alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7943
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus KENNETH PIERRE FORD, a/k/a K-9, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CR-91-429-A) Submitted: March 20, 2003 Decided: March 27, 2003 Before WILLIAMS and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenneth Pierre Ford, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Chestnut, Jerry R. DeMaio, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Kenneth Pierre Ford appeals from the district court’s order denying his request for an order directing the Bureau of Prisons to permit Ford and his co-defendant to serve their sentences at the same facility. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. Ford , No. CR-91-429-A (E.D. Va. Nov. 27, 2002). We di spense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Case 2:17-mj-07545-BSB Document 1 Filed 11/04/17 Page 1 of 4
Case 2:17-mj-07545-BSB Document 1 Filed 11/04/17 Page 2 of 4
Case 2:17-mj-07545-BSB Document 1 Filed 11/04/17 Page 3 of 4
Case 2:17-mj-07545-BSB Document 1 Filed 11/04/17 Page 4 of 4
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

KEITH GARNER,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 511 EAL 2021

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

KEITH GARNER,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 512 EAL 2021

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

KEITH GARNER,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 513 EAL 2021

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court[ 511 EAL 2021, 512 EAL 2021, 513 EAL 2021 and 514 EAL 2021 ]

- 2

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

KEITH GARNER,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 514 EAL 2021

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 19th day of April, 2022

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
#### Gary Jerome RIGGS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

Nos. 01-94-01049-CR, 01-94-01062-CR.

Court of Appeals of Texas, Houston (1st Dist.).

Feb. 16, 1995.

Ken Goode, Houston, for appellant.

John B. Holmes, Houston, for State.

Before HUTSON-DUNN, O’CONNOR and WILSON, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The trial court convicted appellant, Gary Jerome Riggs, of two aggravated robberies *362after appellant pleaded guilty to both offenses. After preparation of a pre-sentence investigation report and hearing, the court assessed punishment at 49-years imprisonment for each offense.

Appellant’s court-appointed counsel has filed a brief in which he has stated in his opinion that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and advancing an arguable ground of error on appeal. *Gainous v. State,*436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex.Crim.App.1969); *see also High v. State,*573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex.Crim.App.1978); *Jackson v. State,*485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex.Crim.App.1974).

A copy of counsel’s brief has been delivered to appellant, and appellant was advised that he had a right to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed within 30 days.

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief, and we conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find nothing else in the record that might arguably support the appeal.

The judgment is affirmed.
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                           AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with this Quarterly Report of Fit For Business International (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending December 31, 2007, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Sandra Wendt, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certifies to the best of
his knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     1.   Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ending December
     31, 2007, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for
     the period ending December 31, 2007, fairly presents, in all material
     respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Fit For
     Business International.

Dated: January 24, 2008


FIT FOR BUSINESS INTERNATIONAL

By: /s/ Sandra Wendt
-----------------------
Sandra Wendt
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 Derby Resources, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2009 (the Report), I, Frank Pioppi, 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: 1) The Report fully complies with the requirement 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 Company's financial position and results of operations.  Date: November 9, 2009 /s/ Frank Pioppi Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.3




CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Anthony J. Branca, Chief Financial Officer of ICON Capital Corp., the Manager of the Registrant, in connection with the Quarterly Report of ICON Leasing Fund Eleven, LLC (the “LLC”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Quarterly Report”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 
 1.
The Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the LLC.
 
 
 Date: May 13, 2011


/s/Anthony J. Branca__


Anthony J. Branca


Chief Financial Officer


ICON Capital Corp.


Manager of ICON Leasing Fund Eleven, LLC
```
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 17 (Thursday, January 25, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2329-2330]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1227]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------1

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
    \1\ The ICC Termination Act of 1995, Pub. L. 104-88, 109 Stat. 
803 (the Act), which was enacted on December 29, 1995, and took 
effect on January 1, 1996, abolished the Interstate Commerce 
Commission (ICC) and transferred certain functions and proceedings 
to the Surface Transportation Board (Board). Section 204(b)(1) of 
the Act provides, in general, that proceedings pending before the 
ICC on the effective date of that legislation shall be decided under 
the law in effect prior to January 1, 1996, insofar as they involve 
functions retained by the Act. This notice relates to a proceeding 
that was pending with the ICC prior to January 1, 1996, and to 
functions that are subject to Board jurisdiction pursuant to 49 
U.S.C. 10901. Therefore, this notice applies to the law in effect 
prior to the Act, and citations are to the former sections of the 
statute, unless otherwise indicated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Finance Docket No. 32850]

Tulsa-Sapulpa Union Railway Company, L.L.C.; Acquisition and 
Operation Exemption; Union Holding Corp.

    Tulsa-Sapulpa Union Railway Company, L.L.C., a noncarrier, has 
filed a notice of exemption to acquire from Union Holding Corp., 
formerly Tulsa-Sapulpa Union Railway Company, and operate approximately 
13 miles of rail line from milepost 0.0 at Tulsa to the end of the line 
at milepost 10.0 at Sapulpa, in Tulsa and Creek Counties, OK. The 
parties stated that they expected to consummate the transaction on or 
about December 29, 1995.2

    \2\ Pursuant to 49 CFR 1150.32(b), this transaction could not 
actually be consummated until effectiveness of the exemption on 
January 2, 1996--7 days after the filing date of the notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Any comments must be filed with: Office of the Secretary, Case 
Control Branch, Surface Transportation Board, 1201 Constitution Ave., 
N.W., Washington, DC 20423. A copy of any pleading filed with the Board 
should be served on applicant's representative: Robert A. Curry, 2400 
First Place Tower, 15 East Fifth Street, Tulsa, OK 74103-4391. 

[[Page 2330]]

    This notice is filed under 49 CFR 1150.31. If the notice contains 
false or misleading information, the exemption is void ab initio. 
Petitions to revoke the exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10505(d) (now 49 
U.S.C. 10502(d)) may be filed at any time. The filing of a petition to 
revoke will not automatically stay the transaction.

    Decided: January 19, 1996.

    By the Board, David M. Konschnik, Director, Office of 
Proceedings.
Vernon A. Williams,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-1227 Filed 1-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915-00-P
```
exv10w4



