alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Montez WOODS, Defendant/Appellant.

No. 64371.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.

May 17, 1994.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied June 15, 1994.

Application to Transfer Denied Aug. 15, 1994.

Charles M. Shaw, James Jay Knappenber-ger, Joseph Howlett, Shaw, Howlett & Knap-penberger, Clayton, for defendant, appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., F. Martin Dajani, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for plaintiff, respondent.

Before SIMON, P.J., and SMITH and PUDLOWSKI, JJ.

*652
      *ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals his convictions for murder in the second degree, kidnapping, and two counts of armed criminal action. No error of law appears and the jury verdict is supported by the evidence. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. The parties have been furnished with a statement setting forth our reasons for affirmance.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 30.25(b).
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 102 (Friday, May 24, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 26180]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-13188]



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


FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION

Ocean Freight Forwarder License; Applicants

    Notice is hereby given that the following applicants have filed 
with the Federal Maritime Commission applications for licenses as ocean 
freight forwarders pursuant to section 19 of the Shipping Act of 1984 
(46 U.S.C. app. 1718 and 46 CFR 510).
    Persons knowing of any reason why any of the following applicants 
should not receive a license are requested to contact the Office of 
Freight Forwarders, Federal Maritime Commission, Washington, D.C. 
20573.

Intrepid Overseas Shipping Corporation, 440 Benmar Drive, Suite 1030, 
Houston, TX 77060, Officer: James N. Ortego, Director
Neotrade, Inc. d/b/a Dandan, Driscoll & Assoc., 1010 Jorie Blvd., Suite 
310, Oak Brook, IL 60521, Officers: Nabil Dandan, President, Eileen 
Driscoll, Secretary
Tober Group, Inc., 1948 Troutman Street, Ridgewood, NY 11385, Officer: 
Yonathan Benhaim, President

    Dated: May 21, 1996.
Joseph C. Polking,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-13188 Filed 5-23-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-M
H. Res. 372 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

April 29, 2009. 

Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it 

shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 

1913) to provide Federal assistance to States, local jurisdictions, and Indian tribes to prosecute hate crimes, and for 

other purposes. All points of order against consideration of 

the bill are waived except those arising under clause 9 or 10 

of rule XXI. The amendment in the nature of a substitute 

recommended by the Committee on the Judiciary now printed 

in the bill, modified by the amendment printed in the report 

of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, 

shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be 

considered as read. All points of order against provisions of 

the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall 

be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour and 20 

minutes of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair 

and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judi-
2 

•HRES 372 EH 

ciary, who may yield control of blocks of that time; and (2) 

one motion to recommit with or without instructions. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JUNE 28, 2024

NO. 03-24-00043-CV

Amy Wilson, Appellant

v.

8900 Austin, LLC d/b/a Orbit Apartments, Appellee

APPEAL FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE BYRNE, JUSTICES SMITH AND THEOFANIS

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION -- OPINION BY JUSTICE THEOFANIS

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the trial court on December 21, 2023. Having 

reviewed the record, the Court holds that Amy Wilson has not prosecuted her appeal and did not 

comply with a notice from the Clerk of this Court. Therefore, the Court dismisses the appeal for 

want of prosecution. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication of 

costs is made.
IV 

House Calendar No. 47 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 371 

[Report No. 111–90] 

Providing for consideration of the conference report to accompany the concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 13) setting forth the congressional budget 

for the United States Government for fiscal year 2010, revising the 

appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal year 2009, and setting forth the 

appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2011 through 2014. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 28, 2009 

Mr. MCGOVERN, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for consideration of the conference report to accompany the concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 13) 

setting forth the congressional budget for the United 

States Government for fiscal year 2010, revising the 

appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal year 2009, and 

setting forth the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal 

years 2011 through 2014. 

1 Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it 

2 shall be in order to consider the conference report to ac3 company the concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 13) setmstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

2 

•HRES 371 RH 

1 ting forth the congressional budget for the United States 

2 Government for fiscal year 2010, revising the appropriate 

3 budgetary levels for fiscal year 2009, and setting forth the 

4 appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2011 through 

5 2014. All points of order against the conference report and 

6 against its consideration are waived. The conference re7 port shall be considered as read. The conference report 

8 shall be debatable for one hour equally divided and con9 trolled by the chair and ranking minority member of the 

10 Committee on the Budget. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

House Calendar No. 47 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 371 

[Report No. 111–90] 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for consideration of the conference report 

through 2014. priate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2011 for fiscal year 2009, and setting forth the appro2010, revising the appropriate budgetary levels for the United States Government for fiscal year Res. 13) setting forth the congressional budget to accompany the concurrent resolution (S. Con. 

