alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Eligah DARNELL, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant v. Terry LEWIS, Assistant District Attorney, Tarrant County, James Hudson, Assistant District Attorney, Tarrant County; Jerry L. Wood, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 04-11331.

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided April 5, 2005.

Eligah Darnell, Jr., Fort Worth, TX, pro se.

Before KING, Chief Judge, and DAVIS and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Eligah Darnell, Jr., Texas state prisoner # 0279245, appeals the district court’s judgment dismissing with prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint unless Darnell pays monetary sanctions of $150. Darnell argues that he inadvertently erroneously answered a question in the complaint concerning prior lawsuits that he had filed.

A district court may *sua sponte*dismiss an action for failure to prosecute or to comply with any court order. FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b); *McCullough v. Lynaugh,*835 F.2d 1126, 1127 (5th Cir.1988). A review of this record and prior suits filed by Darnell reflect that Darnell engaged in contumacious behavior warranting the sanctions imposed. Because it is clear that Darnell deliberately misled the district court in his response to the inquiry in the complaint and also continued to do so when asked to show cause, the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing the sanction of dismissal pending payment of a monetary sanction. The dismissal is AFFIRMED.

Darnell’s motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
**Exhibit 23**
**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLICACCOUNTING FIRM**
The Board of DirectorsC-COR Incorporated:
We consent to the incorporation by reference inthe registration statements on Form S-3 (Nos. 333-32676,333-75888, 333-82697, 333-87909, 333-90011 and 333-90589) and onForm S-8 (Nos. 2-95959, 33-27440, 33-35208, 33-66590,333-02505, 333-30982, 333-43592, 333-49826, 333-61226,333-64040, 333-65805, 333-89067 and 333-116204) ofC-COR Incorporated of our report dated August 13,except as to Note 24, which is as of September 3,2004, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets ofC-COR Incorporated and subsidiaries as of June 25,2004 and June 27, 2003, and the related consolidatedstatements of operations, cash flows and shareholders’equity for each of the three fiscal years in the period endedJune 25, 2004, which report appears in the June 25,2004 annual report on Form 10-K of C-COR Incorporated.Our report refers to the adoption of Statement of FinancialAccounting Standards No. 142, “Goodwill and OtherIntangible Assets” effective June 29, 2002.
KPMG LLP
Harrisburg, PennsylvaniaSeptember 3, 2004
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-8414

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JORGE MAURICCIO VASQUEZ,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad, Jr., Chief District Judge. (3:06-cr-00147-RJC-DCK-2)

Submitted: April 23, 2009 Decided: May 4, 2009

Before MICHAEL, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jorge Mauriccio Vasquez, Appellant Pro Se. Keith Michael Cave, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Jorge Mauriccio Vasquez appeals the district court’s
order denying his motion to impose a new sentence. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,

we affirm for the reasons state d by the district court. See
United States v. Vasquez , No. 3:06-cr-00147-RJC-DCK-2 (W.D.N.C.
Oct. 24, 2008). 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
#### In re Len C. KRETCHMAN and David Geske.

No. 04-1449.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

April 8, 2005.

Before CLEVENGER, GAJARSA, and PROST, Circuit Judges.

Judgment

PER CURIAM.

This CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

AFFIRMED. *See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.
```

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 220 (Wednesday, November 16, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 69508]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-22710]

========================================================================
Notices
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules 
or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings 
and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings, 
delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency 
statements of organization and functions are examples of documents 
appearing in this section.

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 220 / Wednesday, November 16, 2005 / 
Notices

[[Page 69508]]

AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Senior Executive Service: Membership of Performance Review Board

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The following persons are members of the 2005 Senior Executive 
Service Performance Review Board:

Lisa Fiely, Chair
Marilyn Marton
Drew Luten,
Franklin Moore
Amy Billingsley

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Darren Shanks, 202-712-5685.

    Dated: November 8, 2005.
Darren Shanks,
Executive and Performance Management.
[FR Doc. 05-22710 Filed 11-15-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6116-01-P
```
UNITED STATES DISTRICT CO'JRT 

SOGTHERN 3ISTRICT OF NEW YORK ----.. ----------- 

UNITED STATXS OF AMERICA 

TIMOTHY KHAN, 07 Cr. 355 (MGC) 

Defendant. 

