alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA '

'

versus ' NO. 1:23-CR-63-MAC

'

PATRICK LEE BRIDGEWATER '

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION

ON DEFENDANT’S GUILTY PLEA

The court referred this matter to the Honorable Christine L. Stetson, United States 

Magistrate Judge, for administration of a guilty plea under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of 

Criminal Procedure. Judge Stetson conducted a hearing in the form and manner prescribed by 

Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 and issued her Findings of Fact and Recommendation 

on Guilty Plea Before the United States Magistrate Judge. Judge Stetson recommended that 

the court accept the Defendant’s guilty plea. She further recommended that the court adjudge 

the Defendant guilty on Count One of the Indictment filed against the Defendant.

The parties have not objected to Judge Stetson’s findings. The court ORDERS that the 

Findings of Fact and Recommendation on Guilty Plea of the United States Magistrate Judge are 

ADOPTED. The court accepts the Defendant’s plea but defers acceptance of the plea 

agreement until after review of the presentence report. 

It is further ORDERED that, in accordance with the Defendant’s guilty plea and the 

magistrate judge’s findings and recommendation, the Defendant, Patrick Lee Bridgewater, is 

adjudged guilty as to Count One of the Indictment charging a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951—

Hobbs Act Robbery.

________________________________________

MARCIA A. CRONE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE SIGNED at Beaumont, Texas, this 13th day of November, 2024.

Case 1:23-cr-00063-MAC-CLS Document 21 Filed 11/13/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:

57
2010 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

5-20-2010

USA v. Michael McEachern

Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential

Docket No. 10-1070

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2010

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2010 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

Recommended Citation

"USA v. Michael McEachern" (2010). 2010 Decisions. Paper 1295.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2010/1295
BLD-149 NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________

No. 10-1070

___________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

MICHAEL MCEACHERN,

 Appellant

____________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Pennsylvania

(D.C. Criminal No. 08-cr-00116)

District Judge: Honorable Donetta W. Ambrose

____________________________________

Submitted for Possible Summary Action Pursuant to 

Third Circuit LAR 27.4 and I.O.P. 10.6

March 11, 2010

Before: McKEE, Chief Judge, RENDELL and CHAGARES, Circuit Judges.

(Filed: May 20, 2010)

_________

OPINION OF THE COURT

_________

PER CURIAM

In November 2008, Michael McEachern was sentenced to 41 months in prison

after pleading guilty to uttering counterfeit securities. He waived his right to appeal or
 McEachern reserved the right to appeal his sentence if it exceeded the statutory 1

maximum or unreasonably exceeded the guideline range. Neither situation is at issue

here.

2

otherwise challenge his conviction or sentence. In November 2009, McEachern filed a 1

motion to dismiss the charges alleging defects in the indictment. The District Court

denied the motion, and McEachern filed a timely notice of appeal.

We agree with the District Court that McEachern’s motion is meritless. As noted

above, McEachern waived his right to challenge his conviction. Moreover, while

McEachern expressly disavowed 28 U.S.C. § 2255 as the basis for his motion, he did not

provide a jurisdictional basis for the District Court to act on his motion. Furthermore, as

noted by the government, a motion challenging the institution of the prosecution must be

made before trial. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(3)(A).

Summary action is appropriate if there is no substantial question presented in the

appeal. See Third Circuit LAR 27.4. For the above reasons, as well as those set forth by

the District Court, we will summarily affirm the District Court’s order. See Third Circuit

I.O.P. 10.6.
Exhibit 4 

Case 5:23-cv-00032-RWS Document 59-6 Filed 12/08/23 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 1026
App. 035
App. 036
App. 037
App. 038
App. 039
App. 040
App. 041
App. 042
App. 043
Case 5:23-cv-00032-RWS Document 59-6 Filed 12/08/23 Page 11 of 12 PageID #: 1036
App. 045
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 17

- 00112

- CR
Eduardo Luna Rodriguez v. The State of Texas
On Appeal from the 107th District Court of Cameron County , Texas Trial Cause No. 2016

- DCR

- 30

- A

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be AFFIRMED . The Court orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED

. We further order this decision certified below for observance. January 24, 2019
Letter Agreement between Meadows Office, L.L.C. and Cancer Genetics, Inc.



