alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

ROGER YOUNG,

Petitioner,

v.

CINDI CURTIN,

Respondent. 

 /

Case Number: 2:09-CV-11063

HONORABLE VICTORIA A. ROBERTS

OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S 

MOTION TO PRODUCE ADDITIONAL RULE 5 MATERIALS

Petitioner Roger Young, a state inmate presently incarcerated at the Richard A.

Handlon Correctional Facility in Ionia, Michigan, filed a pro se petition for writ of habeas

corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. He challenges his first-degree criminal sexual conduct

conviction, Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.520(b), imposed by a Wayne County, Michigan

circuit court jury. 

Now before the Court is Petitioner’s Motion to Produce Additional Rule 5

Materials. Rules 5(c) and (d), Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, requires the

respondent to file a copy of any prior decisions, pleadings, briefs, and transcripts relevant

to the issues presented in a habeas petition. Petitioner claims that Respondent failed to

file these relevant documents: a handwritten letter from Petitioner to the victim that was

admitted into evidence at trial (both the redacted and unredacted versions) and an

audiocassette that was not admitted into evidence at trial. With regard to the letter, the

2:09-cv-11063-VAR-CEB Doc # 28 Filed 07/08/15 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 3200
victim read the redacted version of the letter into the record. Petitioner does not claim

that she did so inaccurately or that it was transcribed incorrectly. Further, he asserts no

reason why an unredacted version of the letter is relevant. The Court finds no need for

production of either the redacted or unredacted letter. Accord Hernandez v. McDaniel,

No. 3:09-CV-00545, 2009 WL 4953384, *1 (D. Nev. Dec. 14, 2009) (“Nowhere under

the habeas rules are the respondents required to produce trial exhibits ... used in state

court proceedings.”). 

Petitioner requests production of an audiotape that was referenced at trial outside

the presence of the jury. The audiotape was never played for the judge or jury, nor was it

admitted into evidence. Habeas review is “limited to the record that was before the state

court.” Cullen v. Pinholster, — U.S. —, 131 S.Ct. 1388, 1398 (2011). The language of

the statute is “backward-looking” and “requires an examination of the state-court decision

at the time it was made. Id.” The audiotape was not part of the state court record. 

Therefore, the Court may not consider it in adjudicating the habeas petition. 

The Court DENIES Petitioner’s Motion to Produce Additional Rule 5 Materials

(Dkt. #26).

SO ORDERED. 

S/Victoria A. Roberts

VICTORIA A. ROBERTS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: July 8, 2015

2

2:09-cv-11063-VAR-CEB Doc # 28 Filed 07/08/15 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 3201
##### 



EXHIBIT 10.41
 
 
  Optionee:Grant Date:
    
    , 20Number of Shares:Expiration Date:
    
    , 20Exercise Price Per Share:
    
    $[Date First Exercisable:
    
    , 20][Date First Exercisable:
    
    1.          , 20 as to  shares2.           , 20 as to  shares3.           , 20 as to  shares]
 
      1




---



##### 



2




---



##### 



MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATIONBy:Its:OPTIONEEOptionee acknowledges having received, read and understood the Plan and this Agreement, and agrees to all of the terms and provisions of this Agreement.(Signature)(Please print your name)(Please print your residence address)
 3




---



##### 



1.
    
    Exercise of Option.Name:Date:Shares to be Exercised:Per-Share Exercise Price: $Aggregate Exercise Price: $(for all shares being purchased)
 2.
    
    Delivery of Payment. Indicate below how the full option exercise price for the shares is to be
paid:
 Cash in the form of check, bank draft, money order, or wire of funds payable to
Mercantile Bank CorporationBy surrender to the Company of shares of Common Stock owned and held for more
than six months with a value of $ represented by certificate number(s):Pursuant to a cashless exercise program implemented by the CompanyA combination of the above (please provide details, for example, describe the
number of shares to be purchased with cash and the number of shares to be purchased
with previously owned shares of Common Stock):
 SignatureDated:Address:
 4
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.1

              REPORT ON FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULE AND CONSENT
                            OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

The Board of Directors
Interwoven, Inc.:

   The audit referred to in our report dated January 24, 2002 included the
related financial statement schedule as of, and for the year ended December 31,
2001, as listed in the Index in Item 14(a)2 herein. The financial statement
schedule is the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility
is to express an opinion on the financial statement schedule based on our
audit. In our opinion, the financial statement schedule, when considered in
relation to the basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole,
presents fairly in all material respects, the information set forth therein.

   We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements on
Form S-8 (Nos. 333-88725, 333-39914, 333-42690, 333-46662, 333-49926 and
333-54250) of Interwoven, Inc. and subsidiaries of our report dated January 24,
2002, relating to the consolidated balance sheet of Interwoven, Inc. as of
December 31, 2001, and the related consolidated statements of operations and
comprehensive loss, stockholders' equity (deficit) and cash flows for the year
ended December 31, 2001, and related financial statement schedule, which report
appears in the December 31, 2001, annual report on Form 10-K of Interwoven, Inc.

                                          /s/  KPMG LLP

Mountain View, California
March 22, 2002
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

SUZANNE WASHBURN, 

Plaintiff,

Case No. 09-CV-10202

v.

