alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
H. Res. 901 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

February 3, 2010. 

Whereas, in 1954, the Supreme Court ruled that segregated 

schools violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th 

amendment to the Constitution; 

Whereas Judge J. Skelly Wright, of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, ordered 

the Orleans Parish School Board to develop a school desegregation plan in 1956 and, after years of delay, in 

1960, ordered the Orleans Parish School Board to carry 

out a plan designed by the United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of Louisiana; 

Whereas 6 years after the Brown v. Board of Education (347 

U.S. 483) decision, on November 14, 1960, Ruby 

Bridges, at the age of 6, became the first African-American student to attend the all-white William Frantz Elementary School in New Orleans, Louisiana; 

Whereas Ruby Bridges had the courage to attend the William 

Frantz Elementary School every day during the 1960–61 

school year despite ongoing riots and protests in New Orleans, having to be escorted to school by Federal marshals, and having no other students in her classroom; 
2 

•HRES 901 EH 

Whereas Ruby Bridges was also supported by her white firstgrade school teacher, Ms. Barbara Henry, whose lessons 

remain with Ruby Bridges to this day; 

Whereas Ms. Henry faced retaliation for teaching Ruby 

Bridges by not being invited to come back and teach at 

William Frantz School following the 1960–61 school 

year; 

Whereas, in 1995, Ruby Bridges contributed to ‘‘The Story 

of Ruby Bridges’’, a book for children, and, in 1999, 

wrote ‘‘Through My Eyes’’ to help educate children and 

people of all ages about her experiences and the importance of tolerance; 

Whereas Ruby Bridges established the Ruby Bridges Foundation in 1999 to help eliminate racism and improve society by educating students about the experiences of Ruby 

Bridges, discuss ongoing efforts to promote diversity, and 

provide lessons students can take back to their own communities; and 

Whereas, in 2002, the Ruby Bridges Foundation, along with 

the Simon Wiesenthal Center’s Museum for Tolerance in 

Los Angeles, launched The Ruby’s Bridges Project, a 

program that brought together students from diverse 

backgrounds to develop relationship-building skills and 

promote an appreciation of one another: Now, therefore, 

be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

(1) recognizes the 49th anniversary of the first day 

of integrated schools in New Orleans, Louisiana; 
3 

•HRES 901 EH 

(2) remembers Judge J. Skelly Wright for his advocacy, support, and lifelong commitment to promoting 

civil rights, fairness, and equality; 

(3) commends Ruby Bridges for her bravery and 

courage 49 years ago, and for her lifetime commitment 

to raising awareness of diversity through improved educational opportunities for all children; and 

(4) supports policies and efforts to promote equal 

opportunities for all students regardless of their backgrounds. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
## NUMBER 13
- 1 1
- 00 268
- CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI
- EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________ MARIA ELENA GUAJARDO , A ppellant ,

v.
DONALD NEAL , A ppellee

.

____________________________________________________________

On a ppeal from the County Court at Law No. 5

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________



## MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Garza , Vela, and Perkes Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam Appellant, Maria Elena Guajardo , filed an appeal from a judgment entered by the County Court at Law No. 5 of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number CL

- 10

- 2342

- E

. Appellant has filed a motion dismiss the appeal on grounds that the trial court has signed an order granting a motion for new trial. Appellant request s that this Court dismiss the appeal.2

The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant ’ s motion to dismiss the appeal, is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 42.1(a). Appellant ’ s motion to dismiss is granted, and the appeal is hereby DISMISSED. Costs will be taxed against appellant. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 42.1(d) ("Absent agreement of the parties, the court will tax costs against the appellant."). Having dismissed the appeal at appellant ’ s request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained,
and our mandate will issue forthwith.

