alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Case 1:07-cv-03550-HB Document 5 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 1 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-03550-HB Document 5 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 2 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-03550-HB Document 5 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 3 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-03550-HB Document 5 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 4 of 4
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

MARK GEORGE SMITH,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No. 4:10cv131-SPM/WCS

FLORIDA DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This cause is before me upon referral from the Clerk. In an order filed April 16,

2010, Plaintiff was directed to either file a notice of voluntary dismissal or an an

amended complaint by May 17, 2010. Plaintiff was specifically warned that a

recommendation would be made that this case be dismissed if there was a failure to

comply with that order. Doc. 4. To date, no response has been received from the

Plaintiff. 

A trial court has inherent power to dismiss a case sua sponte for failure to

prosecute. Link v. Wabash R.R., 370 U.S. 626, 82 S.Ct. 1386, 8 L.Ed.2d 734 (1962). 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) authorizes a district court to dismiss an action for failure to obey a

court order. Moon v. Newsome, 863 F.2d 835, 838 and cases cited (11th Cir.), cert.
Page 2 of 2

denied, 493 U.S. 863 (1989). Since Plaintiff has failed to comply with an order or to

prosecute this case, this complaint should now be dismissed without prejudice. 

Plaintiff shall have a 14 day period after service of this report and

recommendation in which to file objections. This will also afford Plaintiff a final

opportunity to show good cause for this failure to respond. Plaintiff may do so by filing a

motion for reconsideration which will be referred to me by the Clerk.

It is therefore, respectfully RECOMMENDED that this case be DISMISSED

without prejudice.

IN CHAMBERS at Tallahassee, Florida, on June 2, 2010.

s/ William C. Sherrill, Jr. 

WILLIAM C. SHERRILL, JR.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and

recommendations within 14 days after being served with a copy of this report and

recommendation. A party may respond to another party's objections within 14 days after being

served with a copy thereof. Failure to file specific objections limits the scope of review of

proposed factual findings and recommendations.

Case No. 4:10cv131-SPM/WCS
#### WALTERS v. TIRE SALES & SERVICE

No. 148 PC.

Case below: 51 N.C. App. 378.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 8 July 1981.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                      15,546,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               16,052,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                 14,188,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            49,193,000
<PP&E>                                      43,243,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              17,573,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              74,863,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       21,782,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     3,998,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  47,104,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                74,863,000
<SALES>                                    125,180,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           125,180,000
<CGS>                                      110,766,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               11,933,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              3,094,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,248,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,846,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,846,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .45
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .45
        

</TABLE>
SIXTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

Case No. 6D23-2129

Lower Tribunal No. 2016-CF-011551-A-O

_____________________________

JAMES VILSAINT,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County.

Patricia L. Strowbridge, Judge.

June 25, 2024

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

STARGEL and MIZE, JJ., and LAMBERT, B.D., Associate Judge, concur.

Howard L. “Rex” Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Nicholas Martino, Special 

Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Allison Leigh Morris, Assistant 

Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING 

AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**WRITTEN STATEMENT**

**PURSUANT TO**

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

 

The undersigned, RONALD G. LEE, the Chief ExecutiveOfficer/Chief Financial Officer, of LEE PHARMACEUTICALS (the “Company”),pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, hereby certifies that, to the best ofhis knowledge:

 

(i)  the FORM 10-QSBof the Company for the quarter ended June 30, 2005 (the “Report”) fullycomplies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(ii)  the information contained in the Report fairly presents, inall material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.

 

 
| Date:  | AUGUST 5,  2005 |   |   |
|--------|----------------------|--------|--------|
|   |                 |
|   |                 |
|   | RONALD G. LEE        |   |
|   | Ronald G. Lee        |

 

----
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 00-1560

___________ Ruth A. Gottman, * * Appellant, * * v. * * Commissioner of Internal Revenue * Service, * * Appellee. *

___________ Petition for Review of No. 00-1561 an Order of the Commissioner

___________ of the Internal Revenue Service. Neil E. Gottman, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant, * * v. * * Commissioner of Internal Revenue * Service, * * Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: August 31, 2000 Filed: September 13, 2000

