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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-7531

STEVEN M. JOHNSON, Petitioner - Appellant,

v. SECRETARY OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, District Judge. (1:08-cv-02153-JFM)

Submitted: December 15, 2009 Decided: December 18, 2009

Before MICHAEL and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Steven M. Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Glenn William Bell, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

Steven M. Johnson seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district

court is likewise debatable. See Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Johnson has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

THE DAILY WIRE, LLC;

FDRLST MEDIA, LLC:

THE STATE OF TEXAS, 

Plaintiffs,

Case No.: 6:23-cv-00609

v.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE;

GLOBAL ENGAGEMENT CENTER;

ANTHONY BLINKEN (official capacity); 

LEAH BRAY (official capacity);

JAMES RUBIN (official capacity);

ALEXIS FRISBIE (official capacity);

PATRICIA WATTS ((official capacity);

Defendants.

ORDER GRANTING EXTENSIONS OF TIME

Upon consideration of Plaintiffs’ consent motion for an extension of time, it is hereby

ORDERED that the motion is GRANTED; and ORDERED that the following schedule 

govern the parties’ briefing on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 73):

• Plaintiffs’ Response to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss – due September 20, 2024

• Defendants’ Reply to Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Motion to Dismiss – due October 11, 2024

So ORDERED and SIGNED this day of

___________________________________

JEREMY D. KERNODLE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 31st August, 2024.

Case 6:23-cv-00609-JDK Document 74 Filed 08/31/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 2167
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS 

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8, Nos. 333-10017, 333-58403, 333-49916 and 333-101894; and Form S-3, Nos. 333-96905,333-82426, 333-111657, and 333-112822) pertaining to the ACT Teleconferencing, Inc. Stock Option Plans and the 2002 Performance Incentive Plan, and the issuance of stock by ACT to certain investors and the resale of certain shares of ACT stock byselling security holders, of our report dated April 14, 2004, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedules of ACT Teleconferencing, Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) at December 31, 2003. 

 

/s/ HEIN & ASSOCIATES LLP

 

Denver, Colorado 

April 14, 2004
LINH THI MINH TRAN, Petitioner, v. TRI-COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSIT DISTRICT OF OREGON.

No. 18-9500

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Oregon denied.
Donald Lee HATHORN, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES

No. 19-5045

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Daniel K. HOLTZCLAW, Petitioner, v. OKLAHOMA.

No. 19-843.

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 9, 2020.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma denied.
```
 
 
WHEAT - MINNEAPOLIS GRAIN EXCHANGE                                   Code-001626
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 07/02/13          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:       34,666
COMMITMENTS
   4,116    4,412      815   20,329   19,481   25,260   24,708    9,406    9,958

CHANGES FROM 06/25/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:        864)
    -362      918       18    2,270     -798    1,926      138   -1,061      726

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
    11.9     12.7      2.4     58.6     56.2     72.9     71.3     27.1     28.7

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       55)
      11        9        7       30       21       43       36
```

----

Updated July 8, 2013
FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

Case No. 5D23-1322

LT Case No. 2022-DP-000954

_____________________________

J.H., MOTHER of K.R.B. and

A.M.U., CHILDREN,

Appellant,

v.

K.B., FATHER of K.R.B., a CHILD,

Appellee.

_____________________________ 

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Brevard County. 

Kelly J. McKibbin, Judge. 

Richard F. Joyce, Special Assistant Regional Counsel, Office of 

Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Counsel, Casselberry, for 

Appellant. 

Valarie Linnen, Jacksonville, for Appellee.

Sara Elizabeth Goldfarb, Statewide Director of Appeals, and 

Amanda Victoria Glass, Senior Attorney, Statewide Guardian ad 

Litem Office, Tallahassee, for the Guardian ad Litem Program. 

February 6, 2024 

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.
2

MAKAR, JAY, and SOUD, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
```

```

----

Updated January 25, 2013
**Exhibit 23.2**

 

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS 

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements and related prospectuses (Forms S-8, No. 333-10017, No. 333-58403, No. 333-49916, and No.333-101894, Forms S-3 No. 333-96905, No. 333-82426, No. 333-111657 and No. 333-112822) of our report dated March 9, 2003, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedules of ACT Teleconferencing, Inc. as of December 31, 2002 andfor each of the two years in the period ended December 31, 2002 included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2003. 

 

/s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP 

 

Denver, Colorado 

April 14, 2004
S.T., Petitioner v. WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL AND HEALTH SERVICES.

No. 19-5143

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 2 denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from
the consolidated balance sheet at September 30, 1997 and the consolidated
statement of operations for the six months ended September 30, 1997
and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financials statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                               4
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      506
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        994
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,737
<PP&E>                                             576
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   2,313
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           17,140
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        16,405
<OTHER-SE>                                    (33,831)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     2,313
<SALES>                                          1,141
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,141
<CGS>                                            1,684
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,684
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,846
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 882
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,296)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         1
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,297)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3,297)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.62)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.62)
        

</TABLE>
Antoaneta IOTOVA, et al., Petitioners, v. Dr. DEMISA, et al.

