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

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2323 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2323

    To require the national pooling of receipts under Federal milk 
                           marketing orders.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 23, 1999

   Mr. Obey introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                        Committee on Agriculture

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To require the national pooling of receipts under Federal milk 
                           marketing orders.

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

SECTION 1. NATIONAL POOLING OF RECEIPTS UNDER FEDERAL MILK MARKETING 
              ORDERS.

    In administering Federal milk marketing orders issued under section 
8c of the Agricultural Adjustment Act (7 U.S.C. 608c), reenacted with 
amendments by the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, the 
Secretary of Agriculture shall provide for the national pooling of 
receipts.
                                 <all>
```
Michael Wainaina KARIUKI, Petitioner v. WASHINGTON

No. 18-8987

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1 denied.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

August 29, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 131017 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 131017 

 COA: 264295 

St. Joseph CC: 04-012251-FH

WAYNE KEITH EATON,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the February 28, 2006 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

d0821 

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

August 29, 2006 

 Clerk
Raymond ALSTON, aka Raymond Austin, Petitioner, v. NEW YORK.

No. 19-7348.

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 23, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Division, Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Judicial Department denied.
EXHIBIT 4

Case 2:23-cv-00630-JRG Document 10-4 Filed 05/08/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 135
Case 2:23-cv-00630-JRG Document 10-4 Filed 05/08/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 1
Order entered January 3, 2017

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 16
- 00274
- CV
WIN SHIELDS PRODUCTI ONS, INC. AND WINFRE D L. SHIELDS, Appellant s V. SERNERICK GREER, App ellee On Appeal from the 191st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC
- 13
- 13903



### O RDER Before the Court is appellant s ’ December 30, 2016 third motion t o extend time to file appellant s ’ reply brief. Appellant s ’ motion is GRAN TED . Appellant s ’ reply brief shall be filed by January 30, 2017.

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIERS JUSTICE
# C_2017384EN.01000201.xml

| 14.11.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 384/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.11.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 384/2

---

COMMUNITY PLANT VARIETY OFFICE

Publication of the final accounts for the financial year 2016

(2017/C 384/04)

The complete version of the final accounts may be found at the following address:

http://cpvo.europa.eu/en/about-us/finance-and-budget

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S AUDITED DECEMBER 31, 1997 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997             DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997             DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         451,434                 621,724
<SECURITIES>                                    50,000                  50,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,885,125               1,611,965
<ALLOWANCES>                                    18,992                 255,494
<INVENTORY>                                    136,116                 125,850
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,726,348               2,210,057
<PP&E>                                       3,467,063               2,366,716
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,094,938                 736,556
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,929,711               4,085,269
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,213,366               1,512,905
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                     6,158,584               4,022,671
<OTHER-SE>                                           0                       0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,929,711               4,085,269
<SALES>                                     10,234,403               6,219,946
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            10,234,403               6,219,946
<CGS>                                        4,727,236               3,604,729
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               10,136,176               7,143,595
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              99,496                  36,253
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 98,227               (923,649)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (332,566)               (164,591)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (436,808)             (1,208,107)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (436,808)             (1,208,107)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.14)                  (0.41)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.14)                  (0.41)
        

</TABLE>
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

May 12, 2015

N o. 04

- 15

- 00283

- CV

IN RE SAN ANTONIO RIVER AUTHORITY

Original Mandamus Proceeding 1

ORDER

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

Karen Angelini, J ustice

Jason Pulliam, Justice

On May 7, 2015

, relator filed a petition for writ of mandamus. The court has considered