 EXHIBIT 10.44 

 
 



 
 VIA CERTIFIED RR MAIL 
 January 10, 2008 
 Mr. Louis Maione 

President 
 Cancer Genetics, Inc. 

228 River Vale Road 
 River Vale, NJ 07675

 Re:      Lease dated October 9, 2007 by and between Meadows Office L.L.C. and Cancer Genetics, Inc.

 Dear Mr. Maione: 
 This
letter shall verify that the term of the lease, the following dates have been established: 
  

			
	 Rent Commencement Date:
	  	February 6, 2008
	 Expiration Date:
	  	February 28, 2018

 Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 732-362-8800 

Very truly yours, 
 ONYX MANAGEMENT GROUP,
LLC 
 as Managing Agent for 

MEADOWS OFFICE L.L.C. 
 /s/ Louis
LoCascio                 
 Louis LoCascio 

Director of Operations 
 LL:sr 

 

			
	 cc:
	  	John Saraceno
		  	Sam Giordano
		  	Mike Nevins
		  	Becky Coleridge
		  	Alicja Hein

  
  

900 Route 9 North — Suite 301 —
Woodbridge, NJ 07095 
 phone: (732) 362-8800 — fax:
(732) 362-8801 — www.onyxequities.com
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Mecklermedia
Corporation's consolidated financial statements as of and for the period ended
September 30, 1997, and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                          23,971
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   14,357
<ALLOWANCES>                                       670
<INVENTORY>                                      1,074
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                45,239
<PP&E>                                           3,921
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,393
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  51,781
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           32,045
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            85
<OTHER-SE>                                      19,331
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    51,781
<SALES>                                         19,067
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                55,193
<CGS>                                           13,982
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   31,862
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,017
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (727)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,744
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,744
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.43
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.43
        

</TABLE>
### MANDATE



## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 14

- 00988

- CR

Stephen Joseph Altobello, Appellant

v.
The State of Texas, Appellee Appealed from the 184th District Court of Harris County. (Tr. Ct. No . 1397278). Opinion delivered Per Curiam.

TO THE 184TH D ISTRICT COURT OF HARRIS COUNTY, GREETINGS:

Before our Court of Appeals on March 3 , 2015 , the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment was determined. Our Court of Appeals made its

order in these words:

This cause was heard on the motion of t he appellant to withdraw notice of appeal. Having considered the motion the Court orders the appeal DISMISSED

.
We further order appellant pay all costs expended in the appeal.

We further order the mandate be issued immediately.

We further order this dec ision certified below for observance.

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court in this behalf and in all things have it duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.

WITNESS , the Hon. Kem Thompson Frost , Chief Justice of our Fourteenth

C ourt of Appeals, with the Seal thereof affixed, at the City of Houston, March 06,

2015.
Cedrick THOMAS, petitioner, v. Jeffrey COZZI.

No. 18-368.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 15, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
**Exhibit
      32.2**














**CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF ACCOUNTING OFFICER**





**Pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.
      1350)**








The
      undersigned executive officer of WVS Financial Corp. (the “Registrant”) hereby
      certifies that the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three
      months ended December 31, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section
      13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained
      therein fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
      and
      results of operations of the Registrant.














/s/
                Keith A. SimpsonKeith
                A. SimpsonVice-President
                andChief
                Accounting Officer








Date:
      February 14, 2006








Note:  A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act has been provided to WVS Financial Corp. and will be retained by WVS
      Financial Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
      its
      staff upon request.




E-4
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 18

- 50344 Summary Calendar

BLAYNE D. WILLIAMS, SR.

