alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

TYLER DIVISION 

THE DAILY WIRE, LLC et al., 

 Plaintiffs 

v. 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT 

OF STATE et al., 

 Defendants. 

 Civil Action No. 6:23-cv-00609 (JDK) 

DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE OF CASE DEVELOPMENT 

Defendants respectfully file this notice to inform the Court of an upcoming development that 

is substantially likely to occur on December 23, 2024—termination of the Global Engagement 

Center—with implications for this case. 

This lawsuit challenges programs administered by the State Department’s Global Engagement 

Center (GEC). See ECF No. 1 ¶ 1; ECF No. 53 at 2. GEC’s statutory authority contains a sunset 

provision by which, absent further action from Congress, it will terminate two weeks from today—

on December 23, 2024. See Section 1287(j) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 

2017 (22 U.S.C. § 2656 note) (“Termination.—The Center shall terminate on the date that is 8 years 

after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 23, 2016].”) Congress has not extended the 

termination of the GEC thus far, and it is Defendants’ understanding that reauthorization is unlikely 

to occur. Consistent with statutory requirements regarding congressional notification, last Friday 

(December 6, 2024), the Department transmitted a notification to Congress regarding its plan for the 

forthcoming termination of the GEC and its plan to realign the Center’s staff and funding to other 

Department offices and bureaus for foreign information manipulation and interference activities in 

the event that the termination is not extended. See §§ 7015(a), 7015(b), and 7063 of the Department 

of State, Foreign Operations and Related Programs Act, 2024 (Div. F, P.L. 118-47), as carried forward 

Case 6:23-cv-00609-JDK Document 91 Filed 12/09/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 2323
2 

by the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2025 (Div. A, P.L. 118-83), and § 34 of the State Department 

Basic Authorities Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C. § 2706). 

Defendants submit this notice to provide the Court prompt and direct notice of these 

developments, including the December 6, 2023 communication to Congress. Defendants are 

conferring with Plaintiffs about the implications of these developments for this litigation. 

Dated: December 9, 2024 Respectfully submitted, 

BRIAN M. BOYNTON 

Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General 

JOSHUA E. GARDNER

Special Counsel 

Federal Programs Branch 

JOSEPH E. BORSON 

Assistant Director 

Federal Programs Branch 

/s/Arjun Mody 

JOSHUA M. KOLSKY (DC #993430) 

Senior Trial Counsel 

DOROTHY M. CANEVARI (NY #5989694) 

CRISTEN C. HANDLEY (MO #69114) 

ARJUN MODY (DC #90013383) 

Trial Attorneys 

United States Department of Justice 

Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch 

1100 L Street, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20005 

Tel: (202) 451 7723 

Email: arjun.a.mody@usdoj.gov 

Counsel for Defendants 

 

Case 6:23-cv-00609-JDK Document 91 Filed 12/09/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 2324
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-7143

ERNEST LEE PRESSLEY,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director of the Virginia

Department of Corrections,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District

Judge. (CA-96-710-2)

Submitted: December 11, 1997 Decided: December 30, 1997

Before HALL and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ernest Lee Pressley, Appellant Pro Se. Leah Ann Darron, Assistant

Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on

his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp.

1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court.

Pressley v. Angelone, No. CA-96-710-2 (E.D. Va. July 29, 1997). 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 SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

MARCUS JONES,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 620 EAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 7th day of April, 2020

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
Gerald P. MITCHELL, petitioner, v. WISCONSIN.

No. 18-6210.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 11, 2019.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* and petition for writ certiorari to the Supreme Court of Wisconsin granted.
Robert NOEL, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-6723.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
Antonio MURO, Jr., Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-9164

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 2, 2020

On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* and petition for writ of certiorari granted. Judgment vacated, and case remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit for further consideration in light of *1259*Holguin-Hernandez* v. *United States* , 589 U.S. ----, 140 S.Ct. 762, 206 L.Ed.2d 95 (2020).
BOSTON FINANCIAL TAX CREDIT FUND VIII, A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP


EXHIBIT 32.2





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


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE


SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








In connection with the Quarterly Report of Boston Financial Tax Credit Fund VIII (the “Fund”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, the Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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; and





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








/s/Kenneth J. Cutillo


Kenneth J. Cutillo


Principal Executive Officer and


Principal Financial Officer


Arch Street VIII, Inc., as


General Partner of


Arch Street VIII Limited Partnership, as


General Partner of


Boston Financial Tax Credit Fund VIII,


A Limited Partnership








Date:    August 16, 2010








A signed original of this written statement required by section 906 has been provided to the Fund and will be retained by the Fund and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 106 (Thursday, June 2, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 33482]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-11990]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

TIME AND DATE:  Tuesday, June 7, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. and its 
continuation at the conclusion of the open meeting on June 8, 2022.

PLACE:  1050 First Street NE, Washington, DC and virtual (this meeting 
will be a hybrid meeting).

