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

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 90 Received in Senate (RDS)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 90

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 8, 2014

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Authorizing the use of Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor Center 
for a ceremony as part of the commemoration of the days of remembrance 
                      of victims of the Holocaust.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring),

SECTION 1. USE OF EMANCIPATION HALL FOR HOLOCAUST DAYS OF REMEMBRANCE 
              CEREMONY.

    Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor Center is authorized to be 
used on April 30, 2014, for a ceremony as part of the commemoration of 
the days of remembrance of victims of the Holocaust. Physical 
preparations for the conduct of the ceremony shall be carried out in 
accordance with such conditions as may be prescribed by the Architect 
of the Capitol.

            Passed the House of Representatives April 7, 2014.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
Tony ROBINSON, Petitioner, v. ILLINOIS.

No. 19-7226

Supreme Court of the United States.

Feb. 24, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 6
<CIK> 0000810271
<NAME> Select Government Portfolio
<SERIES>
   <NUMBER>012
   <NAME>Smith Barney Investment Series

<S>                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>              Year
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                 Oct-31-2001
<PERIOD-END>                      Oct-31-2000
<INVESTMENTS-AT-COST>               4,956,250
<INVESTMENTS-AT-VALUE>              5,053,450
<RECEIVABLES>                         121,025
<ASSETS-OTHER>                              0
<OTHER-ITEMS-ASSETS>                        0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                      5,174,475
<PAYABLE-FOR-SECURITIES>                    0
<SENIOR-LONG-TERM-DEBT>                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-LIABILITIES>             178,815
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES>                   178,815
<SENIOR-EQUITY>                             0
<PAID-IN-CAPITAL-COMMON>            4,688,931
<SHARES-COMMON-STOCK>                 470,331
<SHARES-COMMON-PRIOR>                 500,004
<ACCUMULATED-NII-CURRENT>             209,529
<OVERDISTRIBUTION-NII>                      0
<ACCUMULATED-NET-GAINS>                     0
<OVERDISTRIBUTION-GAINS>                    0
<ACCUM-APPREC-OR-DEPREC>               97,200
<NET-ASSETS>                        4,995,660
<DIVIDEND-INCOME>                           0
<INTEREST-INCOME>                     303,545
<OTHER-INCOME>                              0
<EXPENSES-NET>                         40,959
<NET-INVESTMENT-INCOME>               262,586
<REALIZED-GAINS-CURRENT>                    0
<APPREC-INCREASE-CURRENT>              57,700
<NET-CHANGE-FROM-OPS>                 320,286
<EQUALIZATION>                              0
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-INCOME>              79,999
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-GAINS>                    0
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OTHER>                       0
<NUMBER-OF-SHARES-SOLD>               306,687
<NUMBER-OF-SHARES-REDEEMED>           344,523
<SHARES-REINVESTED>                     8,163
<NET-CHANGE-IN-ASSETS>                (70,767)
<ACCUMULATED-NII-PRIOR>                26,942
<ACCUMULATED-GAINS-PRIOR>                   0
<OVERDISTRIB-NII-PRIOR>                     0
<OVERDIST-NET-GAINS-PRIOR>                  0
<GROSS-ADVISORY-FEES>                  30,476
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          0
<GROSS-EXPENSE>                       104,445
<AVERAGE-NET-ASSETS>                5,037,921
<PER-SHARE-NAV-BEGIN>                  10.130
<PER-SHARE-NII>                         0.530
<PER-SHARE-GAIN-APPREC>                 0.120
<PER-SHARE-DIVIDEND>                    0.160
<PER-SHARE-DISTRIBUTIONS>               0.000
<RETURNS-OF-CAPITAL>                    0.000
<PER-SHARE-NAV-END>                    10.620
<EXPENSE-RATIO>                          0.80



</TABLE>
| (logo) WELLS FARGO | **Commercial Mortgage Servicing**D1050-084, 8th Floor  401 South Tryon St.  Charlotte, NC 28202  1-800-326-1334 |
|--------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

** **

** **

**ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE**

 

Referenceis hereby made to that certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as ofDecember 1, 2017, by and among UBS COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE SECURITIZATION CORP., asDepositor, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Master Servicer, KEYBANKNATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Special Servicer, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONALASSOCIATION, as Certificate Administrator, WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONALASSOCIATION, as Trustee, and PENTALPHA SURVEILLANCE LLC, as Operating Advisorand as Asset Representations Reviewer with respect to Commercial MortgagePass-Through Certificates Series 2017-C7 (the "Agreement").Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise defined shall have the meaningsassigned in the Agreement. 