No. 18-9784

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
Jose Abraham GUZMAN, Petitioner, v. Kelly SANTORO, Acting Warden.

No. 19-7291

Supreme Court of the United States.

Feb. 24, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
```
  
 
VIX FUTURES - CBOE FUTURES EXCHANGE                                  Code-1170E1
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 03/05/13          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
($1000 X INDEX)                                      OPEN INTEREST:      413,877
COMMITMENTS
 102,532  182,675   67,482  217,456  135,385  387,470  385,542   26,407   28,335

CHANGES FROM 02/26/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:      4,771)
   8,841   -6,205   -4,368    4,420   17,062    8,893    6,489   -4,122   -1,718

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
    24.8     44.1     16.3     52.5     32.7     93.6     93.2      6.4      6.8

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      167)
      59       59       68       36       33      133      131
```

----

Updated March 8, 2013
`DTCC Repo-US Treasury <30 YR - NYSE LIFFE - NYPC                     Code-045L2T
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 03/19/13                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF $5,000,000)                            OPEN INTEREST:       52,619
COMMITMENTS
   1,297    6,207    1,597   47,953   42,913   50,847   50,717    1,772    1,902

CHANGES FROM 03/12/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:        445)
    -596       -8     -111      777      233       70      114      375      331

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
     2.5     11.8      3.0     91.1     81.6     96.6     96.4      3.4      3.6

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       43)
       4        9        7       23       23       32       34`

---

Updated March 22, 2013
Eli SLOAN, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-9811

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
## **EXHIBIT 31.1**

##  

## **CERTIFICATIONOF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

##  

## I, Roger E. Gower, certify that:

##  

1. I have reviewedthis quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Micro Component Technology, Inc.:

 

2. Based on myknowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;

 

3. Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

 

4. The registrant’sother certifying officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15) for the registrant and wehave:

 

a) designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisquarterly report is being prepared;

 

b) evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation.

 

c) disclosed in this report any changes in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and

 

5. The registrant’sother certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent function):

 

a) all significant deficiencies and materialweakness in the design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

 

b) any fraud, whetheror not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal controls over financialreporting.

 

 
| Dated: August 5,  2005 | By:                                    | /s/ Roger E.  Gower |   |
|-----------------------------|----------------------------------------|---------------------|--------|
|                        | Roger E. Gower                         |
|                        | President and  Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

WARNER RECORDS, INC. et al,

 Plaintiffs,

v.

ALTICE USA, INC. and CSC 

HOLDINGS, LLC,

 Defendants.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

Case No. 2:23-CV-00576-JRG-RSP

ORDER

Defendants previously filed a Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 25.) Magistrate Judge Payne 

entered a Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 75), recommending denial of Defendants’ 

Motion to Dismiss. Defendants have now filed Objections (Dkt. No. 84).

After conducting a de novo review of the briefing on the Motion to Dismiss, the Report 

and Recommendation, and the briefing on Defendants Objections, the Court agrees with the 

reasoning provided within the Report and Recommendation and concludes that the Objections fail 

to show that the Report and Recommendation was erroneous. Consequently, the Court 

OVERRULES Defendants’ Objections and ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation and 

orders that the Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 25) is DENIED.

.

____________________________________

RODNEY GILSTRAP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE So ORDERED and SIGNED this 27th day of September, 2024.

Case 2:23-cv-00576-JRG-RSP Document 87 Filed 09/27/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 5005
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

TYLER DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. 

CHARLES EDWARD PARKER (6) 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

CASE NUMBER 6:23-CR-00096-JDK 

ORDER ADOPTING UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S 

REPORT AND FINDING DEFENDANT GUILTY 

The Court referred this matter to the Honorable John D. Love, United States 

Magistrate Judge, 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 on Guilty Plea. The Magistrate 

Judge recommended that the Court accept Defendant’s guilty plea and adjudge Defendant 

guilty on Count One of the Indictment. 

The parties have not objected to the Magistrate Judge’s findings. 

The Court hereby ADOPTS the Findings of Fact and Recommendation on Guilty Plea 

of the United States Magistrate Judge. 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 Charles 

Edward Parker (6) GUILTY of Count One of the Indictment, charging a violation of Title 21 

U.S.C. § 846 - Conspiracy to Distribute and Possess with Intent to Distribute 

Methamphetamine. 

Case 6:23-cr-00096-JDK-JDL Document 284 Filed 05/01/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 733
So ORDERED and SIGNED this day of

___________________________________

JEREMY D. KERNODLE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 1st May, 2024.

Case 6:23-cr-00096-JDK-JDL Document 284 Filed 05/01/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 734
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, 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.

