alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

444444444444

NO. 10-0928

444444444444

RAUL ERNESTO LOAISIGA, M.D., AND RAUL ERNESTO LOAISIGA, M.D., P.A.,

PETITIONERS,

v.

GUADALUPE CERDA, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT FRIEND OF MARISSA CERDA, A

MINOR, AND CINDY VELEZ, RESPONDENTS

4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444

ON PETITION FOR REVIEW FROM THE

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444

JUSTICE WILLETT, concurring in part and dissenting in part.

I join today’s well-reasoned decision save one quibble: Because I find Parts V.B and VI.B

of the Court’s opinion advisory—and thus inadvisable—I respectfully dissent from those sections.

Today the Court clarifies the standard for defining a healthcare liability claim (HCLC) and

remands so the trial court can apply our new guidance. So far so good. If the trial court concludes

these claims are not HCLCs, then no expert report is necessary. The Court, however, proceeds to

(p)review the reports’ sufficiency just in case the trial court goes the other way.

This analysis is premature. The trial court hasn’t even applied our new test to determine

whether these are HCLCs in the first place. I wouldn’t short-circuit its review by pre-deciding an

issue that might never need deciding at all and that might benefit immensely from lower-court

analysis.
As a judiciary, our constitutional role dictates that we decide concrete cases and not dispense

contingent advice. “[T]he judicial power does not embrace the giving of advisory opinions,” and 1

prudent development of the law requires that courts refrain from speculating on situations that may

never arise.

The Court’s motivation, of course, is commendable: to advance judicial efficiency and

squeeze out inordinate delay. But unless and until the lower courts conclude that plaintiffs’ claims

are indeed HCLCs, I would not suggest a premature predecision that presupposes—if not

predestines—a certain lower-court path.

_____________________________________

Don R. Willett

Justice

OPINION DELIVERED: August 31, 2012

Firemen’s Ins. Co. of Newark, N.J. v. Burch, 442 S.W.2d 331, 333 (Tex. 1968).

1

2
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2582 Filed: 06/18/19 Entered: 06/18/19 14:29:02 Page 1 of

 4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2582 Filed: 06/18/19 Entered: 06/18/19 14:29:02 Page 2 of

 4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2582 Filed: 06/18/19 Entered: 06/18/19 14:29:02 Page 3 of

 4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2582 Filed: 06/18/19 Entered: 06/18/19 14:29:02 Page 4 of

 4
Case: 19-30088    Doc# 2493    Filed: 06/12/19    Entered: 06/12/19 09:14:06    Page 1 of1
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2551 Filed: 06/14/19 Entered: 06/14/19 16:01:16 Page 1 of

4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2551 Filed: 06/14/19 Entered: 06/14/19 16:01:16 Page 2 of

4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2551 Filed: 06/14/19 Entered: 06/14/19 16:01:16 Page 3 of

4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2551 Filed: 06/14/19 Entered: 06/14/19 16:01:16 Page 4 of

4
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

NOVEMBER 17, 2010

JOHN LEY

CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 09-16482

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 09-00045-CR-HL-5

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JUAN PABLO HERRERA-BARAJAS,

Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Georgia

_________________________

(November 17, 2010)

Before DUBINA, Chief Judge, TJOFLAT and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Elizabeth Lane, appointed counsel for Juan Herrera-Barajas, filed a motion
to withdraw on appeal supported by a brief prepared pursuant to Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967). Our

independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the

relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the

entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is

GRANTED, and Herrera-Barajas’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.

2
- Home
      - Grants          - Project Grants
        - Technical Assistance Grants
        - Curriculum Adaptation & Training Grant
        - Strategic Initiatives Grants
        - Education Support Program
        - Funding Toolkit 
      - News
      - Grantee Spotlights
      - Priority Investment Areas          - Court Pandemic Response and Recovery Grant Program 
      - Grant Management
      - About SJI          - Board of Directors
        - Executive Director
        - Past Members
        - SJI Budget 

                  - Home
                  - Grants                      - Project Grants
                    - Technical Assistance Grants
                    - Curriculum Adaptation & Training Grant
                    - Strategic Initiatives Grants
                    - Education Support Program
                    - Funding Toolkit 
                  - News
                  - Grantee Spotlights
                  - Priority Investment Areas                      - Court Pandemic Response and Recovery Grant Program 
                  - Grant Management
                  - About SJI                      - Board of Directors
                    - Executive Director
                    - Past Members
                    - SJI Budget 

### Supporting the Nation's Judicial System & the Public it Serves

#### 					ANNOUNCEMENT				

## How to Boost Court Turnout, Cut Pretrial Detention

Register today! Online Webinar Event on **September 14th, 2023, at 1:00PM EST.** Missed court appearances are leading causes of warrants and jail time in the U.S. Plus, they contribute to:

📊 Racial inequities in arrests🕗 Pretrial process delays💵 Huge court system costs

But this doesn’t have to be our reality. Sign up to get the latest research from experts—and their practical approaches to turning the tide.

