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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs. Case Nos.: 3:01cr8/RV

 3:12cv507/RV/EMT

WALTER DEVON GRANDISON

____________________________/

O R D E R

This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge’s Report and

Recommendation dated October 24, 2012 (doc. 201). Defendant has been furnished a copy of the

Report and Recommendation and has been afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to

Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). No objections have been filed.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, I have determined that the Report and

Recommendation should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:

1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted and incorporated by

reference in this order.

2. The motion to vacate, set aside or correct sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (doc.

199) is DISMISSED without prejudice. 

3. No certificate of appealability shall issue.

DONE AND ORDERED this 28th day of November, 2012.

/s/ Roger Vinson 

ROGER VINSON

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
1


                                 FORM 10-Q/A

                      SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                           Washington, D.C.  20549



             QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
                     THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934


For the quarterly period ended September 30, 1998

Commission file number 1-924


                  Aeroquip-Vickers, Inc.
            (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)


             Ohio                                        34-4288310
   (State of Incorporation)                           (I.R.S. Employer
                                                     Identification No.)


                    3000 Strayer, Maumee, OH   43537-0050
                   (Address of principal executive office)


     Registrant's telephone number, including area code:  (419) 867-2200


Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports
required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 during the preceding 12 months, and (2) has been subject to such filing
requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes   X     No


The number of Common Shares, $5 Par Value, outstanding as of October 23, 1998,
was 27,730,520.






             This document, including exhibits, contains 5 pages.

                   The Exhibit Index is located on page 4.

<PAGE>




Item 6.  Exhibits and Reports on Form 8-K


 (a)  The following exhibit is filed hereunder as part of Part I:


        Exhibit (12)    Statement re:  Computation of Ratios


                                      -2-
                                       
<PAGE>


                                  SIGNATURES




Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned thereunto duly authorized.





                                    Aeroquip-Vickers, Inc.



                                    By  /S/ DARRYL F. ALLEN
                                        --------------------------------------
November 12, 1998                       Darryl F. Allen
                                        Chairman, President and
                                        Chief Executive Officer
                                        (Principal Executive Officer)



                                    By  /S/ DAVID M. RISLEY
                                        --------------------------------------
November 12, 1998                       David M. Risley
                                        Vice President - Finance and
                                        Chief Financial Officer
                                        (Principal Financial Officer)


                                      -3-

_______________________________
1
|    |                                                                                                                       |
|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 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. |

|        |
|--------|
|        |  |  |
|   | Dated:   May 5, 2011 | /s/CRAIG E. LaBARGE |
|   |   | Craig E. LaBarge |
|   |   | Chairman of the Board, |
|   |   | Chief Executive Officer and President |
# National Character Counts Week, 2007

The greatness of a nation is measured not by power or wealth but by the character of its people. During National Character Counts Week, we underscore our dedication to promoting values for our young people and encourage all Americans to demonstrate good character. 

As America's youth strive to become responsible adults, they carry with them the values and traditions they were taught as children. At home, parents and families can teach universal values such as respect, tolerance, self-restraint, fairness, and compassion. In the community, we all can set good examples and demonstrate the virtues of leadership, patriotism, and responsible citizenship. The members of our Armed Forces demonstrate the strength of America's character by answering the call of service to our Nation. 

Through the Helping America's Youth initiative, caring adults are connected with at-risk youth so that they have a mentor and an example as they navigate the challenges young people face. By working together, we can give children the skill and habits they need to reach their full potential. 

During National Character Counts Week and throughout the year, I urge all citizens to support the character development of our youth and make a difference in the lives of others. One way for all Americans to add to the character of our country is to volunteer to help a neighbor in need, and more information can be found at volunteer.gov. I encourage every American to serve a cause greater than themselves and set a positive example in their community. 

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim October 21 through October 27, 2007, as National Character Counts Week. I call upon public officials, educators, librarians, parents, students, and all Americans to observe this week with appropriate ceremonies, activities, and programs. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this nineteenth day of October, in the year of our Lord two thousand seven, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-second. 

[FR Doc. 07-5297

Billing code 3195-01-P
#### STATE v. RUSH

No. 311P82.

Case below: 56 N.C. App. 787.

Petition by defendant for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 13 July 1982.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-7063
WILLIAM CROSS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RONALD W. ANGELONE, Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, District Judge. (CA-95-1494-AM) Submitted: December 19, 1996 Decided: January 6, 1997 Before ERVIN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William Cross, Appellant Pro Se. Robert H. Anderson III, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1994), amended by Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Cross v. Angelone , No. CA-95- 1494-AM (E.D. Va. June 14, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented inthe materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Kennie Lewis Cook, Jr., Appellant

No. 06-20-00002-CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

Appeal from the 5th District Court of Cass

County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 2019F00101). 

