alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 

MICHAEL BAILEY 

United States Attorney 

ANNA WRIGHT

Assistant U.S. Attorney 

NATHANIEL J. WALTERS 

Assistant United States Attorney State Bar No.: 029708 

405 West Congress, Suite 4800 

Tucson, Arizona 85701-5040 

Telephone: (520) 620-7300 

E-mail: anna.wright@usdoj.gov 

E-mail: nathaniel.walters@usdoj.gov 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

United States of America, 

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

Scott Daniel Warren, 

 Defendant.

17-MJ-00341 -RCC (JR) 

GOVERNMENT’S MOTION TO DISMISS 

COUNT ONE WITH PREJUDICE 

On November 20, 2019, this Court found the defendant guilty as to Count 1 of the 

Information, charging him with a violation of 50 C.F.R. § 35.5, Operating a Motor Vehicle 

in a Wilderness Area. (Doc. 145.) In doing so, the Court rejected the defendant’s Religious 

Freedom Restoration Act defense. (Doc. 114.) In the interests of justice, and pursuant to 

Fed. R. Crim. P. 48(a), the United States now respectfully moves for leave of the Court to 

dismiss Count 1 with prejudice. See United States v. Gonzalez, 58 F.3d 459, 462 (9th Cir. 

1995) (explaining that “even after a defendant has been convicted of a crime, a prosecutor 

may obtain a Rule 48(a) dismissal based on broad considerations of justice”) (citing United 

States v. Weber, 721 F.2d 266, 268 (9th Cir. 1983)). 

“[W]hen the government requests a Rule 48(a) dismissal in good faith, the district 

court is duty bound to honor the request.” United States v. Hayden, 860 F.2d 1483, 1488 

(9th Cir. 1988). “Indeed, in the category of cases in which the defendant consents to the 

prosecution’s request, there is a question as to whether a district court may ever deny an 

Case 4:17-mj-00341-RCC-JR Document 156 Filed 02/26/20 Page 1 of 2
- 2 - 

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 

uncontested Rule 48(a) motion.” Gonzalez, 58 F.3d at 461. This motion is made in good 

faith. Therefore, the United States respectfully requests that the Court grant leave to dismiss 

Count 1 with prejudice in the interests of justice. 

Undersigned counsel certify that they personally conferred with counsel for the 

defendant, who does not object to this motion.

 

MICHAEL BAILEY

United States Attorney 

 District of Arizona 

 /s/ Anna R. Wright & Nathaniel J. Walters

 ANNA WRIGHT &

 NATHANIEL J. WALTERS 

 Assistant United States Attorneys 

Copy of the foregoing served electronically or by 

other means this 26th day of February 2020, to: 

All ECF participants 

Case 4:17-mj-00341-RCC-JR Document 156 Filed 02/26/20 Page 2 of 2
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-16-0000807

17-MAY-2018

09:13 AM
#### STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent v. Charles David GIRARDIER, Defendant/Appellant. Charles D. GIRARDIER, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.

Nos. 66382, 68091.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

June 28, 1996.

Raymond J. Capelovitch, Asst. Public Defender, St. Louis, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., David R. Truman, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before REINHARD, P.J., and KAROHL and GRIMM, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

A jury found defendant guilty of one count of forcible rape, § 566.030, and one count of first degree deviate sexual assault, § 566.070, RSMo 1994. The trial court sentenced him as a prior offender to consecutive terms of fifteen years on Count I and four years on Count II.

Defendant appeals, claiming the trial court erred in denying his motion for severance of the two counts. Defendant also appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion, claiming he was denied effective assistance of counsel.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memoran*341dum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgments are affirmed pursuant to Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 531 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 531

Congratulating the Northwestern University Wildcats on winning the 2009 
    NCAA women's lacrosse championship, and to commend Northwestern 
    University for its pursuit of athletic and academic excellence.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 11, 2009

 Ms. Schakowsky submitted the following resolution; which was referred 
                to the Committee on Education and Labor

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Congratulating the Northwestern University Wildcats on winning the 2009 
    NCAA women's lacrosse championship, and to commend Northwestern 
    University for its pursuit of athletic and academic excellence.

