alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
GAINESVILLE DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
vs. CASE NO. 1:10cr7 SPM
LUIS FERRO-LORENZO

Defendant
/

ORDER APPOINTING CJA PANEL ATTORNEY

The above named defendant who appeared before this Court, having been
examined by the undersigned and the Court having determined from the sworn
testimony of the defendant that said defendant is qualified for appointment of counsel
pursuant to the provisions of the Criminal Justice Act, it is

ORDERED:

DANIEL FRANCIS DALY, 20 W. University Ave. #204, Gainesville, FL 32601,
352-505-0445 , is appointed to represent this defendant and serve as counsel of record

in the above-styled proceedings, nunc pro tunc January 19, 2010.

DONE AND ORDERED this Me say of February, 2010.

(MAURIZE M. PAUL, SENIOR
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Recta 216 10UsDeF ini P1040?
August 11, 2016

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

JOHNTAY GIBSON, Appellant

NO. 14-14-00595-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

________________________________

This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. 

Having considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the 

judgment. The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
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 Annual report of The Blackhawk Fund (the "Company")
on  Form  10-KSB  for  the  period  ended  December  31,  2004 as filed with the
Securities  and  Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Brent
Fouch,  Secretary  and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to  18  U.S.C.  Section  1350,  as  adopted  pursuant  to  Section  906  of  the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of  2002,  that:

     3.     The  Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of
the  Securities  Exchange  Act  of  1934;  and

     4.     The  information  contained  in  the  Report fairly presents, in all
material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and results 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.

                                                 /s/ Brent  Fouch
                                                 -------------------------------
                                                 Brent Fouch, Secretary and
                                                 Chief Financial Officer
                                                 Date: October 11, 2005


<PAGE>
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03

- 21

- 00259

- CV

Aleksei Kudimov , Appellant

v.

Anna Kudimov a , Appellee

FROM THE 53RD DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY NO. D

- 1

- FM

- 19

- 007227 , THE HONORABLE JAN SOIFER , JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant Aleksei Kudimov has filed an unopp osed moti on to dismiss this appeal.

We g rant appellant’s motion and dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)

.

__________________________________________ Gisela D. Triana

, J ustice

Before Justices Goodwin, Triana, and Kelly

Dismissed on Appellant’s Motion

Filed: June 30, 2021
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

 PENSACOLA DIVISION

HENRY SORGE,

Petitioner,

vs. 3:10cv114/LAC/MD

WALTER A. MCNEIL,

Respondent. 

O R D E R

This cause is before the court upon respondent’s motion to dismiss petition

for writ of habeas corpus (doc. 12). Before the court rules on this matter, the

petitioner shall have an opportunity to respond.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

Petitioner shall have twenty-eight (28) days from the date this order is entered

on the docket in which to respond to the motion filed by respondent.

DONE AND ORDERED this 16th day of September, 2010.

/s/ Miles Davis

MILES DAVIS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
# C_2011185EN.01000101.xml

| 25.6.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 185/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.6.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 185/1

---

Explanatory Notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union

2011/C 185/01

Pursuant to Article 9(1)(a), second indent, of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (1), the Explanatory Notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union (2) are amended as from 1 July 2011 as follows:

1

2

On page 342:

On page 342:

the Explanatory Note for CN code 8521 90 00 is deleted.

On page 347:

On page 347:

the Explanatory Notes for CN codes 8528 71 13, 8528 71 19 and 8528 71 90 are deleted.

---

(1)  OJ L 256, 7.9.1987, p. 1.

1

(2)  OJ C 137, 6.5.2011, p. 1.

2

---
EX-99.1



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 Fairchild International Corporation (the "Corporation") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), we, George Tsafalas, the President and Chief Executive Officer and Byron Cox, the Secretary, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer, 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 our 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 operations of the Corporation.



George Tsafalas

/s/ George Tsafalas
__________________________
President and Chief Executive
Officer

Byron Cox

/s/ Byron Cox

_________________________
Secretary, Treasurer and
Chief Financial Officer

April 9, 2003
#### In the Matter of the Application of Michael Montario, Appellant, for a Writ of Mandamus against New York Telephone Company, Respondent.

*Matter of Montario*v. *N. Y. Telephone Co.,*181 App. Div. 893, appeal dismissed.

(Argued May 29, 1918;

decided June 14, 1918.)

Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered December 1, 1917, which reversed an order of Special Term granting a motion for a peremptory writ of mandamus to compel the defendant to restore telephone service to the petitioner who maintains a barber shop in the borough of Brooklyn and until the 10th day of March, 1917, was a subscriber of the telephone company under its usual form of contract. On that date the police moved the telephone instrument from his premises and arrested one of his employees on the charge of violating section 986 of the Penal Law by receiving and recording bets on horse races. On being notified by .the police that service had been so interrupted, the telephone company canceled its contract with the relator and declined to re-establish the service without notice to and approval of the police department for the reason that the rule and arrangement that the telephone company has with the police department is that whenever a subscriber’s telephone service is interrupted by the police, the telephone company is notified by the police department and thereupon the contract with the subscriber whose service has been interrupted by the police is canceled by the telephone company and such telephone service is not re-established thereafter until the police department has been notified and has approved of such re-establishment of service. The police department refused to approve the re-establishment of relator’s service and directed the company not to restore it. Thereupon this proceeding was commenced.