PER CURIAM
D elivered and filed the 9th day of June , 20 11

.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<PAGE>
<ARTICLE>  5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
CONSOLIDATED  FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS  FOR  THE  YEAR  1996 AND FOR THE YEAR 1997.
</LEGEND>

<S>                           <C>           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 YEAR          YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             DEC-31-1996   DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                JAN-01-1996   JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                  DEC-31-1996   DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                            297,192       241,157
<SECURITIES>                            0             0
<RECEIVABLES>                   1,440,721     1,485,318
<ALLOWANCES>                       75,868        55,110
<INVENTORY>                     3,624,993     3,630,993
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                5,834,933     5,782,676
<PP&E>                          3,277,680     3,197,185
<DEPRECIATION>                  1,821,584     1,865,087
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  7,599,558     7,596,876
 <CURRENT-LIABILITIES>          3,598,407     3,806,705
<BONDS>                                 0             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>             100,000       100,000
<PREFERRED>                             0             0
<COMMON>                              500           500
<OTHER-SE>                      1,389,867     1,489,909
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    7,599,558     7,596,876
<SALES>                        19,459,629    20,024,374
<TOTAL-REVENUES>               19,858,996    20,024,374
<CGS>                          14,210,698    14,154,104
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   6,059,312     5,599,765
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                        0             0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                  101,442        40,830
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                270,586       219,051
<INCOME-PRETAX>                  (627,503)      263,834
<INCOME-TAX>                      (23,147)            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                     0             0
<DISCONTINUED>                          0             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                         0             0
<CHANGES>                         105,811             0
<NET-INCOME>                     (498,545)      263,834
<EPS-PRIMARY>                        (.24)          .13
<EPS-DILUTED>                        (.24)          .13



<PAGE>


</TABLE>
Exhibit 31.3


CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER


PURSUANT TO EXCHANGE ACT RULE 13A-14(A)/15D-14(A)


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Steven W. Streit, certify that:


|   |                                                                                  
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to Form 10-Q/A of Green Dot Corporation; and

|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|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.




Date:June 7, 2017By:/s/ Steven W. StreitName:Steven W. StreitChief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)
EXHIBIT 32.1

                                SAVWATT USA, INC.
                             A Delaware Corporation
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of SavWatt USA, Inc. ("Company") on Form
10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Isaac H. Sutton,
President and Chief Financial Officer, 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.


Dated: August 24, 2010                     /s/ Isaac H. Sutton
                                           -------------------------------------
                                      By:  Isaac H. Sutton
                                      Its: President and Chief Financial Officer
                                           (Principal Executive Officer)
                                           (Principal Financial Officer)
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 456-1 Filed 02/11/19 Page 1 of 19
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 456-1 Filed 02/11/19 Page 2 of 19
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 456-1 Filed 02/11/19 Page 3 of 19
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 456-1 Filed 02/11/19 Page 4 of 19
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 456-1 Filed 02/11/19 Page 5 of 19
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 456-1 Filed 02/11/19 Page 6 of 19
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 456-1 Filed 02/11/19 Page 7 of 19
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 456-1 Filed 02/11/19 Page 8 of 19
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 456-1 Filed 02/11/19 Page 9 of 19
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 456-1 Filed 02/11/19 Page 10 of 19
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 456-1 Filed 02/11/19 Page 11 of 19
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 456-1 Filed 02/11/19 Page 12 of 19
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 456-1 Filed 02/11/19 Page 13 of 19
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 456-1 Filed 02/11/19 Page 14 of 19
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 456-1 Filed 02/11/19 Page 15 of 19
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 456-1 Filed 02/11/19 Page 16 of 19
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 456-1 Filed 02/11/19 Page 17 of 19
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 456-1 Filed 02/11/19 Page 18 of 19
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 456-1 Filed 02/11/19 Page 19 of 19
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

PICCARRETA DAVIS KEENAN FIDEL PC

2 East Congress Street, Suite 1000

Tucson, AZ 85701

(520) 622-6900

Michael L. Piccarreta

State Bar No. 003962

Email: mlp@pd-law.com

Attorney for Defendant Andrew Padilla

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America,

 Plaintiff,

vs.

6. Andrew Padilla,

 (Counts 1-51)

 

 Defendant.

NO. CR-18-00422-06-PHX-SPL (BSB)

NOTICE OF WAIVER OF PERSONAL 

APPEARANCE AT HEARING

The defendant, Andrew Padilla, by and through his undersigned attorney, hereby

provides notice that he waives his right to be personally present at the upcoming hearing on 

pending motions, set for October 5, 2018, at 9:00 a.m. See Rule 43(b)(3), Federal Rules of 

Criminal Procedure.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 21st day of September, 2018.