relator’s petition and is of the opinion that relator is not entitled to the relief sought. Accordingly,

the pet ition for writ of mandamus is DENIED. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 52.8(a). The court’s opinion

will issue at a later date.

It is so ORDERED on May 12, 2015

.

_________________________________ Jason Pulliam, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto se t my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 12th day of May, 2015

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No . 2013

- CI

- 16836, styled Osvaldo Peralta v. Ci ty of San Antonio and San

Antonio River Authority , pending in the 131st Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Martha

B. Tanner presiding.
* 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. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-40209 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus DENNIS JIMENEZ-AGUILERA, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. L-01-CR-949

-------------------- February 20, 2003 Before WIENER, EMILIO M. GARZA, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Dennis Jimenez-Aguilera (Jimenez) appeals from his guilty plea conviction and sentence for being an alien unlawfully found in the United States after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), (b)(2). For the first time on appeal, Jimenez argues that although he consented to have his guilty plea hearing conducted by a magistrate judge, his plea and sentence are invalid because the magistrate judge lacked jurisdiction to conduct the guilty plea proceeding in the absence of an order ofNo. 02-40209 -2- referral by the district court. Because Jimenez did not object in the district court to the magistrate judge’s exercise of authority, he waived his right to raise the procedural defect in his guilty plea proceeding as a basis for relief. United States v. Bolivar-Munoz , 313 F.3d 253, 256-57 (5th Cir. 2002). Jimenez contends that his indictment was unconstitutional because it lacked an allegation that he acted with general intent. Jimenez raises this issue only to preserve it for possible Supreme Court review. Even if his guilty plea did not waive the issue, see United States v. Cotton , 122 S. Ct. 1781, 1785-87 (2002), his argument is foreclosed by this court’s precedent in United States v. Guzman-Ocampo , 236 F.3d 233, 237-39 & n.13 (5th Cir. 2000), and United States v. Berrios-Centeno , 250 F.3d 294, 299-300 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 534 U.S. 928 (2001). Jimenez argues that the felony conviction that resulted in his increased sentence under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) was an element of the offense that should have been charged in the indictment. He acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by the Supreme Court’s decision in Almendarez-Torres v. United
States , 523 U.S. 224 (1998), but he seeks to preserve the issue for Supreme Court review in the light of Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). Apprendi did not overrule AlmendarezTorres
. Apprendi , 530 U.S. at 489-90, 496; United States v. Dabeit , 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000)

. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
AFFIRMED.
Sharla JENKINS, Petitioner, v. Helen Forbes FIELDS, as Administrator of the Estate of Elase Jenkins.

No. 19-8087.

Supreme Court of the United States.

May 18, 2020.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Ohio, Cuyahoga County denied.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

## Filings in Existing Proceedings

*Docket Numbers:*                     RP22-932-000.                

*Applicants:*                     Midwestern Gas Transmission Company.                

*Description:*                     § 4(d) Rate Filing: Compliance Filing to Implement Revised Tariff Records to be effective 7/2/2022.                

*Filed Date:*                     5/24/22.                

*Accession Number:*                     20220524-5040.                

*Comment Date:*                     5 p.m. ET 6/6/22.                

Any person desiring to protest in any the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date.

                    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system (                    *https://elibrary.ferc.gov/​idmws/​search/​fercgensearch.asp*) by querying the docket number.                

                    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at:                     *http://www.ferc.gov/​docs-filing/​efiling/​filing-req.pdf.*                     For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.                

Dated: May 24, 2022.

Debbie-Anne A. Reese,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2022-11623 Filed 5-27-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________ 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff(s)

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant(s)

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

To: (Defendant’s name and address)

A lawsuit has been filed against you.

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you

are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.

P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney,

whose name and address are:

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. 

You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

CLERK OF COURT

Date:

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

 Eastern District of Texas - Texarkana Division

S3G TECHNOLOGY LLC

5:23-cv-124

CINEMARK HOLDINGS, INC., and CINEMARK 

USA, INC.

Cinemark Holdings, Inc. 

by and through its Registered Agent 

Corporation Service Company 

251 Little Falls Drive 

Wilmington, Delaware 19808 

Charles Ainsworth 

Parker Bunt & Ainsworth, PC 

100 E. Ferguson, Suite 418 