___________1 The Honorable Mary Ann Cohen, Chief Judge, United States Tax Court. -2- Before RICHARD S. ARNOLD, HANSEN, and BYE, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. NeilE. Gottman and Ruth A. Gottman seek review of the tax court’s 1 orders dismissing their respective petitions and entering deficiencies as determined by the Commissioner. The Gottmans argue that requiring them to file tax returns signed under penalty of perjury violates their Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.
After reviewing the record and the parties’ briefs, we conclude that the tax court properly dismissed the Gottmans’ petitions for failure to state a claim. We also grant the Commissioner’s motion for sanctions, see Fed. R. App. P. 38, because the Gottmans’ argument on appeal has been rejected repeatedly, see, e.g. , Boomer v. UnitedStates , 755 F.2d 696, 697 (8th Cir. 1985) (per curiam); UnitedStates v. MacLeod , 436 F.2d 947, 951 (8th Cir.) (“The statutory requirement to file an income tax return does not violate a taxpayer’s right against self-incrimination.”), cert. denied , 402 U.S. 907 (1971). Accordingly, we affirm the tax court’s orders, and award damages in the amount of $500 plus costs to the Commissioner.-3-

A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                      UT
<LEGEND>
     This schedule  contains summary  financial  information  extracted from the
     Statement of Income,  Balance  Sheet and  Statement  of Cash Flows,  and is
     qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000
       
<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1997
<BOOK-VALUE>                                   PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                       3,741,643
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                        50,584
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                            876,411
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                           80,212
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                  7,149,142
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 11,897,992
<COMMON>                                          606,973
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                       1,089,602
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                               917,477
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                  2,614,052
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             637,450
<PREFERRED>                                        63,565
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                            4,371,675
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                      0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                               0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                     101,000
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                           1,050
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                             0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                        0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                  4,109,200
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                  11,897,992
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                       1,516,897
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                              119,332
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                      1,010,874
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                      1,130,206
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                           386,691
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                  6,483
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                    393,174
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          203,628
<NET-INCOME>                                      189,546
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        25,917
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                     163,629
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          107,754
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                         175,662
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                            353,147
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       $1.35
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       $1.35
        



</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-1151

In Re: JOHN ANDREW SPEAGLE, SR.,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. 

(5:05-cr-00234-RLV-CH-2; 5:12-cv-00134-RLV)

Submitted: August 25, 2015 Decided: August 28, 2015

Before GREGORY and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John Andrew Speagle, Sr., Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

John Andrew Speagle, Sr., petitions for a writ of mandamus, 

alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his

motion to recall the district court’s mandate and reconsider its 

order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. He seeks 

an order from this court directing the district court to act. 

Our review of the district court’s docket reveals that the 

district court disposed of Speagle’s pending motions on August 

13, 2015. Accordingly, because the district court has recently 

decided Speagle’s case, we deny the mandamus petition as moot. 

We grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis. We dispense with 

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process. 

PETITION DENIED
Exhibit 23.2









CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM







We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 7, 2006 (File No. 333-131624), and the Registration Statement on Form S-8 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 29, 2007 (File No. 333-146985) of our reports dated February 11, 2008, relating to the combined financial statements of Harvest Oil and Gas, LLC and The Harvest Group, LLC (Predecessor) as of December 31, 2007 appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Saratoga Resources, Inc.







LaPorte Sehrt Romig Hand

www.laporte.com

Metairie, LA

April 15, 2009
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-10295

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ESTEBAN ALONZO-GARCIA,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:14-CR-141-1

Before DAVIS, SMITH, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Esteban AlonzoGarcia has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance 

with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 

F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Alonzo-Garcia has not filed a response. We have 

reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected 

therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no 

 

* 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

February 17, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-10295 Document: 00513383132 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/17/2016
No. 15-10295

2

nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave 

to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities 

herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 15-10295 Document: 00513383132 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/17/2016
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

v. CASES NO. 4:10cr27-RH/WCS

4:10cr28-RH/WCS

TONY LAMAR HAMILTON,

Defendant.

________________________________/

ORDER CONTINUING DETENTION

The government moved for the detention of the defendant Tony Lamar

Hamilton. The magistrate judge granted the motion for the reasons set out in a

written order. (Document 8.) Mr. Hamilton now has moved for review of that

ruling under 18 U.S.C. § 3145(b). I review the matter de novo, that is, without

giving deference to the magistrate judge’s decision.

In the motion for review, Mr. Hamilton takes no issue with the magistrate

judge’s recitation of the evidence included in this record. Nor does he take issue

with the proposition that the evidence properly can be considered on the detention

issue. Mr. Hamilton’s assertion, instead, is that there are conditions less restrictive
Page 2 of 2

Case No: 4:10cr27-RH/WCS and 4:10cr28-RH/WCS

than detention that would reasonable assure the safety of the community and Mr.