PICCARRETA DAVIS KEENAN FIDEL PC

By: /s/ Michael L. Piccarreta

Michael L. Piccarreta

Attorney for Andrew Padilla

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 319 Filed 09/21/18 Page 1 of 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

2

On September 21, 2018, a PDF version

of this document was filed with the

Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF

System for filing and for Transmittal

of a Notice of Electronic Filing to the

following CM/ECF registrants:

Reginald Jones, reginald.jones4@usdoj.gov

Peter Kozinets, peter.kozinets@usdoj.gov

Margaret Perlmeter, margaret.perlmeter@usdoj.gov

Kevin Rapp, kevin.rapp@usdoj.gov

Andrew Stone, andrew.stone@usdoj.gov

Paul Cambria, pcambria@lglaw.com

Tom Bienert, tbienert@bmkattorneys.com

Bruce Feder, bf@federlawpa.com

Michael Kimerer, mdk@kimerer.com

Stephen Weiss, sweiss@karpweiss.com

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 319 Filed 09/21/18 Page 2 of 2
1

ORDER ON DEFENDANT VAUGHT’S OBJECTION TO AND MOTION TO VACATE FRYE-COOPER

HEARING

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

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

United States of America,

 Plaintiff,

vs.

Michael Lacey, et al., 

 

 Defendants.

NO. CR-18-00422-PHX-SMB

ORDER

Upon Objection to and Motion to Vacate the Frye-Cooper hearing in this matter, with good 

cause appearing, 

IT IS ORDERED sustaining Defendant Joye Vaught’s Objection to the Frye-Cooper Hearing.

IT IS ORDERED granting the Defendant’s Motion to Vacate the Frye-Cooper Hearing, 

currently set for August 18, 2023. 

The August 18, 2023 is vacated.

_______________________

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1681-1 Filed 08/08/23 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 12.1


                          COMCAST CELLULAR CORPORATION
                       RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                             (Dollars in thousands)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                       Year Ended December 31, 
                                               ---------------------------------------
                                                  1997           1996           1995
                                               ---------      ---------      ---------
<S>                                            <C>            <C>            <C>  
Earnings (loss) before fixed charges (1):    
Loss before extraordinary items and
  cumulative effects of accounting changes     ($ 39,937)     ($ 69,584)     ($109,779)
Income tax benefit........................       (22,867)       (38,067)       (62,944)
Equity in net losses of affiliates .......         6,603          6,559          9,600
Distributions from Garden State
  Cablevision ............................                       35,479
Fixed charges (Interest expense) .........       117,756        116,297         97,694
                                               ---------      ---------      --------- 
                                               $  61,555      $  50,684      ($ 65,429)
                                               =========      =========      ========= 

Ratio of earnings to fixed charges (2) ...            --             --             --

<FN>
_______________________

(1)  For the purpose of calculating the ratio of earnings to fixed charges,
     earnings consist of distributions from Garden State Cablevision and income
     (loss) before extraordinary items and cumulative effect of accounting
     changes, income tax expense (benefit), equity in net losses of affiliates
     and fixed charges. Fixed charges consist of interest expense.

(2)  For the years ended December 31, 1997, 1996 and 1995, earnings, as defined
     above, were inadequate to cover fixed charges by $56.2 million, $65.6
     million and $163.1 million, respectively.
</FN>
</TABLE>
[DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 1- 14 89 4 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 3 :9 8- cr-0 01 26 -LC-M D-2 UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee, ve rs us MIC HAEL A. BLANKENSHIP, Defen da nt -Ap pe ll an t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt fo r th e North ernDis tri ctof F lo rid a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Sep te m be r 14 , 20 12 ) Befo re MAR CUS, EDMONDSON an d B LACK, Circ ui t J ud ge s. PER CURI AM: Mi ch ael Bla nk en sh ip , a fed eral pri so ne r pr oc eed in g pr o s e , app eal s the Case: 11-14894 Date Filed: 09/14/2012 Page: 1 of 3de ni al of h is “ Mo ti on to Set -Asi de Sen te nc e an d t o R e-s en te nc e.” Inhi s m ot io n i n