Memorandum Opinion delivered by Chief 

Justice Stevens, Justice van Cleef and 

Justice Rambin participating. 

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find there was partial error in the 

judgment of the court below. Therefore, we modify the clerk’s bill of costs and the trial court’s 

judgment by deleting the duplicative court costs of $401.00. As modified, the judgment of the 

trial court is affirmed.

We further order that the appellant, Kennie Lewis Cook, Jr., pay all costs of this appeal.

RENDERED MARCH 10, 2023

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

SCOTT E. STEVENS

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
#### TRUST CO. v. RUBISH

No. 141 PC.

No. 54 (Fall Term).

Case below: 50 N.C. App. 662.

Petition by plaintiff for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 allowed 2 June 1981.
Case 1:07-cv-03579-LTS-MHD Document 22 Filed 12/04/2007 Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 32.2

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

     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Liberty Energy Coal Corp.,  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011,  as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Robert
T.  Malasek , Chief  Financial  Officer,  on the date  indicated  below,  hereby
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:

     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 operation of
          the Company.


Date: May 16, 2011                          By: /s/ Robert T. Malasek
                                                --------------------------------
                                                Robert T. Malasek
                                                Chief Financial Officer
                                                (Principal Financial Officer
                                                & Principal Accounting Officer)
| | Bontan Corporation Inc.
47 Avenue Road, Suite 200
Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5R 2G3
T:  416-860-0211
F:  416-361-6228
W:  www.bontancorporation.com
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





August 10, 2005



Jill S Davis

Branch Chief

US Securities and Exchange Commission



100 F Street, NE

Washington, D.C. 20549-7410

USA



Dear Jill S Davis:



RE: BONTAN CORPORATION INC.  Form 20-F for the year ended march 31, 2004  filed August 30, 2004 (File # 0-30314)





In connection with your review of our above statements, we acknowledge as follows:



1.

The Company is responsible for the adequacy and accuracy of the disclosure in the filing:



2.

Staff comments or changes to disclosure in response to staff comments do not foreclose the Commission from taking any action with respect to the filing: and



3.

The Company may not assert staff comments as a defense in any proceeding initiated by the Commission or any person under the federal securities laws of the United States.











Sincerely









Kam Shah

Chief Executive Officer
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

SHERRIE RUSSELL-BROWN,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 1:09-cv-00257-MP-AK

ROBERT H JERRY, II, LEVIN COLLEGE OF LAW, THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA, THE

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA BOARD OF TRUSTEES,

Defendants.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on Motion for Leave to File reply to Response in

Opposition to Motion by Sherrie Russell-Brown, Doc. 116. Plaintiff requests leave to file a

reply to Defendants’ opposition memorandum, Doc. 113, concerning Plaintiff’s pending request

to amend her complaint, Doc. 98. The motion is GRANTED in part: because of the short time

between the request and the scheduled hearing on the motion in question, Plaintiff shall file their

reply no later than close of business Friday, August 6, 2010. 

DONE AND ORDERED this 3rd day of August, 2010

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge

Case 1:09-cv-00257-MP -AK Document 119 Filed 08/03/10 Page 1 of 1
# C_2011351EN.01001401.xml

| 2.12.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 351/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.12.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 351/14

---

Notice for the attention of the persons and entities to which restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2011/782/CFSP and Council Regulation (EU) No 442/2011 as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1244/2011 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria apply

2011/C 351/04

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

The following information is brought to the attention of the persons and entities that appear in the Annexes to Council Decision 2011/782/CFSP (1) replacing Council Decision 2011/273/CFSP and in Annex II to Council Regulation (EU) No 442/2011 as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1244/2011 (2) concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria.

1

2

The Council of the European Union has decided that the persons and entities that appear in the above-mentioned Annexes should be included in the list of persons and entities subject to restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2011/782/CFSP and to Council Regulation (EU) No 442/2011 as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1244/2011 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria.

The attention of the persons and entities concerned is drawn to the possibility of making an application to the competent authorities of the relevant Member State(s) as indicated in the web-sites in Annex III to Regulation (EU) No 442/2011, in order to obtain an authorisation to use frozen funds for basic needs or specific payments (cf. Article 6 of the Regulation).