Whereas the Northwestern women's lacrosse team serves as important role models 
        to young athletes, demonstrating excellence on the athletic field and in 
        the classroom;
Whereas Northwestern defeated North Carolina 21-7 to win the national 
        championship on May 24, 2009;
Whereas Northwestern finished the season with a 23-0 record to win their fifth 
        straight national championship; and
Whereas senior Hannah Nielsen won the Tewaaraton Trophy, given to the Nation's 
        top player, and played a vital role in helping Northwestern to a 23-0 
        record in 2009, finishing her distinguished career as the Wildcats' all-
        time leader in points (398) after becoming the NCAA Division I all-time 
        assist leader with 224: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) congratulates Northwestern University and its athletes, 
        coaches, faculty, students, administration, and alumni on the 
        winning of the 2009 NCAA women's lacrosse championship;
            (2) recognizes and commends Northwest University for its 
        pursuit of athletic as well as academic excellence; and
            (3) directs the Clerk of the House of Representatives to 
        make available enrolled copies of this resolution to 
        Northwestern University President Henry S. Bienen, Athletic 
        Director James Phillips, and Head Coach Kelly Amonte Hiller for 
        appropriate display.
                                 <all>
```
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 Annual Report of Superclick, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-K for the period ending October 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Sandro Natale, 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 result of operations of the Company.




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.




Date:
      May 4, 2010
              /s/ Sandro NataleSandro
      NataleChief
      Executive Officer
Exhibit 99.1 A-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 Devine Entertainment
Corporation, (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2007
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), 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 operation of the Company.

Date: August 13, 2007

                                               /s/ David Devine
                                               ---------------------------------
                                               Name:  David Devine
                                               Title: President and CEO
----

 

**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**

 

The undersigned, Joseph Blimline, the Chief Executive Officer andChief Financial Officer of ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY PETROLEUM CORP. (the “Company”),DOES HEREBY CERTIFY that:

> 
1. The Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterended April 30, 2007 (the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2. Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operation of theCompany.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned has executed thisstatement this 7th day of January 2009.

 

/s/ Joseph Blimline 

Joseph Blimline

Chief Executive Officer & Chief Financial Officer

(Principal Executive & Financial Officer)

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section906 has been provided to AdvancedTechnology Petroleum Corp and will be retained by Advanced Technology Petroleum Corp and furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

The forgoing certification is being furnished to the Securitiesand Exchange Commission pursuant to § 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not beingfiled for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, asamended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of theCompany, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any generalincorporation language in such filing.

 

----
**EXHIBIT 31.1****Certification of Principal Executive Officer****Section 302 Certification**     I, Bruce A. Shepard, interim Chief Executive Officer of Las Vegas Gaming, Inc., certify that:     1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Las Vegas Gaming, Inc.;     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-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 that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;     (b) [Omitted];     (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and     (d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):     (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe 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 whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.        Date: April 2, 2007 /s/ Bruce A. Shepard   Bruce A. Shepard, Interim Chief Executive Officer
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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Joe Cervantes, Jr.,

Petitioner,

v. 

Charles L Ryan, et al.,

Respondents.

No. CV-17-08279-PCT-DLR

ORDER 

On May 6, 2019, the Court denied Petitioner’s petition for writ of habeas corpus as 

untimely and entered judgment accordingly. (Docs. 27, 28.) Petitioner subsequently filed 

two motions: (1) a “Demand for Payment” (Doc. 29), which is denied as meritless and (2) 

a motion to alter or amend the judgment (Doc. 32). Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 

59(e), a party can move the Court to amend its judgment within 28 days of entry. Amending 

a judgment after entry is “an extraordinary remedy which should be used sparingly.” See 

Allstate Ins. Co. v. Herron, 634 F.3d 1101, 1111 (9th Cir. 2011) (citation and quotation 

omitted). There are four basic grounds upon which a Rule 59(e) motion generally may be 

granted: (1) to correct manifest errors of law or fact upon which the judgment rests; (2) in 

response to newly discovered or previously unavailable evidence; (3) to prevent a manifest 

injustice; and (4) if an intervening change in controlling law undermines the judgment. 

Petitioner anchors his motion in this first category, arguing that the Court’s judgment rested 

