officer of
LifePoint, Inc. (the "Company"), and Craig S. Montesanti, Chief Accounting
Officer of the Company, each hereby certify that, to the best of their
knowledge:

1. The Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31,
2003, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32 (the "PERIODIC
REPORT") fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or section 15(d),
as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have set their hands hereto as of
the 11th, day of February, 2004.


                                             /s/ Linda H. Masterson
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             Linda H. Masterson
                                             Chief Executive Officer


                                             /s/ Craig S. Montesanti
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             Craig S. Montesanti
                                             Chief Accounting Officer




                                       36
```
 
 
WHEAT - MINNEAPOLIS GRAIN EXCHANGE                                   Code-001626
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 03/27/12                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:       38,123
COMMITMENTS
  12,823    1,536    1,727   17,148   26,257   31,698   29,520    6,425    8,603

CHANGES FROM 03/20/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:        738)
     491     -488       69      691      432    1,251       13     -513      725

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    33.6      4.0      4.5     45.0     68.9     83.1     77.4     16.9     22.6

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       52)
      14        6        9       26       20       46       30
```

----

Updated March 30, 2012
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

TYLER DIVISION

SCOTTY LEMOND BARKER, #2768, §

§

Plaintiff, §

§

v. § Case No. 6:23-cv-189-JDK-KNM

§

HENDERSON COUNTY JAIL, et al., §

§

Defendants. §

ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff Scotty Lemond Barker, an inmate of the Henderson County Jail 

proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1983 alleging violations of his civil rights in prison. The case referred to United

States Magistrate Judge K. Nicole Mitchell for findings of fact, conclusions of law, 

and recommendations for the disposition of the case.

On June 13, 2024, the Magistrate Judge entered a Report and 

Recommendation that Defendant’s motion for summary judgment for failure to 

exhaust administrative remedies be granted and that this case be dismissed without 

prejudice. Docket No. 29. No timely objections were filed. 

This Court reviews the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge de 

novo only if a party objects within fourteen days of the Report and Recommendation. 

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). In conducting a de novo review, the Court examines the entire 

record and makes an independent assessment under the law. Douglass v. United 

Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc), superseded on other 

1

Case 6:23-cv-00189-JDK-KNM Document 31 Filed 08/05/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 189
grounds by statute, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (extending the time to file objections from 

ten to fourteen days). 

Here, Plaintiff did not object in the prescribed period. The Court therefore 

reviews the Magistrate Judge’s findings for clear error or abuse of discretion and 

reviews her legal conclusions to determine whether they are contrary to law. See 

United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 

918 (1989) (holding that, if no objections to a Magistrate Judge’s Report are filed, the 

standard of review is “clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law.”). 

Having reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s Report and the record in this case, 

the Court finds no clear error or abuse of discretion and no conclusions contrary to 

law. Accordingly, the Court hereby ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the 

United States Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 29) as the findings of this Court. The 

Defendant’s motion for summary judgment for failure to exhaust (Docket No. 24) is 

GRANTED, and this case is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to exhaust 

administrative remedies. All pending motions are DENIED as MOOT.

2

So ordered and signed on this 

Aug 5, 2024

Case 6:23-cv-00189-JDK-KNM Document 31 Filed 08/05/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 190
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

 Respondent

 v.

ROBERT WASHINGTON,

 Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 180 EAL 2014

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the

Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 20th day of August, 2014, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED.
Order filed October 22, 2013 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-13-00608-CV

____________

MOMENTUM CONTRACTORS, INC., FREDERICK ALLEN, JR. & JUDY 

ALLEN, Appellants

V.

TRI-TEMP REFRIGERATION, INC., Appellee

On Appeal from the 125th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2012-19727

O R D E R

Appellants’ brief was due September 30, 2013. No brief or motion for 

extension of time has been filed. 

Unless appellants submit a brief to the clerk of this court on or before

November 19, 2013, the court will dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See

Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b). 
PER CURIAM
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

TYLER DIVISION

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. 

ISAAC SMITH

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CASE NUMBER 6:23-CR-00039-JCB

FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION ON 

GUILTY PLEA BEFORE THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b), this matter has been referred by the District Court for 

administration of a plea of guilty under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

On May 16, 2023, this cause came before the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge 

for a plea of guilty to an Indictment charging Defendant Isaac Smith in Count One with a violation 

of Title 18 U.S.C. § 751(a) - Escape. After conducting said proceeding in the form and manner 

prescribed by FED. R. CRIM. P. 11, the undersigned finds that:

a. Defendant, after consultation with counsel of record, has knowingly and voluntarily 

consented to the administration of the Guilty Plea in this cause by a United States Magistrate Judge, 

subject to a final acceptance and imposition of sentence by the District Judge;

b. Defendant and the government have entered into a plea agreement which has been 

filed and disclosed in open court pursuant to FED. R. CRIM. P. 11(c)(2);

c. Defendant is fully competent and capable of entering an informed plea, that the 

defendant is aware of the nature of the charges, the maximum penalties, and the consequences of 

the plea, and that the plea of guilty is a knowing and voluntary plea supported by an independent 

basis in fact containing each of the essential elements of the offense; and

Case 6:23-cr-00039-JCB-KNM Document 29 Filed 05/16/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:

64
2

d. Defendant understands each of the constitutional and statutory rights enumerated 

in Rule 11(b) and wishes to waive these rights, including the right to a trial by jury.