Register here: Webinar Registration – Zoom

#### LATEST NEWS & ANNOUNCEMENTS

                  -  Sixteen State Courts Participate in Groundbreaking Workshop for Racial Justice Education  Read More**   
                  -  New Resource: The Rural Justice Collaborative Digest for June 2024  Read More**   
                  -  SJI Board Awards FY 2024 Third Quarter Grants  Read More**   
                  -  SJI Executive Director, Jonathan Mattiello, Congressional Briefing Panelist on Capitol Hill  Read More**   

#### CONTACT US

          contact@sji.gov
                       Tel: 703.660.4979

#### HEADQUARTERS

                       State Justice Institute
                       12700 Fair Lakes Circle, Suite 340
                       Fairfax, VA 22033         

Website design by Segue Technologies, Inc.

            -  ** 
            -  **  **
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                         381,344
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   77,491
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               458,835
<PP&E>                                      11,071,027
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,607,018
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,922,844
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          369,713
<BONDS>                                      5,128,642
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,424,489
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,922,844
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               819,402
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               559,496
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             357,952
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (98,046)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (98,046)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
CERTIFICATION





Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, for the purposes of section 1350 of chapter 63 of title 18 of the United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, in his capacity as an officer of Globe Specialty Metals, Inc. (“Globe”), that, to his knowledge, the Annual Report of Globe on Form 10-K for the period ended June 30, 2010, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Globe. This written statement is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to such Form 10-K. A signed original of this statement has been provided to Globe and will be retained by Globe and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





Date: September 28, 2010
By:
/s/ Jeff BradleyJeff BradleyChief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)Date: September 28, 2010
By:
/s/ Malcolm AppelbaumMalcolm AppelbaumChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)
#### In the Matter of the Application of Carrie E. White for a peremptory writ of *mandamus.*

Motion denied on default, with ten dollars costs.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 100 (Tuesday, May 25, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29322-29323]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-12522]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Federal Advisory Committee; Department of Defense Wage Committee; 
Closed Meeting

AGENCY: Civilian Personnel Management Service (Wage and Salary 
Division), DoD.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the provisions of section 10 of Public Law 92-463, 
the Federal Advisory Committee Act, DoD announces the Department of 
Defense Wage Committee will meet in closed session on June 1, 2010, in 
Rosslyn, Virginia.

DATES: The meeting will be held on June 1, 2010, at 10 a.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at 1400 Key Boulevard, Level A, 
Room A101, Rosslyn, Virginia 22209-5144.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Craig Jerabek, Designated Federal 
Officer for the Department of Defense Wage Committee, 1400 Key 
Boulevard, Suite A105, Arlington, Virginia 22209-5144, Telephone: (703) 
696-1735, Fax: (703) 696-5472, E-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#4b28392a222c65212e392a292e200b283b26386524382f65262227"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="7112031018165f1b14031013141a3112011c025f1e02155f1c181d">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the provisions of section 10(d) of the 
Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972, Public Law 92-463, it is hereby 
determined that every Wage Committee meeting concerns matters listed in 
5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(2) and 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4), and that, accordingly, the 
meeting will be closed to the public.

Purpose of Meeting

    The Committee will receive, review, and consider wage survey 
specifications, wage survey data, local wage survey committee reports 
and recommendations, and wage schedules derived there from.

Request for Waiver

    Due to unforeseen difficulties, the Designated Federal Officer was 
unable to process the Federal Register notice for the June 1, 2010, 
meeting of the Department of Defense Wage Committee, as required by 41 
CFR 102-3.150(a). Accordingly, the Committee Management Officer for the 
Department of Defense, pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.150(b), waives the 15-
calendar day notification requirement.