 

Pursuantto Section 11.09 of this Agreement, I, Daniel Bober, Executive Vice Presidentof Commercial Mortgage Services do hereby certify that: 

 

1. A review of theactivities of the Master Servicer during the period from December 1, 2017through December 31, 2017 (the “Reporting Period”),  and of itsperformance per the Agreement during such period has been made under mysupervision, and 

 

2. To the best ofmy knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer has fulfilled all ofits obligations under this Agreement in all material respects throughout theReporting Period. 

 

INWITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 28thday of February 2018. 

 

/s/ Daniel Bober

DanielBober 

ExecutiveVice President

WellsFargo Bank 

 

 

| Wells Fargo Bank,  N.A. | (logo)  Together we’ll go far |
|-------------------------|-------------------------------------|
```
 
 
CRUDE OIL, LIGHT SWEET-WTI - ICE FUTURES EUROPE                      Code-067411
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 10/21/14                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 1,000 BARRELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:      468,448
COMMITMENTS
  77,393   40,708  114,290  260,598  299,270  452,281  454,268   16,167   14,180

CHANGES FROM 10/14/14 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:    -27,918)
  -2,214     -591  -14,797  -11,073  -11,164  -28,084  -26,552      166   -1,366

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    16.5      8.7     24.4     55.6     63.9     96.5     97.0      3.5      3.0

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      131)
      33       29       53       60       62      118      121
```

----

Updated October 24, 2014
Joseph M. COFFMAN, Petitioner, v. ILLINOIS.

No. 19-8391.

Supreme Court of the United States.

June 1, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Court of Illinois, Fourth District denied.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

QUINTICA RAINES,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D22-2753

[January 19, 2023]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for 

the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Martin S. Fein, Judge; 

L.T. Case No. 18-004305-CF-10A.

Quintica Raines, Trenton, pro se.

No appearance for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

GROSS, DAMOORGIAN and CIKLIN, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 112 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. J. RES. 112

   Providing for the approval of the Congress of the proposed Third 
 Amendment to the Agreement for Co-operation Between the United States 
    of America and the International Atomic Energy Agency that was 
              transmitted to Congress on January 29, 2014.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 5, 2014