Tyler, Texas 75702

10/26/2023

Case 5:23-cv-00124-RWS-JBB Document 4 Filed 10/26/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 277
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil Action No.

PROOF OF SERVICE

(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))

This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)

was received by me on (date) .

’ I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)

on (date) ; or

’ I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name)

, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,

on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or

’ I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is

 designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)

on (date) ; or

’ I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or

’ Other (specify):

.

My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ .

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.

Date:

Server’s signature

Printed name and title

Server’s address

Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:

5:23-cv-124 0.00 Print Save As... Reset

Case 5:23-cv-00124-RWS-JBB Document 4 Filed 10/26/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 278
Joseph Eugene OSBORNE, Petitioner, v. Pelicia HALL, Commissioner, Mississippi Department of Corrections.

No. 19-7256

Supreme Court of the United States.

February 24, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
EXHIBIT 32.1

STATEMENT OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF

INTERNATIONAL TEXTILE GROUP, INC.

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 Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of International Textile Group, Inc. (the
Company) for the period ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Joseph L. Gorga, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, do hereby
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



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



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

Date: April 29, 2009



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/    Joseph L. Gorga               
|Joseph L. Gorga                      
|President and Chief Executive Officer

The foregoing statement is being furnished to accompany International Textile Group, Inc.s
Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2008 (the Report) solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure
document and shall not be deemed incorporated by reference into any other filing of International Textile Group, Inc. that incorporates the Report by reference. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to International Textile Group, Inc. and will be retained by International Textile Group, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

TYLER DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. 

SHAWN RYAN WILLIAMS 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

CASE NUMBER 6:24-CR-00002-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 Shawn Ryan 

Williams GUILTY of Count One of the Indictment, charging a violation of Title 21 U.S.C. § 

841(a)(1) - Possession with the Intent to Distribute Cocaine. 

So ordered and signed on this 

Aug 7, 2024

Case 6:24-cr-00002-JDK-JDL Document 30 Filed 08/07/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 86
# C_2017196EN.01000101.xml

| 20.6.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 196/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.6.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 196/1

---

Notice for the attention of the persons to whom restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2012/285/CFSP and Council Regulation (EU) No 377/2012 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies threatening the peace, security or stability of the Republic of Guinea-Bissau apply

(2017/C 196/01)

The following information is brought to the attention of the persons that appear in Annexes II and III to Council Decision 2012/285/CFSP (1) and in Annex I to Council Regulation (EU) No 377/2012 (2) concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies threatening the peace, security or stability of the Republic of Guinea-Bissau.

1

2

The Council of the European Union, after having reviewed the list of persons designated in the abovementioned Annexes, has determined that the restrictive measures provided for in Decision 2012/285/CFSP and in Regulation (EU) No 377/2012 should continue to apply to those persons.

The attention of the persons concerned is drawn to the possibility of making an application to the competent authorities of the relevant Member State(s) as indicated on the websites listed in Annex II to Regulation (EU) No 377/2012, in order to obtain an authorisation to use frozen funds for basic needs or specific payments (cf. Article 4 of the Regulation).

The persons concerned may submit a request to the Council, together with supporting documentation, that the decision to include them on the above-mentioned lists should be reconsidered, by 28 April 2018, to the following address:

| Council of the European Union |
| --- |
| General Secretariat |
| DG C 1C |
| Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175 |
| 1048 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |
| E-mail: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu |

Council of the European Union

General Secretariat

DG C 1C

Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175

1048 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

E-mail: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu

Any observations received will be taken into account for the purpose of the Council's periodic review, in accordance with Article 5(2) of Decision 2012/285/CFSP and Article 11(4) of Regulation (EU) No 377/2012.

---

(1)  OJ L 142, 1.6.2012, p. 36.

1

(2)  OJ L 119, 4.5.2012, p. 1.

2

---