[[Page 29323]]


    Dated: May 20, 2010.
Mitchell S. Bryman,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2010-12522 Filed 5-24-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
**Exhibit 31.1**
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
I, Craig K. Tagawa, certify that:
1.     I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of American SharedHospital Services;
2.     Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
3.     Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4.     The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared; and
b) [Paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8238 and 34-47986;] and
c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and
d) Disclosed in this report any changes in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during registrant’s most recent fiscalquarter (or the fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting;
5.     The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent function):
a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely 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 otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controlsover financial reporting.
November 14, 2003     /s/ Craig K. Tagawa       Craig K. Tagawa     Chief Financial Officer
13
* 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 September 8, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-51292 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JULIO HERNANDEZ-HERNANDEZ, also known as Jose Alberto Hernandez-Hernandez, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:05-CR-1180-ALL

-------------------- Before KING, GARWOOD, and JOLLY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Julio HernandezHernandez raises arguments that are foreclosed by AlmendarezTorres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4703 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4703

  To amend the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 relating to 
 determinations with respect to efforts of foreign countries to reduce 
  demand for commercial sex acts under the minimum standards for the 
                      elimination of trafficking.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 21, 2014

 Mr. Hultgren (for himself and Mr. Smith of New Jersey) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 relating to 
 determinations with respect to efforts of foreign countries to reduce 
  demand for commercial sex acts under the minimum standards for the 
                      elimination of trafficking.

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

SECTION 1. AMENDMENT RELATING TO DETERMINATIONS WITH RESPECT TO EFFORTS 
              OF FOREIGN COUNTRIES TO REDUCE DEMAND FOR COMMERCIAL SEX 
              ACTS UNDER THE MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR THE ELIMINATION OF 
              TRAFFICKING.

    (a) In General.--Section 108 of the Trafficking Victims Protection 
Act of 2000 (22 U.S.C. 7106) is amended by adding at the end the 
following new subsection:
    ``(c) Criteria With Respect to Commercial Sex Acts.--In 
determinations under subsection (b)(12)(A), if the government of the 
country has the authority to prohibit the purchase of commercial sex 
acts and fails to do so, such failure to prohibit the purchase of 
commercial sex acts shall be deemed to be a failure on the part of the 
government to make serious and sustained efforts to reduce the demand 
for commercial sex acts, notwithstanding other efforts made by the 
government to reduce the demand for commercial sex acts.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) takes 
effect on the date of the enactment of this Act and applies with 
respect to determinations under subsection (b)(12)(A) of section 108 of 
the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 that are made on or 
after such date of enactment.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 32(i)
-------------

                           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 Monroe Bancorp (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Mark D. Bradford,
President and 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; and

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




/s/ Mark D. Bradford
----------------------------------
Mark D. Bradford
President, Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
November 7, 2008


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350 and is not being filed for any other purpose.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-10303

Summary Calendar

MICHAEL ANTHONY DAVIS,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

KAREN L. COLLINS;TERRI L. LASSITER; CHRISEWOLFE, Assistant United

States Attorney; MICHAEL J. WORLEY, Assistant United States Attorney,

Defendants-Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:12-CV-92

Before CLEMENT, ELROD, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Michael Anthony Davis, federal prisoner # 33896-177, appeals the district

court’s dismissal of his pro se civil rights complaint. Davis has been barred from

proceeding in forma pauperis (IFP) under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) because, on at

least three prior occasions while incarcerated, he brought a civil action or appeal

in a court of the United States that was dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for

failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. See Davis v. United

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

September 11, 2012

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

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.

Case: 12-10303 Document: 00511982641 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/11/2012
No. 12-10303

States, 4:11-CV-00064-Y (N.D. Tex. July 6, 2011) (unpublished) (dismissing civil

complaint as malicious); Davis v. Baker, 251 F. App’x 899 (5th Cir. 2007)

(unpublished) (dismissing appeal from dismissal of civil rights complaint as

frivolous and barring Davis from proceeding IFP in the future under § 1915(g));

Davis v. Baker, 4:06-CV-886 (N.D. Tex. Jan. 10, 2007) (unpublished) (dismissing

civil rights complaint as frivolous); Davis v. Baker, No. 4:07-CV-068-A (N.D. Tex.

May 3, 2007) (unpublished) (dismissing civil rights complaint as frivolous); and

Davis v. Inmate Trust Fund, No. 1:03-cv-00732-SS (W.D. Tex. Oct. 16, 2003)

(unpublished) (dismissing civil rights complaint for failure to state a claim upon

which relief may be granted). Further, Davis has not alleged that he is “under

imminent danger of serious physical injury.” § 1915(g).

Accordingly, Davis’s IFP status is decertified, and the appeal is dismissed. 

Davis has 15 days from the date of this opinion to pay the full appellate filing fee

to the clerk of the district court, should he wish to reinstate his appeal. 

IFP DECERTIFIED; APPEAL DISMISSED.

2

Case: 12-10303 Document: 00511982641 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/11/2012