alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Roberta HARRIS, Appellant. Roberta HARRIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

Nos. WD 46774, WD 48090.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

May 10, 1994.

Catherine Connelly, Asst. Public Defender, Kansas City, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Traci J. Sanders, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before TURNAGE, P.J., and FENNER and SPINDEN, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Consolidated appeal from conviction of two counts of delivery of a controlled substance, section 195.211, RSMo Supp.1993, and from denial of Rule 29.15 motion for postconviction relief.

Conviction affirmed pursuant to Rule 30.-25(b); postconviction appeal dismissed for abandonment, *State v. Barnard,*820 S.W.2d 674, 677 (Mo.App.1991).
SAMPLE STOCK CERTIFICATE

INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

DARBY ACQUISITION CORPORATION

AUTHORIZED CAPITAL STOCK 50,000, PAR VALUE $.001 PER SHARE

THIS CERTIFIES THAT is the owner of fully paid and  nonassessable  shares of the
Capital Stock of the above named  Corporation  transferable only on the books of
the  Corporation by the holder hereof in person or by duly  authorized  Attorney
upon surrender of this Certificate properly endorsed.

IT WITNESS  WHEREOF,  the said  Corporation  has caused this  Certificate  to be
signed by its duly  authorized  officers and its  Corporate  Seal to be hereunto
affixed this ___ day of ____, 2000.


--------------------------
Secretary
#### Charles RENTSCHLER, Appellant, v. Terry Jo RENTSCHLER, Respondent.

No. WD 46808.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Feb. 2, 1993.

Charles Rentschler, pro se.

Steve A. Matalone, II, Kansas City, for respondent.

Before KENNEDY, P.J., and BERREY and SPINDEN, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from a decree of annulment. Affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
#### GACA *v.*UNITED STATES

No. 72-6011.

Decided May 7, 1973

Per Curiam.

Petitioner was convicted in United States District Court of illegal wiretapping under 18 U. S. C. § 2511. His appeal was dismissed for want of timely prosecution when he failed to pay a $25 filing fee. Petitioner contends that he thought payment of the fee unnecessary because he had been granted leave to appeal *in forma pauperis*by the District Judge.

In his memorandum before this Court, the Solicitor General states that the United States does not oppose a remand to reinstate the appeal in the exercise of this Court’s supervisory powers in order to avoid possible injustice and the possibility of collateral attack upon the conviction. In light of this representation, and upon our independent examination of the record, the motion for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis*and the petition for certiorari are granted and the case is vacated and remanded with instructions that the appeal be reinstated.

*It is so ordered.*

Mr. Justice White and Mr. Justice Rehnquist dissent.
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 103 (Tuesday, May 28, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 26505]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-13286]



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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[I.D. 051796C]


Marine Mammals; Scientific Research Permit (P466C)

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Receipt of application.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that Mr. Scott D. Kraus, New England 
Aquarium, Central Wharf, Boston, MA 02110-3399, has applied in due form 
for a permit to take by harassment up to 4,000 harbor porpoises 
(Phocoena phocoena) in the Gulf of Maine during the course of acoustic 
playback experiments for purposes of scientific research.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before June 21, 1996.

ADDRESSES: The application and related documents are available for 
review upon written request or by appointment in the following 
office(s):
    Permits Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-
West Highway, Room 13130, Silver Spring, MD 20910 (301/713-2289); and
    Director, Northeast Region, NMFS, One Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, 
MA 01930-2298 (508/281-9250).
    Written data or views, or requests for a public hearing on this 
request, should be submitted to the Director, Office of Protected 
Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13130, Silver Spring, MD 
20910. Those individuals requesting a hearing should set forth the 
specific reasons why a hearing on this particular request would be 
appropriate.
    Concurrent with the publication of this notice in the Federal 
Register, NMFS is forwarding copies of this application to the Marine 
Mammal Commission and its Committee of Scientific Advisors.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The subject permit is requested under the 
authority of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16 
U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), the Regulations Governing the Taking and 
Importing of Marine Mammals (50 CFR part 216).
    The applicant seeks authorization to take by harassment up to 4,000 
harbor porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) in the Gulf of Maine during the 
course of underwater acoustic playback experiments. The proposed 
research is a continuation of work previously authorized in 1992, and 
will provide data on porpoise responses to various acoustic stimuli 
used as acoustic deterrent devices in commercial fishing gear.

    Dated: May 17, 1996.
Ann D. Terbush,
Chief, Permits and Documentation, Office of Protected Resources, 
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 96-13286 Filed 5-22-96; 3:24 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F
EXHIBIT 31.2

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, George C. Alex, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of NextWave Wireless LLC;

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Dated: August 14, 2006

    /s/ George C. Alex
-------------------------------------
George C. Alex
Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer
H. Res. 413 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

May 12, 2009. 