 





Exhibit 10.4




Director Compensation Summary



Persons elected at our annual meetings as directors and who hold no executive office with us or any
of our affiliates are entitled to receive an annual retainer of $20,000 and a further retainer of
$10,000 if such director acts as Chairman of our Audit Committee or $7,500 if such director acts as
Chairman of our Compensation Committee or our Nominating & Corporate Governance Committee.
Effective September 12, 2006, the non-employee Co-Chairman of our board of directors is entitled to
receive an additional annual retainer of $30,000 (payable 50% in cash and 50% in our common
shares). Additionally, each non-executive director is entitled to receive an attendance fee of
$1,000 for each meeting of the directors or any committee thereof, and to be reimbursed for
reasonable fees and expenses incurred in connection with his or her service as a director. With
the exception of the $30,000 non-employee Co-Chairman retainer, such retainers and fees paid to
directors are provided, at the director’s election, 50% in cash compensation with the remaining 50%
payable in our common shares, or 100% payable in our common shares. Non-employee directors are
granted 12,500 restricted share units upon joining our board of directors. The restricted share
units vest over three years from the date of grant. As restricted share units vest, directors are
issued an equivalent number of our common shares.
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 14

- 00247

- CR

Marcus Edward Click

v.

The State of Texas §

§

§

§

§ From the 355th District Court

o f Hood Co unty (CR12270 )

February 26 , 2015

Opinion by Justice Meier

(nfp)



### JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that

there was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of

the trial court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By /s/ Bill Meier

Justice Bill Meier
Exhibit
32.1



ROYAL
ENERGY RESOURCES, INC. FORM 10-K

FOR
THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED AUGUST 31, 2012

CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I,
Jacob Roth, certify that



|1 |  | I am the President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Royal Energy
Resources, Inc.
|- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|2 |  | Attached to this certification is Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended August 31, 2012,
a periodic report (the “periodic report”) filed by the issuer with the Securities Exchange Commission pursuant to
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”), which contains financial statements.
|- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|3 |  | I hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that.
|- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| |  | The periodic report containing the financial statements fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act, and
| |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| |  | The information in the periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the issuer for the periods presented.
| |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------







|                         |                                      
|------------------------ | -------------------------------------
|Date:  December
14, 2012 | By: /s/
    Jacob Roth               
|                         | Jacob
    Roth President, CEO and CFO
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-1265

THE CLARK CONSTRUCTION GROUP, INCORPORATED, Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
MODERN MOSAIC LTD; ST. PAUL FIRE AND MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY, Successor in Interest to: Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Underwriters, Incorporated, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Marvin J. Garbis, District Judge. (CA-00- 2331-MJG) Argued: September 26, 2001 Decided: October 17, 2001 Before WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
ARGUED: David Bruce Stratton, JORDAN, COYNE & SAVITS, L.L.P., Washington, D.C., for Appellant. Edward C. Bacon, BACON, THORNTON & PALMER, L.L.P., Lanham, Maryland, for Appellee Modern Mosaic;Stephen Edward Marshall, VENABLE, BAETJER & HOWARD, L.L.P., Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee St. Paul Fire. ON BRIEF: David P. Durbin, JORDAN, COYNE & SAVITS, L.L.P., Washington, D.C., for Appellant.2 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Clark Construction Group, Inc. (Clark) appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Modern Mosaic, Ltd. (Modern), a subcontractor of Clark, with respect to Clark’s claim that, pursuant to a subcontract agreement between Clark and Modern, Modern is obligated to indemnify it for litigation and settlement expenses that it incurred in connection with the personal injury of Jeffery Glazer, an employee of a lower-tier subcontractor of Modern. Clark also appeals the district court’s Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal of its related indemnity claim against St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). Upon reviewing the parties’ briefs and the applicable law, and having had the benefit of oral argument, we find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Clark Constr. Co. v. Modern Mosaic, Ltd. , No. 00-CV-2331 (D.Md. Nov. 30, 2000 & Jan. 29, 2001).

AFFIRMED
EXHIBIT 32.7



CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF

UCFH II FINANCE, INC.