Hamilton’s appearance as required. Like the magistrate judge, I disagree. I

conclude that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the

safety of the community and Mr. Hamilton’s appearance as required. 

Mr. Hamilton also asserts that during his detention he has not received the

medicines he needs. Even if that were true, the remedy would be to provide the

medicines, not to release him. A person cannot properly be released if, as is the

case here, no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the

safety of the community and the person’s appearance as required. 

For these reasons,

IT IS ORDERED:

Mr. Hamilton’s motion (document 12) for review of the magistrate judge’s

detention order is GRANTED. Upon review, the detention order is approved. The

defendant will remain in detention under that order.

SO ORDERED on May 27, 2010.

s/Robert L. Hinkle 

United States District Judge
#### STATE v. McLAWHORN

No. 138 PC.

Case below: 43 N.C. App. 695.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 8 January 1980.
EXHIBIT 23.1


                            KYLE L. TINGLE, CPA , LLC








To Whom It May Concern:                                       December 01, 2005



The firm of Kyle L. Tingle, Certified Public Accountant, LLC hereby consents to
the inclusion of his report of August 5, 2004, accompanying the audited
financial statements of Flickering Star Financial, Inc., as at December 31, 2002
and December 31, 2003, in the Form 10KSB.


Very truly yours,


/s/ KYLE L. TINGLE
    ________________________
    Kyle L. Tingle, CPA, LLC

















        P.O. Box 50141, Henderson, Nevada 89016, Phone: (702) 434-8452,
             Fax: (702) 436-4218, e-mail: ktingle@kyletinglecpa.com
EXHIBIT 11

<TABLE>
STATEMENT RE: COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS
Aeroquip-Vickers, Inc.
(In thousands, except per share data)

<CAPTION>
                                     Three Months Ended     Six Months Ended
                                          June 30                June 30       
                                        ------------------      -------------------
                                      1997      1996         1997         1996
                                         ----       ----         ----     ----
<S>                                  <C>        <C>         <C>         <C>
AVERAGE SHARES OF COMMON STOCK 
AND COMMON STOCK EQUIVALENTS 
OUTSTANDING (NOTE A)
Average shares outstanding             27,948     28,551      27,966    28,652
Assumed conversion of the 6%
 convertible debentures                 1,905      1,905       1,905     1,905
Net effect of dilutive stock                 
 options based upon treasury stock
 method using average market price        167         72         155        72
                                    --------- ----------  --------------------
Average shares of common stock 
 and common stock equivalents
 outstanding                           30,020     30,528      30,026    30,629
                                   ========== ==========  ====================

INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO COMMON STOCK (NOTE A)
Net income                          $  33,630 $   33,060  $   39,324$   57,475
After-tax equivalent of interest
  expense on the 6% convertible
  debentures                              930        930       1,860     1,860
                                   ---------- ----------  --------------------
Income attributable to common stock$   34,560 $   33,990  $   41,184$   59,335
                                   ========== ==========  ====================  


Net Income per Share               $     1.15 $     1.11  $     1.37$     1.94
                                   ========== ==========  ====================

<FN>
Note A - Net income per share is computed using the average number of common
shares outstanding, including common stock equivalents.  The assumed
conversion of the Company's 6% convertible debentures was included in average
shares outstanding, increasing the average number of shares outstanding by
1,904,762 shares.  For purposes of computing net income per share, net income
was increased for the after-tax equivalent of interest expense on the 6%
convertible debentures.  

</FN>
</TABLE>


                                   -19-
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 7

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                       198,773,688
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                   2,226,746
<MORTGAGE>                                  20,517,422
<REAL-ESTATE>                                  411,676
<TOTAL-INVEST>                             230,655,395
<CASH>                                       2,986,789
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                             469,955
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                      23,996,109
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             347,303,778
<POLICY-LOSSES>                            281,497,065
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                         24,295,920
<POLICY-OTHER>                               2,106,465
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                        1,875,322
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                 28,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     1,149,503
<OTHER-SE>                                  29,887,758
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               347,303,778
<PREMIUMS>                                  23,966,065
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                          8,259,035
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                              67,368
<OTHER-INCOME>                                 516,661
<BENEFITS>                                  13,945,112
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                  (607,009)
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                        17,792,400
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,678,626
<INCOME-TAX>                                   542,030
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,136,596
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,136,596
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .99
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                       0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                  0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                    0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                   0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                     0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                      0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0


</TABLE>