di st ric t co urt, h e rai se d c ha ll en ge s t o h is sen te nc e (s uc h a s, wh ethe r certa in en ha nc em en ts co ul d app ly); bu t h e h as rai se d e nt ire ly diff eren t ar gu m en ts on ap pe al , whi chin st eadch al le ng e tr ia l ev en ts an d g ui lt(su chas, i ns uf fic ie nt ev id en ce). Altho ug h B lank en sh ip no w rai se s d iff eren t i ss ue s o n app eal , th e d is tri ct co urt, b y it s d en ia l, s ti ll en te redanord er fu ll y res ol vi ng hi s “ Mo ti on to Set -Asi de Sen te nc e an d t o R e-s en te nc e”; an d thi s o rd er i s fi na l an d app eal ab le . W e d o h av e juri sd ic ti on to co ns id er the ap pe al . Thi s p rin ci pl e g ui de s u s i n p art : “ a p arty see ki ng to rai se a cl ai m

or i ss ue on ap pe al m us t p la in ly andpro m in en tl y so in di cat e. Oth erwi se , th e is su e -- ev enif pr op erl y pre se rv edat t ria l -- wil l b e co ns id eredab an do ne d.” Uni te d Sta tes v. Jerni ga n , 34 1 F .3d12 73 , 12 83 n.8 (11 thCir . 20 03 ). A rev ie w of the reco rdan d c as e h is to ry rev eal s tha t the di st ric t co urt co ul d no t h av e co ns id eredBla nk en sh ip ’s “ Mo ti on to Set -Asi de ” as a § 2 25 5 m ot io n be cau se he di d n otha ve th e requi redpe rm is si onto fil e a s eco ndor s uc ces si ve m ot io n. Th e d is tri ctco urt’s au th or ity to co ns id er the m ot io n was li mit edby 18 U.S.C. § 3 58 2, an d n on e o f th e ex cep ti on s u nd er § 35 82 ap pl ie d t o B lank en sh ip ’s m ot io n. Th eref

or e, th e d is tri ctco urt d idno t err inde nyin g the m ot io n. Mo reo ve r, 2 Case: 11-14894 Date Filed: 09/14/2012 Page: 2 of 3Bl an ke ns hi p h as ab an do ne d the arg um en ts rai se d i n h is “ Mo ti on to Set -Asi de ,” as

he ha s n otarg ue d the m

on ap pe al . His a rg um en ts on ap pe al are co m pl et el y ap art fro m th e cl ai m s h e arg ue d i n h is m ot io n b efo re the di st ric t co urt. Bas edon a rev ie w of the reco rdan d the pa rti es ’ br ie fs , we affi rm . AFFIRMED.

3 Case: 11-14894 Date Filed: 09/14/2012 Page: 3 of 3
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 112 (Monday, June 10, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 29364]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-14502]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. GT96-65-000]


Algonquin LNG, Inc.; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas 
Tariff

June 4, 1996.
    Take notice that on May 30, 1996, Algonquin LNG, Inc. (Algonquin 
LNG) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised 
Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets with a proposed effective 
date of June 1, 1996:

First Revised Volume No. 1

Third Revised Sheet No. 200

    Algonquin LNG states that the purpose of this filing is to reflect 
a change in Algonquin LNG's index of customers.
    Algonquin LNG states that copies of this filing were served upon 
each affected party and interested state commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Section 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's Rules 
of Practice and Procedure. All such motions or protests must be filed 
as provided in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken but will not serve to make protestants 
parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must 
file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-14502 Filed 6-7-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Exhibit 99.2

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

In  connection  with the filing of the  Annual  Report on Form 10-K for the Year
Ended  December 31, 2001 (the  "Report") by INSpire  Insurance  Solutions,  Inc.
("Registrant"), the undersigned hereby certifies that:

3.        The Report fully  complies with the  requirements  of section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and

4.        The  information  contained  in the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
          material respects,  the financial  condition and results of operations
          of Registrant.




                                             /s/ Andrea Goodrich
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             Andrea Goodrich
                                             Chief Financial Officer
#### Albert Preston CARTER, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 1328-85.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc.

Jan. 7, 1987.

Appeal from County Criminal Court No. 5, Dallas County, John Hendrick, Judge.

Prior report: Tex.App., 700 S.W.2d 289.

Before the court en banc.

On appellant’s petition for discretionary review: petition dismissed.
Exhibit
99.2








CERTIFICATE
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 (the “Report”) on the Form 10-Q of Siga
Resources, Inc. (the “Company”) for the six months ended January 31, 2009, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Arun
Kumar, Chief Executive Officer, President and Director, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:





1. The
Quarterly Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15
(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





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








Date: 
March 9, 2009








ARUN
KUMAR


Arun
Kumar


Chief
Executive Officer,


President
and Director











-1-