WHEREAS, on or about April 26, 2007, 'TIMOTHY KHAN, (the 

"Defendant"), was charged with a six count 1r.dictment 06 Cr. 37i 

(GBD) (the "Indictnent") in violations of 15 U.S.C. 5 78j (b) and 

78ff, 17 C.F.K. § 24C.10b-5 for securities fraud, and 18 U.S.C. S 

1343 and 2 for wire fra~d; 

WHEREAS, the Indictment included a forfeiture allegation 

seeking, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 5 981 (a) (1) (C) and 28 U.S.C. 8 2461 

all property, real and personal, that constitutes or is derived 

from any proceeds the said defendant obcained directly traceable to 

the commlss;or. cf, among other offenses, including, but not llnited 

to a sum of Toney in the amount of $7 million in United States 

currency; 

WHEREAS, on or about March 18, 2008, the Defendant 

TIMOTHY WAN, pled guilty to counts one and three of the 

Indictment; 

WHEREAS, on or about July 31, 2008, the Cefendant was 

sentenced ~o a forfeiture money judgment in the amount of $7 

million in 3nited States Currency, representing the amount of 

Case 1:07-cr-00355-MGC Document 16 Filed 09/18/2008 Page 1 of 2
proceeds obtained as a result of the offenses charged in the 

Indictment; and 

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED 

TEAT : 

1. As a result of the offenses in tlre Indictment, for 

whlch the defe~dant plea guilty, a money judgment in the amount of 

$7 million shall be entered against the defendant. 

2. Pursuant to Rule 32.2(bj (3) of the Federal Rules 

of Criminal Procedure, this Order of Forfeiture shall be final as 

to the defendant, TIMOTHY KHAN, at the time of sentencing and 

shall be made part of the sentence of the defendant, and shall be 

included in the judgment of conviction therewith 

3. The Court shall retain jurisdictio~l to enforce this 

Order, and to arnend it as necessary, pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 

4. The Clerk of the Court shall forward four 

certified copies of this Order to Assistant Ucited States Attorney, 

Sharon ?ohen Levin, One St. Andrew's Plaza, New York, New York 

Dated: New York, New York 

Case 1:07-cr-00355-MGC Document 16 Filed 09/18/2008 Page 2 of 2
#### HEATH v. BD. OF COMRS.

No. 140 PC.

Case below: 29 N.C. App. 185.

Petition by defendant Bd. of Comrs. for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 allowed 17 June 1976.
Case 1:07-cv-03320-SHS Document 17 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 1 of 1
LYNCH, TRAUB, KEEFE AND ERRANTE, P. C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW

52 TRUMBULL STREET P.O. BOX 1612 NEW HAVEN, CONNECTICUT 06506-1612

TELEPHONE (203) 787-0275 FACSIMILE (203) 782-0278

W:\22000-22499\22123 NEW YORK STATE ELECTRIC & GAS\001 - SJE\PLEADINGS\2007\MOTION FOR EXTENSION2.DOC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

BARBARA FORLASTRO

AND ROBERT G. FORLASTRO, 

AS CO-ADMINISTRATORS OF 

THE ESTATE OF ROBERT J. FORLASTRO : CIVIL NO.: 3:06 CV 01541(RNC)

VS. : 

JAMES COLLINS : FEBRUARY 19, 2007

MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

Pursuant to Rule 6(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 

Rule 7(b) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure, the defendant, James 

Collins, respectfully moves for an extension of time to respond, by 

either answer or objection, to plaintiffs Complaint. The defendant 

requests an extension of time to and including March 19, 2007, to 

respond, by either answer or motion to the plaintiffs Complaint.

There is good cause for the requested extension since, although 

the undersigned is prepared to file a Motion to Dismiss, pursuant to 

the Court s standing orders a prefiling conference needs to be held

before said filing is perfected. As such, the undersigned hereby 

Case 1:07-cv-03288-RPP Document 1-8 Filed 04/24/2007 Page 1 of 3
LYNCH, TRAUB, KEEFE AND ERRANTE, P. C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW

52 TRUMBULL STREET P.O. BOX 1612 NEW HAVEN, CONNECTICUT 06506-1612

TELEPHONE (203) 787-0275 FACSIMILE (203) 782-0278

W:\22000-22499\22123 NEW YORK STATE ELECTRIC & GAS\001 - SJE\PLEADINGS\2007\MOTION FOR EXTENSION2.DOC

requests a thirty (30) day extension of time which will enable the 

parties to participate in said prefiling conference. 

This is the defendant s second motion seeking an extension of 

time of this deadline. The undersigned has been unable to ascertain 

the position of Plaintiffs counsel, Michael A. Stratton, regarding 

this request. 

WHEREFORE, the defendant respectfully requests that his Motion 

for Extension of Time be granted. 