Whereas IEEE is the world’s largest technical professional 

society, with more than 375,000 members, including 

more than 210,000 members in the United States; 

Whereas IEEE members are engineers, scientists, and other 

professionals whose technical interests are rooted in electrical and computer sciences, engineering, and related 

disciplines; 

Whereas IEEE’s core purpose is to foster technological innovation and excellence for the benefit of humanity; 

Whereas IEEE traces its roots to the founding of the American Institute of Electrical Engineers (AIEE) on May 13, 

1884; 

Whereas renowned inventor and entrepreneur Thomas Alva 

Edison was a founder of AIEE; 

Whereas notable presidents of the IEEE and its founding organizations include Alexander Graham Bell, Charles Proteus Steinmetz, Lee De Forest, William R. Hewlett, and 

Ivan Getting; 

Whereas AIEE merged with the Institute of Radio Engineers 

in 1963 to form IEEE; 
2 

•HRES 413 EH 

Whereas IEEE maintains a vast library of technical publications; 

Whereas more than 100,000 technical professionals attend 

the more than 300 conferences sponsored or cosponsored 

by IEEE each year; 

Whereas IEEE is a leader in the development of international standards that support many of today’s products 

and services, with an active portfolio of nearly 1,300 

standards and projects under development; 

Whereas IEEE provides learning opportunities within the engineering sciences with the goal of ensuring the growth 

of skill and knowledge among the technical profession; 

Whereas IEEE provides a forum for professionals to interact, 

collaborate, and generate new ideas and concepts; 

Whereas IEEE seeks to attract the best and brightest to use 

their skills and experience and apply technology to benefit society and help solve humanitarian issues; 

Whereas ‘‘IEEE Engineering the Future’’ Day will be held 

by IEEE on May 13, 2009, to recognize the contributions and impact that IEEE, its members, and engineering and technology professionals have made and to raise 

public awareness of the diverse opportunities available in 

different technology fields; 

Whereas revolutionary advances in information technology, 

biotechnology, nanotechnology, and other fields are reshaping the global economy; and 

Whereas the United States must continue its efforts to maintain its leadership in science, technology, and innovation: 

Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 
3 

•HRES 413 EH 

(1) recognizes the importance of engineering and 

technology to meeting our Nation’s most pressing challenges; 

(2) congratulates IEEE on its 125th anniversary; 

and 

(3) supports the goals and ideals of ‘‘IEEE Engineering the Future’’ Day. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-10659

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

PAULA GONZALES,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:10-CR-2-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, GARZA, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

*

Paula Gonzales appeals the 27-month sentence imposed following her

conviction for possessing and uttering forged securities, in violation of 18 U.S.C.

§ 513(a). Gonzales contends that her within-guidelines sentence is procedurally

unreasonable because the district court failed to address the specific arguments

that she raised in favor of a downward variance. She acknowledges that her

argument is foreclosed by circuit precedent, and she raises the argument to

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

February 15, 2011

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: 10-10659 Document: 00511382003 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/15/2011
No. 10-10659

preserve it for further review. The Government moves for summary affirmance

or, in the alternative, for an extension of time to file a brief.

Because Gonzales did not object in the district court to the sufficiency of

the court’s explanation for her sentence, plain error review applies. See United

States v. Mondragon-Santiago, 564 F.3d 357, 361 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 130

S. Ct. 192 (2009). Gonzales has not shown that any error by the court in

explaining its sentence affected her substantial rights because there is no

indication that a more thorough explanation would have changed her sentence.

See id. at 365. This court has specifically rejected Gonzales’s contention that the

district court’s failure to address her mitigation arguments affected her

substantial rights by precluding meaningful appellate review or impacted the

fairness, integrity, or public reputation of the judicial proceedings. See id. Thus,

as Gonzales correctly concedes, she cannot show reversible plain error under our

precedent.

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED, and the

Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED. The alternative

request for an extension of time to file a brief is DENIED.

2

Case: 10-10659 Document: 00511382003 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/15/2011
#### David WILES, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. 56617.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Jan. 23, 1990.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied March 14, 1990.

Application to Transfer Denied April 17, 1990.

Cheryl Rafert, St. Louis, for appellant.

William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., Elizabeth L. Ziegler, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals the denial of his second Rule 27.26 motion without an evidentiary hearing. We affirm. Movant has not sufficiently established why the grounds supporting his current motion could not have been included in. his first *pro se*motion. Rule 27.26(d). The findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous. Rule 27.26(j). An extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose. Rule 84.16(b).
Exhibit 99.2


                                 CERTIFICATIONS

I, Dr. Eugene Stricker certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Kushi Natural Foods
Corp.