 October 10, 2014

d1007

Order 

Clerk

October 10, 2014

149690(81)

SC: 149690

In re IAQUINTA, Minors. COA: 315136

Wayne CC Family Division:

12-509215-NA

_____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s August 22, 

2014 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was 

entered erroneously.
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

SHERMAN DIVISION

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. 

ALEJANDRO GLORIA-RAMOS

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CASE NUMBER 4:23-CR-00233-SDJ

ORDER ADOPTING UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE 

JUDGE’S REPORT AND FINDING DEFENDANT GUILTY

The Court referred this matter to the United States Magistrate Judge 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 on Guilty Plea. The 

Magistrate Judge recommended that the Court accept Defendant’s guilty plea 

and adjudge Defendant guilty on Count One of the Indictment.

The parties have not objected to the Magistrate Judge’s findings. 

The Court hereby ADOPTS the Findings of Fact and Recommendation on 

Guilty Plea of the United States Magistrate Judge. 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 

Alejandro Gloria-Ramos GUILTY of Count One of the Indictment, charging a 

violation of Title 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5) – Prohibited Person in Possession of a 

Firearm.

Case 4:23-cr-00233-SDJ-BD Document 36 Filed 11/21/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 86
2

Case 4:23-cr-00233-SDJ-BD Document 36 Filed 11/21/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 87
`DTCC Repo-US Treasury <30 YR - NYSE LIFFE - NYPC                     Code-045L2T
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 09/10/13                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF $5,000,000)                            OPEN INTEREST:       33,544
COMMITMENTS
   1,716    4,507    2,435   29,321   26,514   33,472   33,456       72       88

CHANGES FROM 09/03/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:      2,010)
    -407      953      396    2,021      661    2,010    2,010        0        0

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
     5.1     13.4      7.3     87.4     79.0     99.8     99.7      0.2      0.3

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       36)
       6       10        7       15       16       25       29`

---

Updated September 13, 2013
ENTRY	OF	APPEARANCE	OF	COUNSEL - Page	1

UNITED	STATES	DISTRICT	COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT	OF	TEXAS

SHERMAN	DIVISION

UNITED	STATES	OF	AMERICA 				§

					§

					§			 CAUSE	NO.		4:23-CR-268

					§

WILLIAM	MCKINNLEY	GARLAND (1)				 					§

ENTRY	OF	APPEARANCE	OF	COUNSEL

TO	THE HONORABLE	SEAN.	D	JORDAN,	JUDGE,	UNITED	STATES	DISTRICT	COURT	FOR	

THE	EASTERN DISTRICT	OF	TEXAS,	SHERMAN DIVISION:

NOW	 COMES,	 J.	 MICHAEL	 PRICE	 II,	 for	 the	 Defendant	 WILLIAM	 MCKINNLEY	

GARLAND,	and	hereby	respectfully	advises	the	Court	and	other	parties	to	this	action	of	this	

Entry	 of	 Appearance	 of	 Counsel,	 J.	 MICHAEL	 PRICE	 II for	 the	 limited	 appearance	 at	 the	

initial	 detention	 hearing	 and	 any	 subsequent	 detention	 hearings	 only.	 	 Mr.	 Garland	 is	 a	

current	client	of	undersigned counsel,	but	due	 to	 the	emergency	nature	of	the	arrest	and	

immediate	need	for	representation	at	the	detention	hearing,	Defendant	and	attorney	have	

not	had	the	opportunity	to	arrange	formal	representation	for	the	duration	of	the	case.

ACCORDINGLY,	 the	 Clerk	 of	 the	 Court	 is	 hereby	 requested	 to	 enter	 J.	 MICHAEL	

PRICE	II as	counsel	of	record	for	WILLIAM	MCKINNLEY	GARLAND as	indicated	above.	

Case 4:23-cr-00268-SDJ-KPJ Document 10 Filed 12/12/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 24
ENTRY	OF	APPEARANCE	OF	COUNSEL - Page	2

Respectfully	Submitted,

/s/	J.	MICHAEL	PRICE	II

____________________________________

J.	MICHAEL	PRICE	II

ATTORNEY	AT	LAW

5600	Tennyson	Parkway,	Suite	210

Plano,	Texas	75024

(214)	765-8000

(972)	848-4042 Fax

mpriceii@aol.com

State	Bar	of	Texas	No.	00794485

ATTORNEY	FOR	DEFEDANT	GARLAND

CERTIFICATE	OF	SERVICE

This	is	 to	 certify	 that	a	 true	and	 correct	 copy	 of	 the	above	and	 foregoing	Entry	 of	

Appearance	 of	 Counsel was	 delivered	 to	 Assistant	 United	 States	 Attorney	 via	 Electronic	

Case	Filing	on	this	the	12th day	of	December,	2023.

/s/	J.	MICHAEL	PRICE	II

J.	MICHAEL	PRICE	II	

Case 4:23-cr-00268-SDJ-KPJ Document 10 Filed 12/12/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 25