*Charles Goldzier*and *Julian V. Gamble*for appellant.

*572
      *Alexander Cameron*and *Charles T. Bussell*for respondent.

*William P. Burr, Corporation Counsel (Terence Farley*of counsel), for police commissioner of city of New York, intervening:

Appeal dismissed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Chase, Pound, McLaughlin, Crane and Andrews, JJ. Dissenting: Hogan, ■ J. Not sitting: His cock, Ch. J.
EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATIONS

I, William A. Shumaker, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Kewaunee Scientific Corporation;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including
its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end
of period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.

Date: March 13, 2008



/s/ William A. ShumakerWilliam A. ShumakerPresident and Chief Executive Officer
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

NORMAN A MCCRARY,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 1:10-cv-00114-MP-GRJ

ADAMS, WALTER A MCNEIL, POLK, STEVEN F SINGER, D WORTHINGTON,

Defendants.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 13, Report and Recommendation of the

Magistrate Judge, recommending that this case be dismissed for failure to state a claim. The

plaintiff filed objections, which the Court has reviewed. After conducting a de novo review of

those portions of the Report and Recommendations to which objection was made, the

undersigned agrees that this case should be dismissed. Despite being warned by the Magistrate

Judge, the plaintiff failed in his Amended Complaint to described specifically how each named

defendant denied him access to the courts and how said lack of access actually impeded his

efforts to pursue a non-frivolous legal claim. Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is adopted and

incorporated herein.

2. This cause is DISMISSED for failure to state a claim for relief, and the Clerk is

directed that this dismissal should be noted on the docket as a strike within the

meaning of 28 U.S.C. §1915 (g).

DONE AND ORDERED this 17th day of June, 2011

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge

Case 1:10-cv-00114-MP-GRJ Document 17 Filed 06/17/11 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

STATE OF FLORIDA, et al

VS CASE NO. 3:10cv91/RV/EMT

U. S. DEPTMENT OF HEALTH 

AND HUMAN SERVICES, et al

REFERRAL AND ORDER

Referred to Judge Vinson on JUNE 29, 2010 

Type of Motion/Pleading PRO SE MOTION BY ROBERT P. SMITH, JR. TO

RECONSIDER THE COURT’S DENIAL (DOC. 37) OF SMITH’S FRCP 24(a) MOTION

(DOCS. 23 & 30) TO INTERVENE AS PARTY DEFENDANT; AND ALTERNATIVELY, 

SMITH’S RENEWED FRCP R. 24(a) MOTION TO INTERVENE (w/supporting Memo)

Filed by: ROBERT P. SMITH, JR. on 6/29/10 Doc. No. 63

( ) Stipulated/Consented/Joint Pleading

RESPONSES:

on Doc. No.

on Doc. No.

WILLIAM M. McCOOL, CLERK OF COURT

 s/Civil Case Manager

Deputy Clerk

ORDER

Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is ORDERED this 1st day of July,

2010, that:

For the reasons stated in prior orders, the requested relief is

DENIED (see docs. 18, 37).

/s/ Roger Vinson

ROGER VINSON

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Entered On Docket: By: 

Rules 58 & 79(a) FRCP or 32(d)(1) & 55 FRCRP

Copies sent to:

Document No. 

Case 3:10-cv-00091-RV-EMT Document 64 Filed 07/01/10 Page 1 of 1
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-6632

DAVID EDWARD CAVALIERI,

 Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA,

 Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at 

Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:18-cv-00356-LMB-JFA)

Submitted: September 28, 2018 Decided: October 11, 2018

Before WYNN and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

David Edward Cavalieri, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

David Cavalieri appeals the district court’s order denying leave to proceed in 

forma pauperis and dismissing without prejudice his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition for 

failure to pay the filing fee. We review for abuse of discretion an order denying a motion 

to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP). Dillard v. Liberty Loan Corp., 626 F.2d 363, 364 

(4th Cir. 1980). We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying 

Cavalieri’s IFP motion and, therefore, did not err in dismissing without prejudice 

Cavalieri’s § 2254 petition. Accordingly, we grant Cavalieri’s motion to proceed IFP in 

this court and affirm the district court’s order. We deny as unnecessary Cavalieri’s 

motion for a certificate of appealability. See Harbison v. Bell, 556 U.S. 180, 183 (2009).

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.

AFFIRMED
#### STATE v. FOUNTAIN

No. 107 PC.

Case below: 13 N.C. App. 107.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 1 February 1972.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 186 (Wednesday, September 26, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 54602-54603]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-55512]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 32


Hunting and Fishing

 CFR Correction

    In Title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 18 to 199, 
revised as of October 1, 2006, in Sec. 32.31, on page 247, under the 
heading ``Minidoka National Wildlife Refuge,'' paragraph D is revised 
to read as follows:


Sec.  32.31  Idaho.

* * * * *

[[Page 54603]]

Minidoka National Wildlife Refuge

* * * * *
    D. Sport Fishing. We allow fishing on the refuge in accordance 
with State regulations and subject to the following conditions:
    1. We allow bank fishing year-round. We only allow vehicle 
access (see Sec.  27.31 of this chapter) to shoreline fishing areas 
on designated routes.
    2. We allow ice fishing in accordance with State regulations. We 
prohibit motor vehicles (see Sec.  27.31 of this chapter) on the 
ice.
    3. We restrict boat fishing to designated areas as specified 
below:
    i. On Lake Walcott, we allow boats from April 1 through 
September 30 within the area marked by buoys and posted signs.
    ii. On Gifford Springs, we allow boats within the area marked by 
posted signs during the open sport fishing season.
    iii. On Smith Springs, we allow boats within the area marked by 
posted signs during the open sport fishing season.
    4. We allow use of float tubes at all times and locations except 
south of the southern buoy line on Lake Walcott.

[FR Doc. 07-55512 Filed 9-25-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
# CE2013349EN.01055002.xml

| 29.11.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 349/550 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.11.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 349/550

---

Wednesday 4 July 2012EU-Russia agreement on trade in parts and components of motor vehicles ***

P7_TA(2012)0285

European Parliament legislative resolution of 4 July 2012 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion of the Agreement between the European Union and the Government of the Russian Federation on trade in parts and components of motor vehicles between the European Union and the Russian Federation (16806/2011 – C7-0517/2011 – 2011/0324(NLE))

2013/C 349 E/30

(Consent)

The European Parliament,

The European Parliament

| — | having regard to the draft Council decision (16806/2011), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the draft Council decision (16806/2011),

| — | having regard to the draft Agreement between the European Union and the Government of the Russian Federation on trade in parts and components of motor vehicles between the European Union and the Russian Federation (16807/2011), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the draft Agreement between the European Union and the Government of the Russian Federation on trade in parts and components of motor vehicles between the European Union and the Russian Federation (16807/2011),

| — | having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 207(4), first subparagraph and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a)(v), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7-0517/2011), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 207(4), first subparagraph and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a)(v), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7-0517/2011),

| — | having regard to Rules 81 and 90(7) of its Rules of Procedure, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Rules 81 and 90(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

| — | having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on International Trade and the opinion of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (A7-0175/2012), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on International Trade and the opinion of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (A7-0175/2012),

| 1. | Consents to conclusion of the Agreement; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Consents to conclusion of the Agreement;

| 2. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the Russian Federation. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the Russian Federation.

---
#### PHILLIPS v. WOXMAN

No. 162 PC.

Case below: 43 N.C. App. 739.

Petition by defendants Banks for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 5 March 1980.
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

GREGORY EUGENE WEBSTER,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No.: 5:10cv95/RS/EMT

ALEX FOSTER, 

Defendant.

__________________________________/

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This cause is before the court upon referral from the clerk. Plaintiff commenced this action

by filing a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Doc. 1). On May 3, 2010, this court

entered an order giving Plaintiff thirty (30) days in which to pay the filing fee or submit a properly

completed motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 5). Plaintiff failed to comply with the order;

1

therefore, on June 8, 2010, the court issued an order requiring Plaintiff to show cause, within twenty

(20) days, why this action should not be dismissed for failure to comply with an order of the court

(Doc. 9). The time for compliance with the show cause order has now elapsed and Plaintiff has not

paid the filing fee or submitted a properly completed motion to proceed in forma pauperis.

Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED:

That this case be DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff’s failure to comply with an

order of the court.

On May 12, 2010, Plaintiff submitted a document titled, “Bay County Jail Inmate Balance Report –

1

Simplified”; however, the document failed to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of

Northern District of Florida in several respects (the document was not signed by Plaintiff, it was not properly captioned

for this court, and it was not in proper form). Therefore, the court directed the clerk to return the document to Plaintiff

without electronic filing (Doc. 8).
Page 2 of 2

At Pensacola, Florida, this 6 day of July 2010. th

/s/ Elizabeth M. Timothy 

ELIZABETH M. TIMOTHY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

Any objections to these proposed findings and recommendations must be filed within

fourteen (14) days after being served a copy thereof. Any different deadline that may appear

on the electronic docket is for the court’s internal use only. A copy of objections shall be

served upon all other parties. Failure to object may limit the scope of appellate review of

factual findings. See 28 U.S.C. § 636; United States v. Roberts, 858 F.2d 698, 701 (11th Cir.

1988).

Case No: 5:10cv95/RS/EMT
Exhibit
99.2








CERTIFICATE
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 (the “Report”) on the Form 10-Q of Plata
Resources, Inc. (the “Company”) for the nine months ended September 30, 2008, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Dexter
R. Caliso, Chief Executive Officer, President and Director, 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 and belief:





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





2. The
information contained in this Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the
Company.

















Dexter R.
Caliso


Chief
Executive Officer,


President
and Director











-1-