Respectfully submitted,

THE DEFENDANT

James Collins

BY: ____________________________

STEVEN J. ERRANTE, ESQ. (ct04292)

MARISA A. BELLAIR, ESQ. (ct23802)

Fed. Bar No. ct04292

Lynch, Traub, Keefe, & Errante

52 Trumbull Street

New Haven, CT 06510

Telephone: 203-787-0275

Facsimile: 203-782-0278

Case 1:07-cv-03288-RPP Document 1-8 Filed 04/24/2007 Page 2 of 3
LYNCH, TRAUB, KEEFE AND ERRANTE, P. C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW

52 TRUMBULL STREET P.O. BOX 1612 NEW HAVEN, CONNECTICUT 06506-1612

TELEPHONE (203) 787-0275 FACSIMILE (203) 782-0278

W:\22000-22499\22123 NEW YORK STATE ELECTRIC & GAS\001 - SJE\PLEADINGS\2007\MOTION FOR EXTENSION2.DOC

CERTIFICATION

I hereby certify that a copy of the above was sent electronically 

on February 19, 2007 to all counsel and pro se parties of record as 

follows:

Michael A. Stratton, Esq.

Stratton Faxon

59 Elm Street

New Haven, CT 06510

___________________________

Steven J. Errante, Esq.

Case 1:07-cv-03288-RPP Document 1-8 Filed 04/24/2007 Page 3 of 3
#### Swarn Singh KANG, Petitioner, v. Alberto GONZALES,* Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 04-71242.

Agency No. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 4, 2005.**

Decided April 7, 2005.

Randhir S. Kang, Law Office of Randhir S. Kang, Fremont, CA, for Petitioner.

Regional Counsel, Western Region Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, OIL, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Officex of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before KOZINSKI, HAWKINS and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.

*

 Alberto Gonzales is substituted for his predecessor, John Ashcroft, as Attorney General of the United States, pursuant to Fed. R.App. P. 43(c)(2).

**

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2). Accordingly, Kang’s request for oral argument is denied.

*850MEMORANDUM***

Swarn Singh Kang, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision summarily affirming the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review an adverse credibility finding for substantial evidence and will uphold the decision unless the evidence compels a contrary conclusion. *See Singh v. Ashcroft,*367 F.3d 1139, 1143 (9th Cir.2004). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s decision. Kang’s testimony was internally inconsistent and inconsistent with his declaration regarding when he was arrested, whether the same police were involved with his arrests, and whether his brother was killed by police. *See Pal v. INS,*204 F.3d 935, 938 (9th Cir.2000). Kang’s testimony also lacked sufficient detail, was vague, and appeared memorized. *See Singh-Kaur v. INS,*183 F.3d 1147, 1152-53 (9th Cir.1999). Finally, substantial evidence supports the adverse credibility finding based on Kang’s failure to properly identify himself. *See id.; Farah v. Ashcroft,*348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir.2003) (upholding adverse credibility finding where the IJ’s “credibility findings went to key elements of the asylum application, including identity”).

Because Kang failed to establish eligibility for asylum, he necessarily failed to meet the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. *See Alvarez-Santos v. INS,*332 F.3d 1245, 1255 (9th Cir.2003).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Case 1:07-cv-03351-RWS Document 17 Filed 12/12/2007 Page 1 of 1
#### BOLICK v. BOLICK

No. 179 PC.

Case below: 29 N.C. App. 421.

Petition by plaintiff for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 14 July 1976. Motion of defendant to dismiss appeal allowed 14 July 1976.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                           7
<CIK>                         0000054473
<NAME>                        Kansas City Life Insurance Company
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1999
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                           2,048,016
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                            104,796
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                              106,237
<EQUITIES>                                       104,920
<MORTGAGE>                                       328,405
<REAL-ESTATE>                                     81,671
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                 2,801,787
<CASH>                                            19,625
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                               130,262
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                           226,829
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 3,562,460
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                  826,288
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                                    0
<POLICY-OTHER>                                    41,084
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                          1,846,515
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                   30,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                            0
<COMMON>                                          23,121
<OTHER-SE>                                       493,825
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   3,562,460
<PREMIUMS>                                       110,684
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                              151,677
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                                 2,519
<OTHER-INCOME>                                    92,428
<BENEFITS>                                       210,217
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                       27,294
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                               6,075
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   47,611
<INCOME-TAX>                                      14,252
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               33,359
<DISCONTINUED>                                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                        0
<CHANGES>                                              0
<NET-INCOME>                                      33,359
<EPS-BASIC>                                       2.70
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       2.70
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                         0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                    0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                      0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                     0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                       0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                        0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                                0



</TABLE>
# Soldier Missing From Vietnam War Accounted For (Phipps)

/ Published June 8, 2015

The Department of Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency (DPAA) announced today that the remains of three U.S. servicemen, missing from the Vietnam War, have been identified and will be buried with full military honors.

Army Chief Warrant Officers 3 James L. Phipps, 24, of Mattoon, Ill., and Rainer S. Ramos, 20, of Wiesbaden, Germany, were the pilots of a UH-1C Iroquois (Huey) helicopter gunship that was shot down in Quang Tin Province, South Vietnam. Also aboard the aircraft were door gunners Staff Sgt. Warren Newton, 18, of Eugene, Ore., and Spc. Fred J. Secrist, 19, of Eugene, Ore. The crew was assigned to Troop C, 7th Squadron, 17th Cavalry Regiment, 14th Aviation Group, 1st Aviation Brigade. The crew will be buried, as a group, on June 17, at Arlington National Cemetery near Washington, D.C.

On Jan. 9, 1968, the crew was on a mission over Quang Tin Province (now part of Quang Nam Province), South Vietnam, when the Huey was struck by ground fire, causing it to crash and explode in a North Vietnamese bunker and trench system. The crew was declared missing in action. On Jan. 20, 1968, a U.S. led team recovered the body of Secrist and he was returned to his family for burial.

Between August 1993 and August 2011, U.S./Socialist Republic of Vietnam (S.R.V.) teams surveyed and/or excavated the site three times. From Aug. 6-21, 2011, a joint U.S./S.R.V. team recovered human remains and personal effects.

In the identification of the recovered remains, scientists from DPAA and the Armed Forces DNA Identification Laboratory (AFDIL) analyzed circumstantial evidence and used forensic identification tools, to include mitochondrial DNA, which matched Secrist’s sister and brother. Remains not individually identified represent the entire crew and will be buried as a group.

Today, 1,627 Americans remain unaccounted for from the Vietnam War. The U.S. government continues to work closely with the governments of Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia to recover Americans lost during the Vietnam War.

For additional information on the Defense Department’s mission to account for Americans, who went missing while serving our country, visit the DPAA website at www.dpaa.mil or call (703) 699-1420.
Case 1:07-cv-03344-DFE Document 6 Filed 05/03/2007 Page 1 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-03344-DFE Document 6 Filed 05/03/2007 Page 2 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-03344-DFE Document 6 Filed 05/03/2007 Page 3 of 3
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-23-00109-CV

CDM Resource Management, Ltd. and USA Compression Partners, LLC

v.

Victoria Central Appraisal District

On Appeal from the

24th District Court of Victoria County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 19-11-85165-A

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed. The Court orders the appeal 

DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion. Costs of the appeal are adjudged against 

appellants.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

November 9, 2023
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1380 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1380

To amend the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure to remind prosecutors 
           of their obligations under Supreme Court case law.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 8, 2019

  Mr. Sullivan (for himself and Mr. Durbin) introduced the following 
    bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the 
                               Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure to remind prosecutors 
           of their obligations under Supreme Court case law.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Due Process Protections Act''.

SEC. 2. REMINDER OF PROSECUTORIAL OBLIGATIONS.

    Rule 5 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure is amended--
            (1) by redesignating subsection (f) as subsection (g); and
            (2) by inserting after subsection (e) the following:
    ``(f) Reminder of Prosecutorial Obligation.--
            ``(1) In general.--In all criminal proceedings, on the 
        first scheduled court date when both prosecutor and defense 
        counsel are present, the judge shall issue an oral and written 
        order to prosecution and defense counsel that confirms the 
        disclosure obligation of the prosecutor under Brady v. 
        Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) and its progeny, and the possible 
        consequences of violating such order under applicable law.
            ``(2) Formation of order.--Each judicial council in which a 
        district court is located shall promulgate a model order for 
        the purpose of paragraph (1) that the court may use as it 
        determines is appropriate.''.
                                 <all>
```
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**




**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 Annual Report of Lattice Incorporated (the "Company") on
      Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Paul
      Burgess, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
      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 and 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
      the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
      and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


April 16, 2007
              
              /s/ Paul BurgessPaul
                BurgessChief
                  Executive Officer
#### HILLMAN v. UNITED STATES LIABILITY INS. CO.

No. 654P82.

Case below: 59 N.C. App. 145.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 11 January 1983.
Case 1:07-cv-03344-DFE Document 4 Filed 04/27/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-03344-DFE Document 4 Filed 04/27/2007 Page 2 of 2