alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Marquis Travell EDWARDS, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-5388

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.
Nikko A. JENKINS, Petitioner, v. NEBRASKA.

No. 19-514.

Supreme Court of the United States.

April 20, 2020

Motion of The Promise of Justice Initiative, et al. for leave to file a brief as *amici curiae* granted. Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Nebraska denied.
Exhibit 32.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted
           pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2003


Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2003, the undersigned, as
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Prime Retail, Inc. (the "Company"), does
hereby certify that to the undersigned's knowledge:

1.       the Company's quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
         September 30, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section
         13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and;

2.       the information contained in the Company's quarterly report on Form
         10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2003 fairly presents, in all
         material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
         the Company.


         Date: November 13, 2003                     /s/ Glenn D. Reschke
                                                     --------------------
                                                     Glenn D. Reschke
                                                     Chairman and Chief
                                                     Executive Officer



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Prime Retail, Inc. and will be retained by Prime Retail, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SHERMAN DIVISION

ANTHONY CAIRNS, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. )

)

CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:23-CV-00997

YLY PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, LLC, )

)

Defendant. )

ORDER OF DISMISSAL AS TO DEFENDANT

In accordance with the Joint Stipulation of Dismissal with Prejudice filed March 11, 

2024, it is hereby ORDERED that all claims that were or could have been asserted by 

Plaintiff against Defendant, YLY PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, LLC, and this entire matter 

be dismissed with prejudice, pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Case 4:23-cv-00997-ALM Document 7 Filed 03/12/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 28
Felix LOPEZ-CABRERA, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-7594.

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 23, 2020

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

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 122 Engrossed in House (EH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 122

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That in the enrollment of the bill H.R. 83, the Clerk of the House of 
Representatives shall amend the long title so as to read: ``Making 
consolidated appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
2015, and for other purposes.''.

            Passed the House of Representatives December 11, 2014.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
113th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                            H. CON. RES. 122

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

        Providing for a correction in the enrollment of H.R. 83.
```
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**




**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,**


**SECTION 1350**




In
        connection with Amendment No. 2 to the Annual Report of Mendocino Brewing
        Company, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K/A for the year ended
        December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
        the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Mahadevan Narayanan, Chief Financial Officer
        of the Company, certify, pursuant to Title 18, United States Code,
        Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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.




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




Date:
        June 10, 2008




/s/ Mahadevan
              NarayananName:
                Mahadevan Narayanan
              Title:
                Chief Financial Officer
United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Argued May 31, 2013

Decided July 2, 2014

Before

JOEL M. FLAUM, Circuit Judge

DANIEL A.  MANION, Circuit Judge

ILANA DIAMOND ROVNER, Circuit Judge

Nos. 12‐3120, 12‐3258, 12‐3322, 12‐3654

BIG RIDGE, INC. &

FTS INTERNATIONAL PROPPANTS, LLC,

Petitioners, Cross‐

Respondents,

v.

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD,

Respondent, Cross‐

Petitioner.

On Petitions for Review and Cross‐

Applications for Enforcement of Orders

of the National Labor Relations Board.

Nos. 14‐CA‐30379, 14‐CA‐30406, 14‐RC‐

12824, 30‐CA‐82116, 30‐RC‐6783

O R D E R

Big Ridge, Inc. and FTS International Proppants, LLC lost unrelated cases before the

National Labor Relations Board. Petitioners argued that the Board lacked a quorum at the

time it issued decisions in their cases, see 29 U.S.C. § 153(b), because three of the Board’s

five members—Sharon Block, Richard Griffin, and Terence Flynn—were improperly

appointed under the Recess Appointments Clause of the Constitution.

NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited only in accordance with

Fed. R. App. P. 32.1
Nos. 12‐3120, 12‐3258, 12‐3322, 12‐3654 Page 2

InNLRBv.NoelCanning, No. 12–1281 (June 26, 2014),theU.S. Supreme Court heldthese

three appointments invalid because “when the appointments ...took place, the Senate was

in the midst of a 3‐day recess. Three days is too short a time to bring a recess within the

scope of the Clause. Thus we conclude that the President lacked the power to make the

recess appointments here at issue.” Slip op. at 2.

As “in the absence of a lawfully appointed quorum, the Board cannot exercise its

powers,” Noel Canning, slip op. at 3 (citing New Process Steel, L.P. v. NLRB, 560 U.S. 674,

687–88 (2010)), we GRANT the petitions for review and VACATE the Board’s orders in both

cases. We also DENY the cross‐petitions of the Board for enforcement of its orders.
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

**____________** No. 23
- 50348 Summary Calendar

**____________ United States of America,**  Plaintiff

— Appellee **,** versus **Hector Josue Valeviano,** Defendant

— Appellant **.**

**______________________________** Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 2:21
- CR
- 796
- 1

**______________ ________________**  Before **Willett, Duncan,** and **Ramirez,** Circuit Judges . **Per Curiam :**  ***** The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Hector Josue Valeviano has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Valeviano has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected

**_____________________** * This opinion is not designated for publication. See **5th Cir .**  **R .**  47.5. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED March 7, 2024 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 23-50348 Document: 42-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/07/2024No. 23
- 50348

2 therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is **GRANTED** , counsel is excused from further r esponsibilities herein, and the appeal is **DISMISSED** . See **5th Cir. R.**  42.2 . Case: 23-50348 Document: 42-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/07/2024
Arthur Lee KIMBEL, Petitioner, v. TEXAS.

No. 19-7385.

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 23, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourth District denied.
## **EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO**

**18U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

**ASREQUIRED BY**

# **SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connectionwith the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Steinway Musical Instruments, Inc.(the “Company”) for the quarter ended March 31, 2008 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, DanaD. Messina, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify that to the best ofmy knowledge:

 

1. The Reportfully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

 
|              | /s/ Dana D.  Messina                   |
|-------------------|----------------------------------------|
|              |                                   |
|              | President  and Chief Executive Officer |
|              | (Principal  Executive Officer)         |
|              |                                   |
|              |                                   |
| May 8,  2008 |                                   |

 

----
```
 