APRIL 28, 2009 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
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 Summer Infant, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2008 (the
"Report"), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I Jason Macari, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:



|/s/JASON MACARI                      |  | May 12, 2008
|------------------------------------ |  | ------------
|Jason Macari
Chief Executive Officer |  |             

---



QuickLinks
#### STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Timothy ATKINS, Defendant/Appellant. Timothy ATKINS, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.

Nos. 67740, 68733 and 70427.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Dec. 10, 1996.

Robert E. Steele, Jr., Asst. Public Defender, St. Louis, for MovanVAppellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Attorney General, Becky Owenson Kilpatrick, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, for Respondent/Respondent.

Before DOWD, P.J., and REINHARD, and GARY M. GAERTNER, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals after he was convicted by a jury of one count of second degree burglary, § 569.170, RSMo 1986. The court sentenced him as a prior offender and a persistent misdemeanor offender to a term of six months in a medium security institution to run consecutively with a sentence for an unrelated conviction. Defendant also appeals the denial, without an evidentiary hearing, of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. We affirm.

We have reviewed the record and find the claims of error are without merit; the judgment of the motion court is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).
Beckstead and Watts, LLP
Certified Public Accountant
                                                       3340 Wynn Road Suite C
                                                          Las Vegas, NV 89102
                                                                 702.257.1984
                                                             702.362.0540 fax





March 27, 2003


To Whom It May Concern:

The firm of Beckstead and Watts, LLP, consents to the inclusion of our report
of March 27, 2003, on the Financial Statements of Rub Investments Limited for
the  years ended December 31, 2002 and 2001, in its Form 10K-SB filing to  be
filed with the US Securities and Exchange Commission.

Signed,


/s/ Beckstead and Watts, LLP


Beckstead and Watts, LLP
Case 2:17-cr-01522-JAT Document 1 Filed 10/05/17 Page 1 of 4
Case 2:17-cr-01522-JAT Document 1 Filed 10/05/17 Page 2 of 4
Case 2:17-cr-01522-JAT Document 1 Filed 10/05/17 Page 3 of 4
Case 2:17-cr-01522-JAT Document 1 Filed 10/05/17 Page 4 of 4
Case 2:17-cr-01524-DGC Document 1 Filed 10/13/17 Page 1 of 4
Case 2:17-cr-01524-DGC Document 1 Filed 10/13/17 Page 2 of 4
Case 2:17-cr-01524-DGC Document 1 Filed 10/13/17 Page 3 of 4
Case 2:17-cr-01524-DGC Document 1 Filed 10/13/17 Page 4 of 4
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF

UNIVERSAL CITY FLORIDA HOLDING CO. I

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the quarterly report of Universal City Florida Holding Co. I (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 29, 2009 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: May 8, 2009



> By:
> 
>                                                                                         
> 
>                                                                                         /s/ John R. SproulsJohn R. SproulsPrincipal Executive Officer
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

U.S. BANK, N.A., )

)

Appellant/Cross-Appellee, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D17-117

)

VIVIANE PATTERSON, )

)

Appellee/Cross-Appellant. )

)

Opinion filed July 13, 2018.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pinellas 

County; John Schaefer, Judge.

Bart Heffernan and Andrew Arias of 

Marinosci Law Group, P.C., Ft. 

Lauderdale, for Appellant/Cross-Appellee. 

Mark P. Stopa of Stopa Law Firm, Tampa, 

for Appellee/Cross-Appellant. 

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

LaROSE, C.J., and CASANUEVA and BADALAMENTI, JJ., Concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 294 Reported in House (RH)]

                                                  House Calendar No. 34
111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 294

                          [Report No. 111-63]

 Providing for consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 279) providing 
for the expenses of certain committees of the House of Representatives 
                 in the One Hundred Eleventh Congress.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 30, 2009

  Mr. Hastings of Florida, from the Committee on Rules, reported the 
  following resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and 
                         ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Providing for consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 279) providing 
for the expenses of certain committees of the House of Representatives 
                 in the One Hundred Eleventh Congress.

    Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
order without intervention of any point of order to consider in the 
House the resolution (H. Res. 279) providing for the expenses of 
certain committees of the House of Representatives in the One Hundred 
Eleventh Congress. The amendment in the nature of a substitute 
recommended by the Committee on House Administration now printed in the 
resolution shall be considered as adopted. The resolution, as amended, 
shall be considered as read. The previous question shall be considered 
as ordered on the resolution, as amended, to final adoption without 
intervening motion or demand for division of the question except: (1) 
one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and 
ranking minority member of the Committee on House Administration; and 
(2) one motion to recommit which may not contain instructions.
                                                  House Calendar No. 34

111th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                              H. RES. 294

                          [Report No. 111-63]

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 Providing for consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 279) providing 
for the expenses of certain committees of the House of Representatives 
                 in the One Hundred Eleventh Congress.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             March 30, 2009

        Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed
```
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7882

KENNETH RAY HILL, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RONALD ANGELONE, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., District Judge. (CA-02-427-2) Submitted: March 6, 2003 Decided: March 14, 2003 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenneth Ray Hill, Appellant Pro Se. Linwood Theodore Wells, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Kenneth Ray Hill seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2000). The magistrate judge recommended denying relief, and advised Hill that his failure to file timely objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the recommendation. Despite this warning, Hill failed to object to the magistrate judge’s recommendation. The timely filing of specific objections to a magistrate judge’s recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when the parties have been warned that failure to object will waive appellate review. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 155 (1985); Wright v. Collins , 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985). Hill has waived appellate review by failing to file objections after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we grant Hill’s motion to amend his informal brief, deny Hill’s motions for appointed counsel and for the production of transcripts at Government expense, deny a certificate of appealability, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense 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. DISMISSED
1

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

____________________

NO. 09-14-00094-CV

____________________

IN RE WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., BANK OF MONTREAL,

THE PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA,

THOMAS E. MCGRAW, AND TROY JEFFERSON

_______________________________________________________ ______________

Original Proceeding

________________________________________________________ _____________

ORDER 

On February 28, 2014, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Bank Of Montreal, The 

Prudential Insurance Company Of America, Thomas E. Mcgraw, And Troy 

Jefferson filed a petition for writ of mandamus to compel the judge of the 58th 

District Court of Jefferson County, Texas to grant a continuance of the trial and 

permit additional discovery in trial court case number A-189,693. On March 7, 

2014, the judge recused himself from further consideration of the case. We may 

abate a mandamus proceeding when a trial judge recuses after the mandamus 
2

proceeding is filed. See In re Blevins, No. 12-0636, 2013 WL 5878910, at *2 (Tex. 

Nov. 1, 2013) (orig. proceeding). 

This original proceeding is hereby abated for thirty days, to provide the 

relator with the opportunity to present this matter to the successor judge. Id., see 

also Tex. R. App. P. 7.2(b). The supplemental mandamus record is due May 12, 

2014. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.7(b). Our temporary order of March 3, 2014, remains 

in effect. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.10(b). 

ORDER ENTERED April 10, 2014.

 PER CURIAM

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.
Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF BDO SEIDMAN, LLP, INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

I-many, Inc.

Edison, New Jersey

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in
the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (Nos. 333-139126, 333-68924, 333-76716, 333-85044, 333-88714 and 333-105088) and on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-41362, 333-60162, 333-64974, 333-86958 and 333-11651) of I-many, Inc. and subsidiaries of our reports
dated March 16, 2007, relating to the consolidated financial statements, and the effectiveness of I-many, Inc.s internal control over financial reporting, which appear in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.



|                      
|----------------------
|/s/ BDO SEIDMAN, LLP  
|                      
|BDO Seidman, LLP      
|Woodbridge, New Jersey
|                      
|March 16, 2007
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-7397 

KEIALTO MAURICE WALKER,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

JACK LEE, Warden, Keen Mountain Correctional

Center,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Richmond. David G. Lowe, Magistrate

Judge. (CA-03-341-3)

Submitted: January 13, 2005 Decided: January 19, 2005

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Keialto Maurice Walker, Appellant Pro Se. Virginia Bidwell

Theisen, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond,

Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
*

The parties consented to the jurisdiction of the magistrate

judge under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2000). 

- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Keialto Maurice Walker seeks to appeal the magistrate

judge’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.

§ 2254 (2000).*

 An appeal may not be taken from the final order in

a habeas corpus proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues

a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A

certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial

showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his

constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive

procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or

wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003);

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d

676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the

record and conclude that Walker has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the

appeal. We dispense 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. 

 

DISMISSED
Exhibit
32.2





CERTIFICATION




Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


(Section
1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)




In
connection with the Quarterly Report of New Oriental Energy & Chemical Corp.
(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2010, as filed with
the Securities Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Donglai
Li 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 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.





Date:
      August 23, 2010By:
              /s/Donglai LiDonglai
      LiChief
      Financial Officer





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.
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Wesley BATES, Jr., Appellant. Wesley BATES, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

Nos. 65707, 67559.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District.

Dec. 5, 1995.

Robert B. Ramsey, Pratt, Bradford & To-bin, P.C., East Alton, Ill., for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Joanne E. Beal, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before CRANE, C.J., and SIMON and BLACKMAR, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Wesley Bates, J.R., appeals from his sentence of fifteen years for the Class A Felony of trafficking in the second degree, § 195.233 RSMo.1994. This appeal is consolidated with an appeal from the dismissal of appellant’s motion to vacate judgment and sentence under Rule 29.15. The judgment of conviction is affirmed. Rule 30.25(b). The dismissal of post-conviction *relief*is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).