Plaintiff

- Appellant

v.
CITY OF AUSTIN; AUSTIN POLICE DEPARTMENT; MARGO FRASIER, in her official and individual capacities; FRED FLETCHER, in his official capacity; ART ACEVEDO, in his official and individual capacities; JOHN DOE; JANE DOE; AUSTIN POLICE DEPARTMENT

- ART ACEVEDO, in his official and individual capacities; CHATTANOOGA POLICE DEPARTMENT; FRED FLETCHER, in his individual capacity

Defendants

- Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 1:16

- CV

- 1338

Before SMITH, WIENER, and WILLETT, Circuit Judges

. PER CURIAM: *
Plaintiff

- Appellant, Blayne D. Williams, Sr., proceeding pro se, is before us for the second time in this case, now under Rule 60(b) . T his time he seeks
to overturn the district court’s March 201 8 Order denying his Motion for

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED November 20, 2018 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 18-50344 Document: 00514730471 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/20/2018No. 18

- 50344

2 Relief from Judgment. At the core of both of Williams’s appeals has been the rejection of his contention that the statute of limitations should not have been employed to dismiss his lawsuit because of the “Continuous Violati ons Doctrine” which prevents application of the time bar.

We have reviewed the record on appeal, including the briefs of the parties and the district court’s March 26, 2018 Order denying Williams’s Motion for Relief from Judgment, and we conclude that the d istrict court did not abuse its discretion in denying that motion or in any o ther way. The
abovesaid Order is, therefore, AFFIRMED. Case: 18-50344 Document: 00514730471 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/20/2018
Tyrone D. MORANT, petitioner, v. Jason LEWIS, Superintendent, Southeast Correctional Center.

No. 18-6469.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Missouri denied.
EXHIBIT 32: Rule 13a-14(b) Certifications





The undersigned officers certify that this report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Jinzanghuang Tibet Pharmaceuticals, Inc.





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Jinzanghuang Tibet Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and will be retained by Jinzanghuang Tibet Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





May 16, 2011
/s/ Xue BangyiXue Bangyi (Chief Executive Officer)





May 16, 2011
/s/ Eva DengEva Deng (Chief Financial Officer)
_____________

No. 95-4209WM

_____________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the Western

v. * District of Missouri.

*

Jesus Montalvo-Rodriguez, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellant. *

_____________

Submitted: June 12, 1996

 Filed: June 21, 1996

_____________

Before FAGG, BOWMAN, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

_____________

PER CURIAM.

Jesus Montalvo-Rodriguez appeals the 151-month sentence imposed by

the district court after Montalvo-Rodriguez pleaded guilty to conspiring

to distribute cocaine base and cocaine powder. The Government did not file

a substantial assistance motion, and Montalvo-Rodriguez failed to make a

substantial threshold showing the Government improperly withheld the

motion. On appeal, counsel filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386

U.S. 738 (1967). In the Anders brief, counsel suggests the district court

improperly failed to depart downward below the applicable sentencing range

and the mandatory statutory minimum. Montalvo-Rodriguez's argument is

foreclosed by our holding in United States v. Kelly, 18 F.3d 612, 617-18

(8th Cir. 1994). Having carefully reviewed the record for any other

nonfrivolous issues, we find none. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80

(1988). We thus affirm the district court.
-2-

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**AFFINITY GROUP, INC.**

 

**STATEMENT PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

I, Michael A. Schneider, President and Chief Executive Officer ofAffinity Group, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), herebycertify as follows:

 

1.             This statement is providedpursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 in connection with the Company’sQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30,2009 (the “Periodic Report”);

 

2.             The Periodic Report fullycomplies with the requirements of section 13(a) and 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

3.             The information contained inthe Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company as of dates and for the periodsindicated therein.

 

 

Date:  August 14, 2009

 
|   | /s/  Michael A. Schneider        |
|--------|---------------------------------------|
|   | Michael A. Schneider                  |
|   | President and Chief Executive Officer |

 

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906,or such other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting thesignature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of thewritten statement as required by Section 906, has been provided toAffinity Group, Inc. and will be retained by Affinity Group, Inc. andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
Gerald NELSON, petitioner, v. AMALGAMATED TRANSIT UNION LOCAL 1181-1061, AFL-CIO, et al.

No. 17-8091.

Supreme Court of the United States

Aug. 6, 2018.