 
WHEAT - MINNEAPOLIS GRAIN EXCHANGE                                   Code-001626
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 07/16/13          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:       38,686
COMMITMENTS
   4,098    6,138      774   23,748   20,512   28,620   27,425   10,066   11,261

CHANGES FROM 07/09/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:      3,293)
     -38    1,035      -28    3,074    1,289    3,007    2,296      286      997

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
    10.6     15.9      2.0     61.4     53.0     74.0     70.9     26.0     29.1

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       60)
      12       10        7       33       24       46       41
```

----

Updated July 19, 2013
Star FORTES, Petitioner, v. TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY AND PROTECTIVE SERVICES, et al.

No. 19-6541.

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 23, 2020

Petition for rehearing denied.
# C_2017362EN.01003001.xml

| 26.10.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 362/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.10.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 362/30

---

Notice of the impending expiry of certain anti-dumping measures

(2017/C 362/04)

1.   As provided for in Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Union (1), the Commission gives notice that, unless a review is initiated in accordance with the following procedure, the anti-dumping measures mentioned below will expire on the date mentioned in the table below.

1

2.   Procedure

Procedure

Union producers may lodge a written request for a review. This request must contain sufficient evidence that the expiry of the measures would be likely to result in a continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury. Should the Commission decide to review the measures concerned, importers, exporters, representatives of the exporting country and Union producers will then be provided with the opportunity to amplify, rebut or comment on the matters set out in the review request.

3.   Time limit

Time limit

Union producers may submit a written request for a review on the above basis, to reach the European Commission, Directorate-General for Trade (Unit H-1), CHAR 4/39, 1049 Brussels, Belgium (2) at any time from the date of the publication of the present notice but no later than three months before the date mentioned in the table below.

2

4.   This notice is published in accordance with Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036.

| Product | Country(ies) of origin or exportation | Measures | Reference | Date of expiry (3) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Ironing boards | The People’s Republic of China | Anti-dumping duty | Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 695/2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of ironing boards originating in the People’s Republic of China and repealing the anti-dumping measures on imports of ironing boards originating in Ukraine following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) and a partial interim review pursuant to Article 11(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 (OJ L 198, 23.7.2013, p. 1) | 24.7.2018 |

Product

Country(ies) of origin or exportation

Measures

Reference

Date of expiry (3)

3

Ironing boards

The People’s Republic of China

Anti-dumping duty

Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 695/2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of ironing boards originating in the People’s Republic of China and repealing the anti-dumping measures on imports of ironing boards originating in Ukraine following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) and a partial interim review pursuant to Article 11(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 (OJ L 198, 23.7.2013, p. 1)

24.7.2018

---

(1)  OJ L 176, 30.6.2016, p. 21.

1

(2)  TRADE-Defence-Complaints@ec.europa.eu

2

(3)  The measure expires at midnight of the day mentioned in this column.

3

---
EXHIBIT 1

REDACTED IN ITS 

ENTIRETY

To Plaintiffs' Opposition to Defendants' Motion to 

Dismiss Complaint

Case 2:23-cv-00617-RWS-RSP Document 50-1 Filed 08/06/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 739
##### 



Exhibit 10.1
 LIMITED WAIVER WITH RESPECT TO THIRD AMENDED AND  RESTATED CREDIT AGREEMENT
 Waiver Borrower Agent
 RECITALS
 Credit Agreement
 New Entities New Entity Capitalization
   SECTION 1. Limited Waivers
 SECTION 2. Conditions




---



##### 



SECTION 3. Representations and Warranties
     SECTION 4. Reference to and Effect Upon the Credit Agreement .
   2




---



##### 



SECTION 5. GOVERNING LAW
 SECTION 6. Headings
 SECTION 7. Counterparts
  3




---



##### 



BORROWER:NAVARRE CORPORATIONBy:Name:Title:GENERAL ELECTRIC CAPITALCORPORATION, as Agent and LenderBy:Name:Title:




---



##### 



LENDERSBy:Name:Title:




---



##### 



ENCORE SOFTWARE, INC., as Credit PartyBy:Name:Title:BCI ECLIPSE COMPANY, LLC, as Credit PartyBy:Name:Title:FUNIMATION PRODUCTIONS LTD., as Credit PartyBy: Navarre CP, LLC, its General PartnerBy:Name:Title:FUNIMATION STORE LTD., as Credit PartyBy: Navarre CS, LLC, its General PartnerBy:Name:Title:NAVARRE CP, LLC, as Credit PartyBy:Name:Title:NAVARRE CLP, LLC, as Credit PartyBy:Name:Title:




---



##### 



NAVARRE CS, LLC, as Credit PartyBy:Name:Title:
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                                5
<MULTIPLIER>                                          1000
       
<S>                                                    <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                        9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                               9,602
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        6,500
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    46,281
<PP&E>                                             492,317
<DEPRECIATION>                                      52,525
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     486,073
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               26,278
<BONDS>                                            314,668
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                             51
<COMMON>                                               134
<OTHER-SE>                                         144,942
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       486,073
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    63,112
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       59,830<F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  17,343
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      4,680
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  4,680
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     (1,017)<F2>
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                         3,663
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        (1.17)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            0
<FN>
<F1>Includes a non-recurring charge of $6,131 related to a binding loan
    commitment that the Company obtained on June 5, 1996.
<F2>Represents an extraordinary loss of $1,017 (net of minority intererst in
    the amount of $3,263) on early extinguishment of debt.
</FN>
        


</TABLE>
Nikkolas THOMPSON, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-8121.

Supreme Court of the United States.

April 27, 2020

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

For the Eighth Circuit 

___________________________

No. 24-1923

___________________________ 

Karen D. Littrell

 Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

Martin O’Malley, Commissioner of Social Security Administration

 Defendant - Appellee

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis

____________ 

Submitted: October 1, 2024

Filed: October 4, 2024

[Unpublished] 

____________ 

Before GRASZ, STRAS, and KOBES, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

Karen Littrell appeals the district court’s order affirming the partial denial of

supplemental security income benefits, after her hearing before an Administrative 

Law Judge (ALJ). After careful review, we conclude that remand is required for 

further consideration of Littrell’s subjective complaints, particularly her reports of 

back and knee pain. See Ross v. O’Malley, 92 F.4th 775, 778 (8th Cir. 2024) (de
-2- 

novo review of district court’s judgment; Commissioner’s decision will be affirmed 

if it is supported by substantial evidence on record as whole and ALJ made no legal 

error). The ALJ discounted Littrell’s pain complaints without providing sufficient 

rationale, as he cited only the lack of objective medical evidence in discounting her 

physical complaints generally, and did not address her reports of back and knee pain. 

See Halverson v. Astrue, 600 F.3d 922, 931-32 (8th Cir. 2010) (ALJ may not discount 

claimant’s subjective complaints solely because they are unsupported by objective 

medical evidence, although such absence of evidence is factor to be considered); 

Guilliams v. Barnhart, 393 F.3d 798, 802 (8th Cir. 2005) (in rejecting claimant’s 

complaints of pain as not credible, court expects ALJ to detail reasons for discrediting 

testimony and set forth inconsistencies found).

Because the ALJ’s evaluation of Littrell’s pain complaints was insufficient, the 

ALJ’s subsequent determination of her residual functional capacity (RFC) and the 

related hypothetical question he posed to the vocational expert (VE) were similarly 

infirm. See Swope v. Barnhart, 436 F.3d 1023, 1025 (8th Cir. 2006) (where there was 

no indication in ALJ’s opinion that he disbelieved evidence of claimant’s impairment, 

it was error not to include impairment in hypothetical question to VE); Cunningham 

v. Apfel, 222 F.3d 496, 502 (8th Cir. 2000) (reversing in part because ALJ failed to 

credit or properly consider evidence of physical impairment that was supported by 

medical records). Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the district court, and we 

remand with instructions to remand to the Commissioner for further evaluation of 

Littrell’s pain complaints.

STRAS, Circuit Judge, dissenting.

I would have affirmed the judgment.

______________________________