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



In connection with the quarterly report of UCFH II Finance, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending July 3, 2005 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John R. Sprouls certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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 operations of the Company.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated: August 15, 2005



By:

/s/ JOHN R. SPROULSJohn R. SproulsPresident (Principal Executive Officer)




36
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 96 (Thursday, May 16, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 24837]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-12493]



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

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT


Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory Committee; Cancellation of Open 
Committee Meeting

    According to the provisions of section 10 of the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), notice is hereby given that the meeting 
of the Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory Committee scheduled for 
Thursday, May 16, 1996, has been canceled.
    Information on other meetings can be obtained by contacting the 
Committee's Secretary, Office of Personnel Management, Federal 
Prevailing Rate Advisory Committee, Room 5559, 1900 E Street, NW., 
Washington, DC 20415, (202) 606-1500.

    Dated: May 8, 1996.
Phyllis G. Foley,
Chief, Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory Committee.
[FR Doc. 96-12493 Filed 5-14-96; 2:46 pm]
BILLING CODE 6325-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 84 (Tuesday, April 30, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 19089]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10573]



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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Antitrust Division


National Cooperative Research Notification; Center for Emissions 
Control, Inc.; Correction

    In notice document 95-7180 concerning Cable Television 
Laboratories, Inc., appearing in the issue of Thursday, March 23, 1995 
at 60 Fed. Reg. 15307, make the following corrections: In the third 
column; third paragraph; the notice should read ``On August 8, 1988 
CableLabs filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of 
the Act''.
    The Department of Justice published a notice in the Federal 
Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on September 7, 1988 (53 
Red. Reg. 34593). The last notification as to changes in membership and 
additional activities was filed on September 26, 1994. A notice was 
published in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act 
on March 20, 1995 (60 FR 14779).
Constance K. Robinson,
Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 96-10573 Filed 4-29-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 94 (Tuesday, May 14, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24309-24310]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-11987]



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


FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Notice of Proposals To Engage in Permissible Nonbanking 
Activities or To Acquire Companies That Are Engaged in Permissible 
Nonbanking Activities

    The companies listed in this notice have given notice under section 
4 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843) (BHC Act) and 
Regulation Y, (12 CFR part 225) engage de novo, or to acquire or 
control voting securities or assets of a company that engages either 
directly or through a subsidiary or other company, in a nonbanking 
activity that is listed in Sec. 225.25 of Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.25) 
or that the Board has determined by Order to be closely

[[Page 24310]]

related to banking and permissible for bank holding companies. Unless 
otherwise noted, these activities will be conducted throughout the 
United States.
    Each notice is available for inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank 
indicated. Once the notice has been accepted for processing, it will 
also be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of 
Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the 
question whether the proposal complies with the standards of section 4 
of the BHC Act, including whether consummation of the proposal can 
``reasonably be expected to produce benefits to the public, such as 
greater convenience, increased competition, or gains in efficiency, 
that outweight possible adverse effects, such as undue concentration of 
resources, decreased or unfair competition, conflicts of interests, or 
unsound banking practices'' (12 U.S.C. 1843). Any request for a hearing 
on this question must be accompanied by a statement of the reasons a 
written presentation would not suffice in lieu of a hearing, 
identifying specifically any questions of fact that are in dispute, 
summarizing the evidence that would be presented at a hearing, and 
indicating how the party commenting would be aggrieved by approval of 
the proposal.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding the applications must be 
received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of 
Governors not later than May 28, 1996.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (Kenneth R. Binning, 
Director, Bank Holding Company) 101 Market Street, San Francisco, 
California 94105:
    1. BankAmerica Corporation, San Francisco, California; to engage 
de novo through its subsidiary, BankAmerica Community Development 
Corporation, San Francisco, California, in community development 
activities, pursuant to Sec. 225.25(b)(6) of the Board's Regulation 
Y.

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, May 8, 1996.
William W. Wiles,
Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 96-11987 Filed 5-13-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-M
### IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10

- 08

- 00144

- CR

SEAN CAREY LYNN

, Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

, Appellee

From the 40th District Court

Ellis County, Texas

Trial Court No. 32417CR

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Sean Carey Lynn was convicted of Failu re to Register as a Sex Offender and

sentenced to 12 years in prison. T EX

. C ODE C RIM

. P ROC

. A NN . art. 62.102 (Vernon 2006 ).

We affirm.

In his sole issue, Lynn contends the evidence is insufficient to support the

conviction. He relies solely on the "rea sonable hypothesis analytical construct" as

support for why the evidence was insufficient. That construct for determining the

sufficiency of the evidence was abrogated by the Court of Criminal Appeals in 1991.

Geesa v. State , 820 S.W.2d 154, 159, 161 (Te x. Crim. App. 1991). Because Lynn argues noLynn v. State Page 2

other reason in support of his issue that the evidence is insufficient, his issue is

overruled.

Accordingly, the trial court’s judgment is affirmed.

TOM GRAY

Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice G ray,

Justice Reyna, and

Justice Davis

Affirmed

Opinion delivered and filed March 25 , 2009

Do not publish

[CR25]