IT IS THEREFORE RECOMMENDED that the District Court accept the Plea 

Agreement and the Guilty Plea of the defendant and that ISAAC SMITH should be finally 

adjudged guilty of that offense.

Defendant has waived his right to object to the findings of the Magistrate Judge in this 

matter, and the Government also waived its right to object, so the Court will present this Report 

and Recommendation to District Judge J. Campbell Barker for adoption immediately upon 

issuance.

So ORDERED and SIGNED this 16th day of May, 2023.

Case 6:23-cr-00039-JCB-KNM Document 29 Filed 05/16/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:

65
Lancey Darnell RAY, petitioner, v. Tracy McCOLLUM, Warden.

No. 17-9504.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 19, 2018.

Petition for rehearing denied.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 21.1

                        TALX Corporation and Subsidiaries
            Subsidiaries of TALX Corporation, a Missouri corporation

1.    Net Profit, Inc. - a South Carolina corporation
2.    TALX FasTime Services, Inc. - a Texas corporation
3.    TALX UCM Services, Inc. - a Missouri corporation (d/b/a TALX UC eXpress)
4.    TALX Employer Services, LLC - a Missouri limited liability company
5.    TBT Enterprises, Incorporated - a Maryland corporation
6.    UI Advantage, Inc. - a Maryland corporation
7.    Johnson & Associates, LLC - a Nebraska limited liability company
8.    Jon-Jay Associates, Inc. - a Massachusetts corporation
9.    TALX Tax Incentive Services, LLC - a Missouri limited liability company
10.   Unemployment Services, LLC - a Missouri limited liability company
11.   TALX Tax Credits and Incentives, LLC - a Missouri limited liability
      company
12.   Management Insight Incentives, LLC - a Missouri limited liability company
13.   Performance Assessment Network, Inc. - a Delaware corporation
14.   TALX Limited - a company organized under laws of England
IIB

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 1901

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 4, 2000

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and

Public Works

AN ACT

To designate the United States border station located in

Pharr, Texas, as the ‘‘Kika de la Garza United States

Border Station’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

HR 1901 RFS

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

2 The United States border station located in Pharr,

3 Texas, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Kika de

4 la Garza United States Border Station’’.

5 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

6 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

7 paper, or other record of the United States to the border

8 station referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a

9 reference to the ‘‘Kika de la Garza United States Border

10 Station’’.

Passed the House of Representatives May 3, 2000.

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL,

Clerk.
I

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1808

To provide an exemption from certain import prohibitions.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 13, 1999

Mr. MENENDEZ (for himself, Mr. MATSUI, and Mr. GEJDENSON) introduced

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To provide an exemption from certain import prohibitions.

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

3 SECTION 1. EXEMPTION FROM IMPORT PROHIBITION.

4 Notwithstanding any other provision of law, Execu5 tive Order 13067 of November 3, 1997, shall not apply

6 with respect to imports of articles described in Har7 monized Tariff Schedule headings 1301.20.00 and

8 1301.90.90 (other than balsams, tragacanth, and karaya).

Æ
Exhibit 32.2





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350





In connection with the Quarterly Report of Tucows Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Michael Cooperman, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, to my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





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








Date: May 13, 2011
/s/ Michael CoopermanMichael CoopermanChief Financial Officer
Sonny SCOTT, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-6271.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 5, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
AO 458 (Rev. 06/09) Appearance of Counsel

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff

v. Case No.

Defendant

APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL

To: The clerk of court and all parties of record

I am admitted or otherwise authorized to practice in this court, and I appear in this case as counsel for:

.

Date:

Attorney’s signature

Printed name and bar number

Address

E-mail address

Telephone number

FAX number

 Eastern District of Texas Headwater Research LLC Samsung Electronics America, Inc. et al 2:23-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Headwater Research LLC 06/18/2024 /s/ Dale Chang Dale Chang CA Bar No. 248657

Russ August & Kabat 

12424 Wilshire Blvd., 12th Floor 

Los Angeles, CA 90025 dchang@raklaw.com (310) 826-7474 (310) 826-6991 Print Save As... Reset

Case 2:23-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 97 Filed 06/18/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 4828
No. 6:23-cr-00025-1

United States of America

v.