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

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

Date: March 24, 2003


/s/ DR. EUGENE STRICKER
---------------------------------------
Dr. Eugene Stricker
President (Principal Executive Officer)
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-50476

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JUAN JOSE CERVANTES-GONZALEZ, also known as Jose Cervantes, also 

known as Jose Gonzalez, also known as Juan Cervantes-Gonzalez, also known 

as Juan Cervantes, also known as Juan Cervantes Gonzalez, also known as 

Juan Gonzalez, also known as Juan Gonzalez-Cervantes, also known as Juan 

Gonzalez Cervantes,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 5:18-CR-581-1

Before DAVIS, SMITH, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Juan Jose Cervantes-Gonzalez appeals his conviction for illegal reentry

into the United States. He challenges the denial of his motion to dismiss the 

indictment as invalid, contending that his initial removal order was void for 

 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

December 31, 2019

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 19-50476 Document: 00515253208 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/31/2019
No. 19-50476

2

the failure of the notice to appear in the initial removal proceedings to specify 

a date for his removal hearing. He concedes that this challenge is foreclosed 

by United States v. Pedroza-Rocha, 933 F.3d 490 (5th Cir. 2019), petition for 

cert. filed (U.S. Nov. 6, 2019) (No. 19-6588), but he wishes to preserve it for 

further review. The Government has filed an unopposed motion for summary 

affirmance, agreeing that the issue is foreclosed under Pedroza-Rocha. 

Alternatively, the Government requests an extension of time to file its brief.

Summary affirmance is appropriate if “the position of one of the parties 

is clearly right as a matter of law so that there can be no substantial question 

as to the outcome of the case.” Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 

1162 (5th Cir. 1969). This court concluded in Pedroza-Rocha that the notice to 

appear from the defendant’s prior removal proceedings was not deficient 

because it lacked a specific date for the hearing, that any such alleged 

deficiency had not deprived the immigration court of jurisdiction, and that the 

defendant could not collaterally attack his notice to appear without first 

exhausting his administrative remedies. 933 F.3d at 496-98. CervantesGonzalez’s arguments are, as he concedes, foreclosed by Pedroza-Rocha. 

See id.

Accordingly, the Government’s motion for summary affirmance is 

GRANTED, the Government’s alternative motion for an extension of time to 

file a brief is DENIED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. 

 Case: 19-50476 Document: 00515253208 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/31/2019
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Alyssa Jones,

Plaintiff,

v. 

Riot Hospitality Group LLC, et al.,

Defendants.

No. CV-17-04612-PHX-GMS

ORDER 

Pending before the Court is the parties’ Stipulation to Dismiss Defendants JW Bar, 

LLC and MRM Hospitality, LLC (Doc. 382) and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED granting the parties’ Stipulation to Dismiss 

(Doc. 382). Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants JW Bar, LLC and MRM Hospitality, 

LLC are dismissed with prejudice; each party to bear their own attorney fees and costs.

Dated this 6th day of November, 2020.

Case 2:17-cv-04612-GMS Document 384 Filed 11/06/20 Page 1 of 1
OFFICE OF T’HE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTlN GIQYLIl SLLLEmO 

.‘. 

A?*c* OINLIAI. -I 

. ,- 

ruoh ohuroh to ba 

oa 88xaiod. Tho80 lots 

the Qnrent prroo of worlbh~p 
5 

1: 664 

roosralA4l7 wo agrad dM yea in year oenol~oE 

tptao 108# bt4leagla4 to us0 onurah 02-O &sot uoapt lroa 

* 

Tours vary tral7 

.
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 report of Spark Networks plc (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2006 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his 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.



|                                         
|-----------------------------------------
|                                         
|/s/ David E. Siminoff                    
|David E. Siminoff Chief Executive
Officer

August 11, 2006



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|                                     
|/s/ Mark Thompson                    
|Mark Thompson Chief Financial
Officer

August 11, 2006

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Spark Networks plc and will be retained by Spark Networks plc and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
IV 

House Calendar No. 54 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 450 

[Report No. 111–113] 

Waiving a requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII with respect to 

consideration of certain resolutions reported from the Committee on Rules. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 18, 2009 

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

RESOLUTION 

Waiving a requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII with 

respect to consideration of certain resolutions reported 

from the Committee on Rules. 

1 Resolved, That the requirement of clause 6(a) of rule 

2 XIII for a two-thirds vote to consider a report from the 

3 Committee on Rules on the same day it is presented to 

4 the House is waived with respect to any resolution re5 ported on the legislative day of May 19, 2009, providing 

6 for consideration or disposition of the bill (S. 896) to preVerDate Nov 24 2008 00:01 May 19, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\HR450.RH HR450

smartinez on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 450 RH 

1 vent mortgage foreclosures and enhance mortgage credit 

2 availability. 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with BILLS

smartinez on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
House Calendar No. 54 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 450 

[Report No. 111–113] 

RESOLUTION 

Waiving a requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII 

tions reported from the Committee on Rules. with respect to consideration of certain resoluMAY 18, 2009 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with BILLS