The persons and entities concerned may submit a request to the Council, together with supporting documentation, that the decision to include them on the above-mentioned list should be reconsidered, to the following address:

| Council of the European Union |
| --- |
| General Secretariat |
| Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175 |
| 1048 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

Council of the European Union

General Secretariat

Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175

1048 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

The attention of the persons and entities concerned is also drawn to the possibility of challenging the Council's Decision before the General Court of the European Union, in accordance with the conditions laid down in Article 275, second paragraph, and Article 263, fourth and sixth paragraphs, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

---

(1)  OJ L 319, 2.12.2011, p. 56.

1

(2)  OJ L 319, 2.12.2011, p. 8.

2

---
#### STATE v. CROMARTIE

No. 116 PC.

Case below: 50 N.C. App. 212.

Petition by defendant for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 17 August 1981.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

 v. 

ANGEL ALEJANDRO CARMONA, a.k.a. 

Lil Criminal, 

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-50210 

D.C. No. 2:16-cr-00401-ODW 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Otis D. Wright, II, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 15, 2018**

Before: SILVERMAN, BEA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.

Angel Alejandro Carmona appeals from the district court’s judgment and 

challenges the 125-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction 

for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and to distribute 

methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. We have jurisdiction under 28 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

MAY 18 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 17-50210 

U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Carmona contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to 

address the 18 U.S.C. § 3553 factors and explain its reasons for the sentence. We 

review for plain error, see United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 

1108 (9th Cir. 2010), and conclude that there is none. The district court considered 

and discussed the advisory Guidelines range and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) 

sentencing factors, and explained at length the reasons for the sentence. See Rita v. 

United States, 551 U.S. 338, 356 (2007) (“The sentencing judge should set forth 

enough to satisfy the appellate court that he has considered the parties’ arguments 

and has a reasoned basis for exercising his own legal decisionmaking authority.”). 

The court also considered Carmona’s mitigating arguments. 

Carmona also argues that the sentence is substantively unreasonable because 

the district court sentenced him to 125 months, despite recommendations of 120 

months from probation, the government, and the defense. The district court did not 

abuse its discretion in imposing Carmona’s within-Guidelines sentence. See Gall 

v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The sentence is substantively reasonable 

in light of the section 3553(a) factors and the totality of the circumstances. See 

Gall, 552 U.S. at 51.

AFFIRMED.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

RICARDO ERNESTO RODRIGUEZ,

Petitioner,

v.

WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 14

- 73278

Agency No. A095

- 749

- 060

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted August 28 , 2020 * *

Before: TROTT, SILVERMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Ricardo Ernesto Rodriguez, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for

review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order summarily affirming an

immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his motion to reopen removal

proceedings and to reconsider

. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We

review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen or reconsider

.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

SEP 1 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 14

- 73278

Cano

- Merida v. INS , 311 F.3d 960, 964 (9th Cir. 2002). We deny the petition for

review.

The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying Rodriguez ’s motion to

re open his removal proceedings

. Rodriguez did not support his motion with

anything other than his counsel’s statements, no affidavits or evidentiary material

whatsoever. Moreover, he did not demonstrate why the evidence counsel

referenced could not have been discovered bef ore or presented at his hearing. In

addition, he did not demonstrate that the evidence he sought to submit would likely

have changed the outcome of his case. See Shin v. Mukasey , 547 F.3d 1019, 1025

(9th Cir. 2008) ( setting out the standard for a motion to reopen and noting that

petitioners who seek to re open proceedings to pursue relief “ bear a ‘heavy burden’

of proving that, if proceedings were reopened, the new evidence would likely

change the result in the case” (citation omitted) )

.

The agency also d id not abuse its discretion in denying Rodriguez’s motion

to reconsider

, where his motion failed to identify any error of fact or law in the IJ’s

prior order. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)(2).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
#### CRAWFORD v. SURETY CO.

No. 184 PC.

Case below: 44 N.C. App. 368.

Petition by plaintiff for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 6 February 1980.
FLN (Rev. 4/2004) Deficiency Order Page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

BARBARA H. ENGBERG

vs

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE

Case No. 3:10cv64/RV/EMT

ORDER

Plaintiff’s documents (proofs of service) identified on the electronic docket as “AFFIDAVITS OF

SERVICE” (documents 5, 6, and 7; electronically filed April 5, 2010), were referred to the

undersigned with the following deficiency:

No signed affidavits were submitted along with the proofs of service. 

For this reason, it is ORDERED that:

The documents shall remain in the electronic file, but the court will not consider them

until you have corrected the above deficiencies through the filing of a corrected

document.

DONE and ORDERED this 7 day of April 2010. th

 /s/ Elizabeth M. Timothy

ELIZABETH M. TIMOTHY 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE