alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**CMF** IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 18 - 0668 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. SKYLER TRISTAN SCHNEIDER,

Defendant and Appellant.**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a 30 - day extension of time, and good cause appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellee is granted an extension of time to and including April 1 6 , 2021 , within which to prepare, serve, and file its response brief

.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

March 11 2021

03/11/2021

Case Number: DA 18-0668
463 A.2d 30

#### Commonwealth v. Gaerttner, Appellant.

Argued May 20, 1982.

John Bozza, for appellant; Paul J. Susko, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Before HESTER, McEWEN and JOHNSON, JJ.

Judgment of sentence affirmed.
EXHIBIT
      10.21





**PROMISSORY
      NOTE**








**$75,000.00**
            Omaha,
                Nebraska


February
      10, 2006





Maturity
      Date: **April
      10, 2006**





FOR
      VALUE
      RECEIVED, Gabriel Technologies Corp., a Delaware corporation (“Maker”), promises
      to pay to Keith Feilmeier, an individual residing at 20740 Timberlane Drive,
      Elkhorn, Nebraska 68022, in the county of Douglas, the undersigned maker
      (“Feilmeier”) of the sum of





SEVENTY-FIVE
      THOUSAND AND NO DOLLARS ($75,000.00)





with
      interest on the unpaid balance at the rate of 9.0% per annum from the date
      hereof until maturity, April 10, 2006 (“Maturity Date”). Maker and Feilmeier
      further acknowledge and agree to the following conditions which form a part
      of
      this Note:








1.
            Maker
                may prepay all or any part of the unpaid principal balance, or any
                accumulated interest thereon, at any time prior to the Maturity Date,
                without penalty.





2.
            This
                Note is not collateralized but shall be deemed a full recourse
                Note.





3.
            Make
                hereby waives demand, protest or notice and agrees that extension
                of time
                shall not constitute a waiver of its obligations
                hereunder.








MADE
      AND
      SIGNED this 10 th day of
      February, 2006.





By
      MAKER:





GABRIEL
      TECHNOLOGIES CORP.





By: /s/
      Keith
      Feilmeier


Title: CEO








AGREED
      AND ACCEPTED:





By: /s/
      Keith
      Feilmeier


Keith
      Feilmeier
**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 quarterly report of B&D Food Corp. (the “Company”) for
      the period ending September 30, 2008 on Form 10-Q, as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on November 15, 2008 (the “Report”), I,
      Daniel Ollech, Chief Executive 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:




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




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




By:
            /s/ Daniel Ollech**Daniel Ollech**
              **Chairman of the Board, President**
              **and**
              **Chief Executive Officer**




November
      19, 2009
No. 1,717.

#### FALK, Respondent, *v.*DITTO, Appellant.

*Appeal from District Court, Silver Bow County; B. W. Harney, Judge.*

On motion to dismiss appeal.

Decided November 23, 1903.

*Mr. J. N. Kirie,*for Appellant.

*Mr. J. H. Duffy,*for Respondent.

Per Curiam.

The motion to- dismiss this appeal is hereby sustained, and the appeal is accordingly- dismissed.
# William Morris Stewart: A Featured Biography

**

----

Known as the "silver senator," William Stewart represented the people of Nevada for more than 20 years in the Senate. The Gold Rush brought Stewart west where he amassed a fortune as a mining litigator. He settled in Nevada and entered politics. Stewart was an instrumental figure in the state's 1863 constitutional convention and he became Nevada's first senator in 1865. As a senator, he drafted the final version of the 15th Amendment, and, famously, employed Mark Twain as a personal secretary. In 1875, Stewart retired to private practice in Nevada, only to return to the Senate in 1887. He ran as a Silver Party candidate in 1892 and 1898 because he opposed the Republican Party's position on demonetizing silver, though he ultimately rejoined the Republican caucus in 1899. As chairman of the Committee on Pacific Railroads and the Committee on Indian Affairs, Senator Stewart advocated western interests such as regional economic development, safer mining practices, and land irrigation rights.

All Featured Biographies

        -  Contact 
        -  Leadership & Officers 
        -  Former Senators 
        -  Qualifications & Terms of Service 
        -  Facts & Milestones 
        -  States 

### Organizational Chart 

This chart shows the relationships among Senate leaders and officers who manage the flow of legislative and administrative business in the Senate.  

### Contact Your Senator 

Can't find your senator's name in the list of Senators?  Perhaps he or she is a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, or a Senator in your State Legislature.

### Biographical Directory 

The Directory provides information about former and current senators.

### Related Art 

William Morris Stewart
**EXHIBIT
      32.2   CERTIFICATIONS**







CERTIFICATION  PURSUANT
      TO




18
      U.S.C.
      SECTION 1350




AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO




SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002









I,
      Michael J. Shea, Senior Vice-President and Chief Financial and Accounting
      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, to the best
      of
      my knowledge, the Quarterly Report of Hooper Holmes, Inc., on Form 10-Q for
      the
      quarter ended June 30, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section
      13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the
      information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents,
      in
      all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
      Hooper Holmes, Inc.




Dated:  August
      9,
      2007




/s/
      Michael J. Shea




__________________________




Michael
      J. Shea




Senior
      Vice President and Chief Financial and Accounting Officer




This
      certification shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) or otherwise subject to the
      liability of Section 18 of the Exchange Act. Such certification shall not be
      deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities
      Act
      of 1933 or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically
      incorporates it by reference.




A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      Hooper Holmes, Inc. and will be retained by Hooper Holmes, Inc. and furnished
      to
      the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
      request
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16

- 20194 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

v. DANIE L LARIOS-VILLATORO, Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:15 -CR- 629 -1

Before JONES, WIENER, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Daniel Larios -Villatoro appeals the 18

- month sentence imposed when he pleaded guilty to being in the United States illegally after being deported. He contends that his offense level was improperly increased by eight levels due to a 2011 conviction for illegal reentry. He argues that the previous illegal reentry conviction should not have been treated as an “aggravated felony” because the 1996 Nebraska attempted

- arson conviction that rendered the

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED April 4, 2017 Lyle W. Cayc e Clerk Case: 16-20194 Document: 00513939470 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/04/2017No. 16

- 20194

2 illegal reentry aggravated was itself not an aggravated felony. We need not revisit the underlying Nebraska felony because Larios-Villatoro concedes that the prior illegal reentry offense was an aggravated felony when he pleaded guilty in 2011

. See United States v. Gamboa-Garcia , 620 F.3d 546, 548

- 49 (5th Cir. 2010). Moreover , Lario s- Villatoro fails to show that the Nebraska conviction was not an aggravated felony. He contends that c ould only qualify as an aggravated felony under the residual definition of “crime of violence” found at 18 U.S.C. § 16(b), which he says is unconstitutional in light of Johnson v. United States , 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015) . That contention is foreclosed. See United States v. Gonzalez -Longoria , 831 F.3d 670, 675

- 77 (5th Cir. 2016) (en banc), petition for cert. filed (Sept. 29, 2016) (No. 16

- 6259). The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is granted. We deny, as unnecessary, its alternative motion for an extension of time for briefing, and we affirm the judgment of the district court. Larios- Villatoro moves for a stay of the appeal until the Supreme Court decides whether § 16(b) is unconstitutionally vague in Lynch v. Dimaya , 137 S. Ct. 31 (2016) (granting certiorari). The motion is denied. Gonzalez-Longoria is binding precedent unless overruled by this court en banc or by the Supreme Court. See United States v. Lipscomb , 299 F.3d 303, 313 & n.34 (5th Cir. 2002). A grant of certiorari does not in itself override this court’s precedent. See Wicker v. McCotter , 798 F.2d 155, 157 -58 (5th Cir. 1986). JUDGMENT AFFIRMED; MOTION FOR SUMMARY AF FIRMANCE GRANTED ; MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME DENIED, MOTION TO STAY APPEAL DENIED. Case: 16-20194 Document: 00513939470 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/04/2017
No. 1,821.

#### In re APPLICATION OF T. J. WALSH, ON BEHALF OF JOHN F. FORBIS AND L. ORVIS EVANS, for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, and in Aid Thereof a Writ or certiorari.

*Habeas corpus*— Certiorari.

Decided April 29, 1902.

*Mr. T. J. Walsh,*for Petitioners.

*Mr. John Lindsay,*for Bespondent.

Per Curiam.

Upon examination of the judgment of the district court whereby the petitioners were found guilty of contempt, and in pursuance of which they were committed to the custody of the sheriff of Silver’ Bow county, the court finds that the same is void, in that the said judgment, being’ as for a contempt in the joresence of the court, does not recite any fact showing that a contempt had been committed: It is therefore ordered that the judgment be annulled; that the petitioners be discharged from custody, and that their bail be exonerated.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 95 (Tuesday, May 18, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27797-27798]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-11886]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention


Notice of Meeting

    Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and Control Special 
Emphasis Panel (SEP): Evaluation of Offering and Documenting Influenza 
Vaccination for Nursing Home Residents, Funding Opportunity 
Announcement (FOA) IP10-001; Development, Implementation, and 
Evaluation of a Multi-Component Intervention to Vaccinate Adolescents 
at Risk for Vaccine-Preventable Diseases, FOA IP10-002; Evaluation and 
Impact of a State Law Requiring Mandatory Influenza Vaccination of 
Hospital Employees, FOA IP10-003; and Improving the Translation of the

[[Page 27798]]

Evidence-Based Recommendation of Client Reminder/Recall for Childhood 
Immunization, FOA IP10-004, initial review.
    In accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention (CDC), announces the aforementioned meeting:

    Time and Date: 8 a.m.-5 p.m., June 7, 2010 (Closed).
    Place: Sheraton Gateway Hotel Atlanta Airport, 1900 Sullivan 
Road, Atlanta, Georgia 30337, Telephone: (770) 979-1100.
    Status: The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance 
with provisions set forth in Section 552b(c) (4) and (6), Title 5 
U.S.C., and the Determination of the Director, Management Analysis 
and Services Office, CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92-463.
    Matters To Be Discussed: The meeting will include the initial 
review, discussion, and evaluation of applications received in 
response to ``Evaluation of Offering and Documenting Influenza 
Vaccination for Nursing Home Residents, FOA IP10-001; Development, 
Implementation, and Evaluation of a Multi-Component Intervention to 
Vaccinate Adolescents at Risk for Vaccine-Preventable Diseases, FOA 
IP10-002; Evaluation and Impact of a State Law Requiring Mandatory 
Influenza Vaccination of Hospital Employees, FOA IP10-003; and 
Improving the Translation of the Evidence-Based Recommendation of 
Client Reminder/Recall for Childhood Immunization, FOA IP10-004''.
    For More Information Contact: Gregory Anderson, M.S., M.P.H., 
Scientific Review Officer, CDC, 1600 Clifton Road, NE., Mailstop 
E60, Atlanta, Georgia 30333, Telephone: (404) 498-2293.
    The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been 
delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices pertaining 
to announcements of meetings and other committee management 
activities, for both CDC and the Agency for Toxic Substances and 
Disease Registry.

    Dated: May 11, 2010.
Elaine L. Baker,
Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease 
Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2010-11886 Filed 5-17-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
O rder filed January 20, 2022



### In The 

# Eleventh Court of Appeals

__________

No. 11

- 21

- 00 145

- CR

__________

DANI E L RAY GARCIA , Appellant

V.

THE S TATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 1 0 6 t h District Court
Gaines County, Texas
Tri al Court Cause No. 19

- 5086

O R D E R

T h is appeal has be come stalled due to the failure of Cara B. McLeod , the court
reporter for the 1 0 6 t h District Court, to prepare and file in this court the reporter’s

record , which w as originally due on October 20, 2021

. The appellant, who
represents himself in this appeal, has filed motions complaining of the delay in the
filing of the reporter’s record, and he has also filed other motions in this court that
require this court to review portions of the reporter’s record.2 McLeod filed three prior requests for an extension of time to file the rep orter’s

record in this case

. W hen w e granted her th ird request on December 20, 2021 , we directed that the reporter’s record be filed on or before January 18, 2022

. McLeod

has now filed her fourth request for an extension of time to file the reporter’s record.
In her recent request, McLeod states that she and family members currently have
COVID. She also indicates that the reporter’s record is expected to be approximately
2,500 p ages and cover seven days of testimony. Given the extenuating
circumstances in this case, we grant McLeod’s fourth request for extension. We
note, h owever, that we are not inclined to consider any further extensions from

McLeod in this case.
By this o rder, Cara B. McLeod i s ORDERED to file the reporter’s record

in this cause on or before 3 :00 p.m. on February 17 , 20 22 . If the reporter’s record

has not been filed in this court by 3:00 p.m. on February 17, 2022

, McLeod is ordered

to appear in person at that time in the courtroom of the Eleventh Court of Appeals
in Eastland, Texas, to explain the delay.

PER CURIAM

January 20, 2022
Do not publish. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47.2(b).

Panel consists of: Bailey , C.J., Trotter , J., and Williams , J.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 14 (Friday, January 22, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3730-3731]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-1186]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9105-3]


Good Neighbor Environmental Board; Notification of Public 
Advisory Committee Teleconference

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notification of Public Advisory Committee Teleconference.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-
463, notice is hereby given that the Good Neighbor Environmental Board 
(GNEB) will hold a public teleconference on February 4, 2010 from 1 
p.m. to 3 p.m. Eastern Standard Time.

[[Page 3731]]

The meeting is open to the public. For further information regarding 
the teleconference and background materials, please contact Dolores 
Wesson at the number listed below.
    Background: GNEB is a Federal advisory committee chartered under 
the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92463. GNEB provides 
advice and recommendations to the President and Congress on 
environmental and infrastructure issues along the U.S. border with 
Mexico. Purpose of Meeting: The purpose of this teleconference is to 
discuss and approve the Good Neighbor Environmental Board's Thirteenth 
Report.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: If you wish to make oral comments or submit 
written comments to the Board, please contact Dolores Wesson at least 
five days prior to the meeting.
    General Information: Additional information concerning the GNEB can 
be found on its Web site at http://www.epa.gov/ocem/gneb.
    Meeting Access: For information on access or services for 
individuals with disabilities, please contact Dolores Wesson at (202) 
564-1351 or e-mail at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e4938197978b8aca808b888b968197a4819485ca838b92"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a9deccdadac6c787cdc6c5c6dbccdae9ccd9c887cec6df">[email protected]</span></a>. To request accommodation 
of a disability, please contact Dolores Wesson at least 10 days prior 
to the meeting to give EPA as much time as possible to process your 
request.

    Dated: January 12, 2010.
Dolores Wesson,
Designated Federal Officer.
[FR Doc. 2010-1186 Filed 1-21-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
**Exhibit 32.1****Certification**     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the undersigned officer of Bowater Incorporated (the “Company”),hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge, that the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q forthe quarter ended June 30, 2006 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company.   Dated:August 4, 2006 /s/ David J. Paterson     Name: David J. Paterson
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

 The Honorable Myron H. Bright, Senior Circuit Judge for the United **

States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, sitting by designation.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JUANA ACOSTA DE LEON,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER JR., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 08-73253

Agency No. A077-115-491

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Argued and Submitted November 8, 2012

Pasadena, California

Before: BRIGHT, GRABER, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges. ** 

Petitioner Juana Acosta de Leon petitions for review from the Board of

Immigration Appeals’ ("BIA") entry of a final order of removal and denial of

cancellation of removal. Reviewing de novo "[l]egal questions concerning the

FILED

JAN 31 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
 The BIA has recently disapproved of our decision in Garcia-Quintero. In 1

re Reza-Murillo, 25 I. & N. Dec. 296 (B.I.A. 2010). But this case presents no

opportunity to reconsider the viability of Garcia-Quintero because the BIA has not

applied its new rule here. See INS v. Orlando Ventura, 537 U.S. 12 (2002) (per

curiam).

2

meaning of the immigration laws," Aguilar Gonzalez v. Mukasey, 534 F.3d 1204,

1208 (9th Cir. 2008), we deny the petition.

The BIA correctly held that Petitioner had not been "admitted in any status"

under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a) because, as Petitioner acknowledges, she never entered

the country lawfully and therefore cannot meet the statutory definition of

"admitted," 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(13)(A). 

Although we have held that being accepted into certain programs providing

immigration benefits constituted being "admitted in any status," see Garcia v.

Holder, 659 F.3d 1261 (9th Cir. 2011); Garcia-Quintero v. Gonzales, 455 F.3d

1006 (9th Cir. 2006), those cases are not applicable here. Petitioner here merely 1

applied for temporary status under the Special Agricultural Workers program

defined at 8 U.S.C. § 1160(a). Cf., e.g., Garcia-Quintero, 455 F.3d at 1015

(assessing whether acceptance into the Family Unity Program ("FUP") rendered

the petitioner "admitted in any status"). The fact that Petitioner received a work

permit and some limited right to travel during the period between her application

and the agency’s determination that her application was fraudulent does not change
3

the conclusion. See Guevara v. Holder, 649 F.3d 1086, 1093–94 (9th Cir. 2011)

("In Garcia-Quintero, our decision to allow FUP participants to qualify as admitted

in any status was not based upon the fact that FUP participants were allowed to

work. Our decision instead focused on the aliens’ acceptance into the FUP."

(citation omitted)).

Petition DENIED.
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JULY 14, 2022

NO. 03

- 22

- 00359

- CV

Joseph McCullough , Appellant

v.

Danielle Weston, in her Representative Capacity as Trustee of the Round Rock Independent School District , Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 425TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY
BEFORE CHIE F JUSTICE BYRNE, JUSTICES TRIANA AND SMITH
DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION
OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE BYRNE

Thi s is an appeal from the order issued by the tr i a l court on June 15, 2022

. Having reviewed the

record

, it appears that the C ourt lacks jurisdiction over the appeal

. Therefore, the C our t

dismisses the appea l for want of jurisdiction

. The appellant shall pay all costs relating to this

appeal, both in this Court and in the court below.