 Mr. Royce (for himself and Mr. Engel) introduced the following joint 
   resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
   Providing for the approval of the Congress of the proposed Third 
 Amendment to the Agreement for Co-operation Between the United States 
    of America and the International Atomic Energy Agency that was 
              transmitted to Congress on January 29, 2014.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That the Congress does favor 
the proposed agreement for cooperation transmitted to the Congress by 
the President on January 29, 2014.
                                 <all>
```
Stanley J. CATERBONE, Petitioner v. LANCASTER CITY BUREAU OF POLICE, et al.

No. 19-5228

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* denied, and the petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit dismissed. See Rule 39.8.
EXHIBIT 32.a



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 BCTC V Assignor Corp. (the "registrant") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John P. Manning, Principal Executive Officer of registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge, after due inquiry:



|(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 registrant.



|             |  |                            
|------------ |  | ---------------------------
|Date:        |  |                            
|May 15, 2006 |  | /s/ John P. Manning        
|             |  |                            
|             |  | John P. Manning            
|             |  | Principal Executive Officer
|             |  |                            
|             |  |                            



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other

document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the registrant and will be retained by the registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<LEGEND>
The audited  financial  statements  of  Mendocino  Brewing  Company,  Inc. as at
December 31, 1997
</LEGEND>

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         494,800
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  317,400
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    380,500
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,346,300
<PP&E>                                       9,810,400
<DEPRECIATION>                                 540,100
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              11,144,600
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,963,100
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                     3,869,600
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    227,600
<OTHER-SE>                                     203,200
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                11,144,600
<SALES>                                      3,839,700
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,004,700
<CGS>                                        1,909,700
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,177,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                41,300
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              11,600
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (202,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (78,200)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (123,800)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (123,800)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        


</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-6380

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

REGINALD BOONE, a/k/a Reggie,

Defendant – Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr.,

Senior District Judge. (2:92-cr-00113-002)

Submitted: August 26, 2010 Decided: September 1, 2010

Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Reginald Boone, Appellant Pro Se. Laura Marie Everhart, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Reginald Boone appeals the district court’s order 

denying his motion for a reduction of sentence filed pursuant to 

18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). We have reviewed the record and 

hold the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying 

the motion. See United States v. Stewart, 595 F.3d 197, 200 

(4th Cir. 2010). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s 

order for the reasons stated there. See United States v. Boone, 

No. 2:92-cr-00113-002 (E.D. Va. Feb. 18, 2010). 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.

AFFIRMED
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


C\_2018244EN.01000401.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 12.7.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 244/4 |

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.8999 — CACF/Bankia/JV)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2018/C 244/05)

1.

On 5 July 2018, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 [(1)](#ntr1-C_2018244EN.01000401-E0001), whereby CA Consumer Finance SA (‘CACF’, France) and Bankia SA (‘Bankia’, Spain) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control of a newly created joint venture (the ‘Target’).

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

—   for Bankia: financial services and provision of financing, insurance, asset management and management of real estate assets in Spain,

—   for CACF: provision of consumer credit in a variety of areas of consumer credit such as direct sales, point-of-sales financing, e-commerce, partnerships and brokerage in 19 countries,

—   for the Target: provision of consumer finance products to individuals, self-employed workers as well as other related activities exclusively in Spain and through non-banking channels such as, inter alia, car dealership companies, shops, direct contact via telephone or websites.

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 [(2)](#ntr2-C_2018244EN.01000401-E0002) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.

4.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

M.8999 — CACF/Bankia/JV

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

| |
| --- |
| Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu |
| Fax +32 22964301 |
| Postal address: |
| European Commission |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

---

[(1)](#ntc1-C_2018244EN.01000401-E0001)  [OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOL_2004_024_R_TOC) (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

[(2)](#ntc2-C_2018244EN.01000401-E0002)  [OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOC_2013_366_R_TOC).

---
Kwasi MCKINNEY, Petitioner, v. ARKANSAS.

No. 19-8025.

Supreme Court of the United States.

May 18, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Arkansas denied.
Travis Ray NORWOOD, Petitioner, v. WEST VIRGINIA.

No. 19-962.

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 9, 2020.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia denied.
NUMBER 13-18-00609-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

PETER KRUMP, Appellant,

v.

KATHRYN GONZALEZ, Appellee.

____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 347th District Court

of Nueces County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Benavides and Longoria

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Benavides

Appellant Peter Crump attempted to appeal a judgment entered by the 347th 

District Court of Nueces County on August 14, 2018. On October 31, 2018, the Clerk of 

this Court requested appellant to pay the filing fee for the notice of appeal within ten days. 

On November 19, 2018, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant, in accordance with 

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3(c), that he was delinquent in paying the filing fee 
2

and that we would dismiss this appeal unless the $205.00 filing fee was paid. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 42.3(c). Appellant has not responded to the notice from the Clerk or paid the 

filing fee. See TEX. R. APP. P. 5; id. R. 12.1(b). Further, appellant has not made 

payment arrangements for the clerk’s record or the reporter’s record. 

The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant’s failure to pay 

the filing fee, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed. See id. R. 42.3(b),(c). 

Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED for want of prosecution.

GINA M. BENAVIDES,

Justice

Delivered and filed the

31st day of January, 2019.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

DISPLAY TECHNOLOGIES, LLC,

 Plaintiff,

v.

ROCHE DIABETES CARE, LTD.,

 Defendant.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:23-cv-00585-JRG-RSP

(Lead Case)

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:24-cv-00098-JRG-RSP

(Member Case)

ORDER

Before the Court is the Notice of Dismissal (“Notice”) filed by Display Technologies, LLC

(“Plaintiff”). (Dkt. No. 23.) In the Notice, Plaintiff represents that Defendant Vivint, Inc. is 

voluntarily dismissed WITH PREJUDICE. (Id. at 1.)

In light of the Notice, which the Court ACCEPTS AND ACKNOWLEDGES, and 

pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), all pending claims and causes of action between Plaintiff and 

Vivint in the above-captioned cases are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. All pending requests 

for relief in the above-captioned cases not explicitly granted herein are DENIED AS MOOT.

The Clerk of Court is directed to MAINTAIN AS OPEN lead case 2:23-cv-00585-JRGRSP and CLOSE member case 2:24-cv-00098-JRG-RSP as no parties or claims remain.

 

.

____________________________________

RODNEY GILSTRAP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE So ORDERED and SIGNED this 17th day of May, 2024.

Case 2:24-cv-00098-JRG-RSP Document 10 Filed 05/17/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 205
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 08-8125

SHERMAN L. SHELTON, JR., 

 Petitioner - Appellant, 

 v. 

DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, 

 Respondent - Appellee. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Chief 

District Judge. (3:08-cv-00070-JRS) 

Submitted: August 12, 2009 Decided: September 2, 2009 

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. 

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Sherman L. Shelton, Jr. Appellant Pro Se. Susan Mozley Harris, 

Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2 

PER CURIAM: 

Sherman L. Shelton, Jr., 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 Shelton

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
Damion D. FAULKNER, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-5877

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 15, 2019

*404Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
Michael ARTIS, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-8014.

Supreme Court of the United States.

April 20, 2020

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