Amber Veronica Tobias

ORD ER

This criminal action was referred to United States Magistrate 

Judge John D. Love for administration of a guilty plea under Federal 

Rule of Criminal Procedure 11. The magistrate judge conducted a 

hearing in the form and manner prescribed by Rule 11 and issued 

findings of fact and recommendation that the court accept defendant’s guilty plea and adjudge defendant guilty on count three of the 

indictment. Doc. 90 at 2. Defendant waived his right to object to the 

magistrate judge’s findings. Id.

The court hereby accepts the magistrate judge’s findings of fact 

and recommendation on defendant’s guilty plea. The court also accepts defendant’s plea but defers acceptance of the plea agreement 

until after review of the presentence report.

In accordance with defendant’s guilty plea, the court finds defendant Amber Veronica Tobias (1) guilty of count three of the indictment, charging a violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) – Possession

with the Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine.

So ordered by the court on November 30, 2023.

J. CAMPBELL BARKER

United States District Judge

Case 6:23-cr-00025-JCB-JDL Document 91 Filed 11/30/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 258
Kenneth A. WHITE, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-6193.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 5, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-10-00244-CR

David CALZADA,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 226th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2009-CR-7747

Honorable Sid L. Harle, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Rebecca Simmons, Justice

Steven C. Hilbig, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Delivered and Filed: May 19, 2010

DISMISSED

The trial court’s certification in this appeal states that “this criminal case is a plea-bargain 

case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.” The clerk’s record contains a written plea 

bargain, and the punishment assessed did not exceed the punishment recommended by the 

prosecutor and agreed to by the defendant; therefore, the trial court’s certification accurately 

reflects that the underlying case is a plea-bargain case. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). 
04-10-00244-CR

- 2 -

Rule 25.2(d) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provides, “The appeal must be 

dismissed if a certification that shows the defendant has a right of appeal has not been made part 

of the record under these rules.” TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d). Appellant’s counsel has filed written 

notice with this court that counsel has reviewed the record and “can find no right of appeal for 

Appellant.” We construe this notice as an indication that appellant will not seek to file an 

amended trial court certification showing that he has the right of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 

25.2(d); 37.1; see also Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 174, 177 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, no 

pet.). In light of the record presented, we agree with appellant’s counsel that Rule 25.2(d) 

requires this court to dismiss this appeal. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed.

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH
Barbara E. BROWN, petitioner, v. Scott BURTON, Deputy Sheriff, in His Individual Capacity, et al.

No. 18-8597.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 3, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Microsoft Word 10.0.6612;


            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


We consent to the  incorporation by reference in Registration  Statements on
Form S-8  (Registration  No. 33-84340 and Registration No.
33-47891) of MFB Corp. of our report dated November 28, 2006 which is
incorporated  by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of
MFB Corp. for the year ended September 30, 2006.


                                               /s/ Crowe Chizek and Company LLC
                                                Crowe Chizek and Company LLC

South Bend, Indiana
December 15, 2006
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

IN THE MATTER OF: B. G., MINOR CHILD. No. 83380
GINA G., Appellant, 

# FILE

vs. WASHOE COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY, Res • ondent. 

### SEP 2 1 2021 ELiZEJ A. BROWN CLERK OF PREME COURT BY DtPLITY CLERK

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL This is an appeal from a district court order affirming master's findings and recommendations. Second Judicial District Court, Family Court Division, Washoe County; Paige Dollinger, Judge.

Review of the notice of appeal, docketing statement, and documents before this court reveals a jurisdictional defect. It does not appear that the district court has entered a final judgment appealable under NRAP 3A(b)(1). See Lee v. GNLV Corp., 116 Nev. 424, 426, 996 P.2d 416, 417 (2000) (defining a final judgment). The order challenged in this appeal determines the temporary custody of the minor children, and that order is subject to periodic mandatory review and modification by the district court. See NRS Chapter 432B. Thus, it appears that the district court has not entered a final written judgment. In re Temp. Custody of Five Minor Children, 105 Nev. 441, 443, 777 P.2d 901, 902 (1989); Lee v. GNLV Corp., 116 Nev. 424, 996 P.2d 416 (2000). No statute or court rule authorizes an appeal from an order of the district court affirming a master's

tfindings and recommendation and determining temporary custody

pursuant to NRS Chapter 432B. The right to appeal is statutory, and where no statute or rule authorizes an appeal, no right to appeal exists. See Brown v. MHC Stagecoach, LLC, 129 Nev. 343, 345, 301 P.3d 850, 851 (2013) (this court "may only consider appeals authorized by statute or court rule"). Accordingly we lack jurisdiction and

ORDER this appeal DISMISSED.'

, J.

Cadish 

# P ieke4 , J. Pickering Herndon

cc: Hon. Paige Dollinger, District Judge, Family Court Division Gina G. Washoe County District Attorney Washoe District Court Clerk

'In light of this decision, this court takes no action in regard to appellant's transcript request form filed on August 30, 2021. SUPREME Coma

OF NEVADA (C) 1947A AD, 2

-

. 1 " . A • • '"si - Z.' ;;;;E..4: ,