on manifest errors of law or fact. None of the arguments he raises, however, undermine 
- 2 -

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

the Court’s determination that his habeas petition was untimely. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner’s “Demand for Payment” (Doc. 29) and motion 

to alter or amend the judgment (Doc. 32) are DENIED.

Dated this 16th day of March, 2020.

Douglas L. Rayes

United States District Judge
Exhibit 12.1
 BROADVIEW NETWORKS HOLDINGS, INC.
COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
 Years Ended December 31,2005
    
    
    2006
    
    
    2007
    
    
    2008
    
    
    2009Earnings:Income (loss) from before provision
for income taxes
    
    $
    (38,928
    )
    
    $
    (41,251
    )
    
    $
    (64,763
    )
    
    $
    (41,810
    )
    
    $
    (12,691
    )Interest charges
    
    
    17,842
    
    
    
    25,463
    
    
    
    34,390
    
    
    
    39,514
    
    
    
    39,197Interest factor in operating rents (1)
    
    
    2,365
    
    
    
    2,568
    
    
    
    3,993
    
    
    
    3,775
    
    
    
    3,997Total income (loss)
    
    
    (18,721
    )
    
    
    (13,220
    )
    
    
    (26,380
    )
    
    
    1,479
    
    
    
    30,503Fixed charges:Interest charges
    
    
    17,842
    
    
    
    25,463
    
    
    
    34,390
    
    
    
    39,514
    
    
    
    39,197Interest factor in operating rents (1)
    
    
    2,365
    
    
    
    2,568
    
    
    
    3,993
    
    
    
    3,775
    
    
    
    3,997Total fixed charges
    
    
    20,207
    
    
    
    28,031
    
    
    
    38,383
    
    
    
    43,289
    
    
    
    43,194Ratio of earnings to fixed charges
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Deficiency
    
    $
    (38,928
    )
    
    $
    (41,251
    )
    
    $
    (64,763
    )
    
    $
    (41,810
    )
    
    $
    (12,691
    )
 
 (1)
    
    For purposes of computing the ratio of earnings to fixed charges,
earnings consist of earnings before income taxes plus fixed charges.
Fixed charges consists of interest expense and the portion
(approximately 33%) of rental expense that management believes is
representative of the interest component of rental expense.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

   Schedule of Year-To-Date Principal and Interest Distributions
                           to
                  Certificateholders
                                                                              Ending
Class                   Interest             Principal      Losses           Balance
<S>                     <C>                  <C>            <C>              <C>
A                     24,740,629.25      76,583,103.74         0.00        352,366,896.29
B                      1,738,092.98       4,106,332.65         0.00         18,893,667.36
OC                             0.00               0.00         0.00          9,200,079.96
TC                     2,843,605.74               0.00         0.00                  0.00


</TABLE>
1... See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.4.

COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 2-08-316-CV

IN RE MISTY DAWN MEIER RELATOR

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

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

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

The court has considered relator’s petition for writ of mandamus and

motion for temporary relief and is of the opinion that relief should be denied.

Accordingly, relator's petition for writ of mandamus and motion for temporary

relief are denied.

Relator shall pay all costs of this original proceeding, for which let

execution issue.

PER CURIAM

PANEL: DAUPHINOT, LIVINGSTON, and WALKER, JJ. 

DELIVERED: August 1, 2008
H. Res. 635 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

July 13, 2009. 

Whereas M. Pope Barrow, Jr., was appointed to the Office 

of the Legislative Counsel of the House of Representatives in 1968; 

Whereas M. Pope Barrow, Jr., has provided 40 years of service to the House as a member of the Office of the Legislative Counsel under eight successive Speakers; 

Whereas M. Pope Barrow, Jr., has served as the Legislative 

Counsel for 12 years, following his service as the Deputy 

Legislative Counsel for 4 years; 

Whereas M. Pope Barrow, Jr., has been the principal drafter 

over the past 30 years of Federal laws that protect the 

environment, preserve public lands and waterways, and 

promote the production and efficient use of energy resources; 

Whereas M. Pope Barrow, Jr., has provided exemplary leadership in undertaking significant programs to modernize 

the operations of the Office of the Legislative Counsel 

and the House; and 

Whereas M. Pope Barrow, Jr., has provided steady guidance 

in continuing the professional, nonpartisan service to 

which the Office of the Legislative Counsel is dedicated: 

Now, therefore, be it 
2 

•HRES 635 EH 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives expresses 

its gratitude to— 

(1) M. Pope Barrow, Jr., for his 40 years of service 

to the House; and 

(2) the Office of the Legislative Counsel for its 

more than 90 years of assistance in the drafting of legislation considered by the House. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, Donald Ceci, the Chief Executive Officer of Power Air Corporation (the "Company"), and Minnie Wright, the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each 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 or her knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended December 31, 2008, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, as amended, fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: March 25, 2009

By: "Donald Ceci"      Donald Ceci
      President, Chief Executive Officer, Principal Executive Officer and a director

By: "Minnie Wright"      Minnie Wright
      Secretary, Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signatures that appear in typed form within the electronic version 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.

__________