Petition for rehearing denied.
Michael A. BLACKENSHIP, petitioner, v. Jorge L. PASTRANA, Warden.

No. 17-8553.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
```
 
 
WHEAT - MINNEAPOLIS GRAIN EXCHANGE                                   Code-001626
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 10/02/12                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:       43,762
COMMITMENTS
   9,273    1,315    1,097   22,596   31,868   32,966   34,280   10,796    9,482

CHANGES FROM 09/25/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:        966)
      12      250      -10      711    1,110      713    1,350      253     -384

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    21.2      3.0      2.5     51.6     72.8     75.3     78.3     24.7     21.7

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       56)
      16        5        7       28       21       47       31
```

----

Updated October 5, 2012
EXHIBIT 10.9


                         DVI BUSINESS CREDIT CORPORATION

                               September 29, 1997

U.S. Diagnostic Inc.
777 South Flager Drive
West Palm Beach, Florida
Attn:  Mr. Joseph Paul, President

Dear Mr. Paul:

         U. S. Diagnostic Inc. ("USD") and DVI Business Credit Corporation
("DVIBC") entered into a Loan and Security Agreement dated as of February 25,
1997 (the "Loan Agreement") pursuant to which DVIBC has advanced USD a revolving
line of credit with a Commitment Amount of $25,000,000. Capitalized terms used
but not defined herein have the meaning given to them in the Loan Agreement.

         This letter is confirm that USD and DVIBC agreed to amend the Loan
Agreement as follows:

         1.    The Commitment Amount is increased to Thirty-Five Million Dollars
               ($35,000,000).

         2.    The Term of the Loan Agreement is extended until February 28,
               1999. Upon the expiration of such Term the Loan Agreement will
               be renewed as proved in the Loan Agreement.

         3.    USD grants DVIBC the right to debit the lock boxes established
               pursuant to the Lock Box Agreements in the amount of any loan,
               lease or other payments which are or become due to DVI
               Financial Services Inc. ("DVIFS") for Indebtedness owed by USD
               to DVIFS. DVIBC shall promptly remit the amounts debited from
               the lock box accounts to DVIFS for payment on such
               Indebtedness.

         4.    Except as expressly amended by this letter, the Loan Agreement
               remains in full force and effect. References to the Loan
               Agreement are deemed to mean the Loan Agreement as amended by
               this letter.

         5.    Promptly upon the execution of a counterpart of this letter,
               USD will pay DVIBC an origination fee equal to one percent
               (1%) of the increase in the Commitment Amount. USD will pay
               all other fees when and as due pursuant to the Loan Agreement
               based on the increased Commitment Amount.

         6.    Pursuant to Section 5.11 of the Loan Agreement DVIBC created a
               post closing checklist, the items on which where required to
               be completed within 90 days of Closing. DVIBC and USD
               acknowledge that certain of the items on such post


<PAGE>


U.S. Diagnostic Inc.
September 29, 1997
Page 2

               closing checklist have not been completed.  USD agrees to
               resolve all such items by October 30, 1997.

         Please confirm your agreement that the terms of the Loan Agreement have
been modified as set forth above by signing each counterpart of this letter.

                                   Very truly yours,

                                   DVI BUSINESS CREDIT CORPORATION

AGREED:

------------------------
U.S. DIAGNOSTIC INC
Joseph Paul, President
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk September 11, 2009

l0831 

# Order

September 11, 2009

138207

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 138207 COA: 286733 Wayne CC: 06-008243-01 DOUGLAS WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the November 21, 2008 order of the Court of Appeals is consider ed, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented s hould be reviewed by this Court.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

HEADWATER RESEARCH LLC

Plaintiff,

v.

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD and 

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, 

INC.,

Defendants.

Case No. 2:23-CV-00103-RSP

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

ORDER DENYING HEADWATER’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF NO 

INVALIDITY BASED ON THE MOTOROLA E815

Before the Court is Headwater Research LLC’s Motion for Summary Judgment of No 

Invalidity Based on the Motorola E815 (the “Motion”). Having considered the matter, the Court 

DENIES the Motion.

Case 2:23-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 208-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:

13009