STATUS:  This meeting will be closed to the public.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:  Compliance matters pursuant to 52 U.S.C. 
30109.
    Information the premature disclosure of which would be likely to 
have a considerable adverse effect on the implementation of a proposed 
Commission action.
    Matters concerning participation in civil actions or proceedings or 
arbitration.
* * * * *

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:  Judith Ingram, Press Officer, 
Telephone: (202) 694-1220.
    Authority: Government in the Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b.

Vicktoria J. Allen,
Acting Deputy Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2022-11990 Filed 5-31-22; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6715-01-P
Case 2:23-cv-00526-JRG-RSP Document 5 Filed 11/17/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 169
Lawrence MARTIN, Petitioner, v. Wendy KELLEY, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction.

No. 19-7354.

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 23, 2020

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

Calendar No. 615

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 2307

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

NOVEMBER 9, 1999

Received

NOVEMBER 19, 1999

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs

JUNE 21, 2000

Reported by Mr. THOMPSON, without amendment

AN ACT

To designate the building of the United States Postal Service

located at 5 Cedar Street in Hopkinton, Massachusetts,

as the ‘‘Thomas J. Brown Post Office Building’’.

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

4 The building of the United States Postal Service lo5 cated at 5 Cedar Street in Hopkinton, Massachusetts,

6 shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Thomas J. Brown

7 Post Office Building’’.
2

•HR 2307 RS

1 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

2 Any reference in any law, map, regulation, document,

3 paper, or other record of the United States to the building

4 referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference

5 to the ‘‘Thomas J. Brown Post Office Building’’.

Passed the House of Representatives November 8,

1999.

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL,

Clerk.

Calendar No. 615

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 2307

AN ACT

To designate the building of the United States

Postal Service located at 5 Cedar Street inHopkinton, Massachusetts, as the ‘‘Thomas J.Brown Post Office Building’’.

JUNE 21, 2000

Reported without amendment
Lena LASHER, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-5325.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for rehearing denied.
Thelma R. DAVIS, petitioner, v. BROWN & DORTCH LLC, et al.

No. 18-6649.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 14, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland denied.
No. 6:23-cr-00076

United States of America

v.

Tyrone Lamont Hall

ORDER

This criminal action was referred to United States Magistrate 

Judge K. Nicole Mitchell 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. Doc. 21. 

The magistrate judge recommended that the court accept defendant’s guilty plea and adjudge defendant guilty on count one of the 

indictment. Id. at 2. Defendant waived hisright to object to the magistrate judge’s findings. Id.

The court hereby accepts 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 Tyrone Lamont Hall guilty of count one of the indictment, 

charging a violation of Title 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) - Felon in Possession of a Firearm.

So ordered by the court on January 23, 2024.

J. CAMPBELL BARKER

United States District Judge

Case 6:23-cr-00076-JCB-KNM Document 28 Filed 01/23/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 66
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

 Respondent

 v.

TERRELL COSTNER,

 Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 81 EAL 2015

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the

Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 23rd day of July, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED.
EXHIBIT 32

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Cadus  Corporation (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2003 as filed with the  Securities  and
Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,  Michele A. Paige,
President and Chief Executive  Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18
U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted  pursuant to ss. 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; and

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

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

/s/ Michele A. Paige
----------------------------------------------
Michele A. Paige
President and Chief Executive Officer (Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer)
August 14, 2003

The foregoing  certification is furnished  solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section
1350 and is not being  filed as part of the Report or as a  separate  disclosure
document.
NO. 07-08-0279-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL B

JANUARY 12, 2009

______________________________

TEXAS MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY,

Appellant

V.

GOETZ INSURORS, INC. AND

GOETZ INSURORS, INC., AS ASSIGNEE

OF THE CLAIMS OF CATTLECO, INC.,

Appellees

______________________________

FROM THE 64th DISTRICT COURT OF SWISHER COUNTY;

NO. A-10810-05-11; HON. ROBERT W. KINKAID, JR., PRESIDING

_______________________________

ON ABATEMENT AND REMAND

_______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.

Appellant Texas Mutual Insurance Company appeals from the final judgment of the

trial court. On August 11, 2008, the clerk’s record was filed. The reporter’s record was due

on October 15, 2008. No extension motion or reporter’s record was filed. On October 22,

2008, this court directed the court reporter by letter “to advise the Court of the status of the

reporter’s record on or before November 3, 2008." In response, the Court received a
2

motion for extension of time to file the record, which was granted to November 14, 2008.

No extension motion or record was filed by that date. On December 1, 2008, the Court

again notified the reporter that the record had not been filed and the reporter was asked

to provide the status of the record by December 10, 2008. On December 10, 2008, the

reporter filed her second extension motion requesting until January 12, 2009, to file the

record, which was granted. On January 5, 2009, this Court received the court reporter’s

third extension request asking for an additional thirty days to file the record.

Accordingly, we abate this appeal and remand the cause to the 64th District Court

of Swisher County (trial court) for further proceedings. Upon remand, the trial court shall

immediately cause notice of a hearing to be given and, thereafter, conduct a hearing to

determine:

when the reporter’s record can reasonably be transcribed into

written form and filed in a manner that does not further delay

the prosecution of this appeal or have the practical effect of

depriving the appellant of their right to appeal.

The trial court shall cause the hearing to be transcribed. So too shall it 1) execute

findings of fact and conclusions of law addressing the foregoing issues, 2) cause to be

developed a supplemental clerk’s record containing its findings of fact and conclusions of

law and all orders it may issue as a result of its hearing in this matter, and 3) cause to be

developed a reporter’s record transcribing the evidence and arguments presented at the

aforementioned hearing, if any. Additionally, the district court shall then file the

supplemental clerk’s and reporter’s records transcribing the hearing with the clerk of this

court on or before February 11, 2009. Should further time be needed by the trial court to

perform these tasks, then same must be requested before February 11, 2009.
3

It is so ordered.

Per Curiam

Do not publish.
```
 
 
WHEAT - KANSAS CITY BOARD OF TRADE                                   Code-001612
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 03/26/13                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:      167,247
COMMITMENTS
  40,956   37,751   23,623   83,828   79,636  148,407  141,010   18,840   26,237

CHANGES FROM 03/19/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:       -343)
    -550   -2,488    2,024   -2,643     -950   -1,169   -1,414      826    1,071

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    24.5     22.6     14.1     50.1     47.6     88.7     84.3     11.3     15.7

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      197)
      48       46       43       62       73      136      146
```

----

Updated March 29, 2013
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

December 6, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-11021

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JAMES LEMARC BYRD, also known as Mark Byrd,

Defendant-Appellant.

--------------------

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:04-CR-22-ALL

--------------------

Before REAVLEY, STEWART, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, James LeMarc Byrd

raises arguments that are foreclosed by United States v.

Daugherty, 264 F.3d 513, 518 (5th Cir. 2001), which rejected a

Commerce Clause challenge to the felon-in-possession-of-a-firearm

statute, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g). The Government’s motion for summary

affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is

AFFIRMED.
NO. 07-05-0390-CR NO. 07-05-0391-CR IN THE COUR

T OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVEN TH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO PANEL D DECEMBER 20 , 2005

______________________________ ROSS DANIEL MONNETT, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

_________________________________ FROM THE 2 51st DIS TRICT CO URT OF POT TER COUNT Y; NOS. 49,127-C and 49,12 8-C; HON. PATRICK PIRTLE, PRESIDING

_______________________________ ORDER OF DISMISSAL

_______________________________ Before QUINN, C.J., and REAVIS an d CAMPBELL, JJ. Ross Daniel Monne tt appeals hisconvicti ons for possessi ng a control led substa nce. He ple d gu ilt

y tothe o ff enses in accor dance with a plea bargai n and confessed to the accusations in the indic tments. Upon deter mining that his plea was kno wing an d volu ntar y, the trial court found him guilty of the offenses and assesse d punish ment with in the ra nge recommended by the prosecutor. As part of the bargain, ap pella nt also wai ved his r ight to appeal the causes, and the trial court cert ified, p ursuant to Tex as Rule of Appell ate2

Procedure 25.2( a)(2) and ( d), that he had no right to ap peal them. According to Rule 25.2( a)(2) of the Texas Rules of Appel late Proc edu re, the tria l court must cer

tify whether or

not the appellant

has the rig ht to appeal. If suc h a certification has not been executed, the appeal mus t be dismissed. T EX . R
. A PP . P
. 25.2(d). Here, the trial court did not cert ify that appellant ha d a right to appeal; quite the cont rary, it certified that he did not. According ly, the appeals are dismissed per Texas Rule of Appellate Proced ure 25.2(d).
Per Curiam Do not publish
.
Robert Anthony CHESTER, Petitioner, v. WEST VIRGINIA.

No. 19-5528

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia denied.
```
 
 
MSCI EAFE MINI INDEX - NYSE LIFFE                                    Code-244041
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 06/11/13                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(MSCI EAFE INDEX X $50)                              OPEN INTEREST:       89,271
COMMITMENTS
  24,072    4,065    2,085   57,217   79,232   83,374   85,382    5,897    3,889

CHANGES FROM 06/04/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:        -30)
   2,144   -1,556       42   -2,290      673     -104     -841       74      811

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    27.0      4.6      2.3     64.1     88.8     93.4     95.6      6.6      4.4

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       79)
      13        6        1       39       36       52       43
 
 
MSCI EMERGING MKTS MINI INDEX - NYSE LIFFE                           Code-244042
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 06/11/13                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(MSCI EAFE INDEX X $50)                              OPEN INTEREST:      242,116
COMMITMENTS
  68,274   39,276    7,789  144,592  183,144  220,655  230,209   21,461   11,907

CHANGES FROM 06/04/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:     17,835)
   1,517    2,360    2,192    8,762    6,182   12,471   10,734    5,364    7,101

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    28.2     16.2      3.2     59.7     75.6     91.1     95.1      8.9      4.9

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      153)
      38       18       10       75       54      118       77
```

----

Updated June 14, 2013