HON. GEORGE CARAM STEEH

GENERAL ELECTRIC CAPITAL, 

CORPORATION,

Defendant.

_____________________________________/

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE

The parties of record reached a resolution of the above-referenced matter and

signed a written settlement agreement. This case hereby is DISMISSED WITHOUT

PREJUDICE. This case may be reopened, if necessary, by motion of either party

without the payment of additional fees or costs. Alternatively, the parties may submit

an order of dismissal with prejudice upon consummation of the settlement.

SO ORDERED.

s/George Caram Steeh 

GEORGE CARAM STEEH

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: August 16, 2011

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Copies of this Order were served on the attorneys/parties of record on 

 August 16, 2011 by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

s/Marcia Beauchemin

Deputy Clerk

2:09-cv-10202-GCS-RSW Doc # 42 Filed 08/16/11 Pg 1 of 1 Pg ID 1197
UN PUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20

- 1624

ERICK JHONATHAN CUBIAS

- MONTOYA

,

Petitioner

,

v.

MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General

,

Respondent

.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

.

Submitted : April 20, 2021 Decided: May 13, 2021

Before AGEE and QUATTLEBAUM , Circuit Judges , and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by un published per curiam opinion

.

Anser Ahmad, McLean, Virginia, for Petitioner. Jeffery Bossert Clark, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Shelley R. Goad, Assistant Director, Laura Halliday Hickein, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

, Was hington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

Erick Jhonathan Cubias

- Montoya, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for

review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) denying his motion to

reconsider and reopen. We have reviewed the administrative record and the Board’s order

and find no abuse of discretion. 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a) , (b)(1), (c)(1) (202 0) . Accordingly,

we deny the petition for review for the reasons sta ted by the Board. In re Cubias

- Montoya

(B.I.A. May 20, 2020). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would

not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 20 (Tuesday, January 30, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 3021]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1703]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP96-117-000]


Texas Eastern Transmission Corporation; Notice of Proposed 
Changes in FERC Gas Tariff

January 24, 1996.
    Take notice that on January 19, 1996, Texas Eastern Transmission 
Corporation (Texas Eastern) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas 
Tariff, Sixth Revised Volume No. 1 and Original Volume No. 2, the 
tariff sheets listed on Appendix A to the filing to become effective 
February 18, 1996. Texas Eastern asserts that the purpose of this 
filing is to comply with the Commission's order issued September 28, 
1995 in Docket No. RM95-3-000.
    Texas Eastern states that the purpose of this filing is to bring 
its FERC Gas Tariff into compliance with the Commission's updated 
Regulations set forth in Order No. 582 (Final Rule) issued September 
28, 1995 in Docket No. RM95-3-000, Filing and Reporting Requirements 
for Interstate Natural Gas Company Rate Schedules and Tariffs. 
Specifically, Texas Eastern is: (a) adding telephone and facsimile 
numbers as well as street address to the respective title pages of each 
volume of the tariff; (b) revising Section 11 to address Texas 
Eastern's policy on financing or construction of pipeline laterals; (c) 
adding a statement describing the order in which Texas Eastern 
discounts its rates; (d) including a description of periodic reports 
required by Commission orders or settlements in proceedings initiated 
under Part 154 or 284 of the Commission's Regulations; (e) updating 
references to Part 154 of the Commission's Regulations; and (f) adding 
the Index of Firm Customers to the Table of Contents. Copies of the 
filing were served on firm customers of Texas Eastern and interested 
state commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Secs. 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's Rules 
and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed as provided 
in Sec. 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. 96-1703 Filed 1-29-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 130 (Friday, July 5, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35269-35270]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-17138]


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


NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

Special Emphasis Panel in Civil and Mechanical Systems; Notice of 
Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meeting:


[[Page 35270]]


    Name: Special Emphasis Panel in Civil and Mechanical Systems 
(1205).
    Dates and Times: July 23 and July 24, 1996; 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 
p.m.
    Place: NSF, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Room 530, Arlington, 
Virginia.
    Type of Meeting: Closed.
    Contract Person: Dr. Devendra P. Garg, Program Director, Dynamic 
Systems & Control Program, Division of Civil and Mechanical Systems, 
Room 545, NSF, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22230 703/306-1361, 
x 5068.
    Purpose of Meeting: To provide advise and recommendations 
concerning proposals submitted to NSF for finanicial support.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate research proposals as part of 
selection process for awards.
    Reason for Closing: The proposal being reviewed include 
information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including 
Technical information; financial data, such as salaries; and 
personal information concerning individuals associated with the 
proposals. There matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c) (4) and 
(6) of the Government Sunshine Act.

    Dated: July 1, 1996
M. Rebecca Winkler,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 96-17138 Filed 7-3-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We have issued our reports dated March 13, 2007,accompanying the consolidated financial statements and management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting included in the Annual Report of Vignette Corporation on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,2006. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said reports in the Registration Statements of Vignette Corporation on Form S-8 (File No. 333-72877, 333-91767, 333-30242, 333-41482, 333-59358, 333-100566, and 333-107702) and Form S-3(File No. 333-113674 and 333-33794). 

/s/ Grant Thornton LLP 

Dallas, Texas 

March 13, 2007
EXHIBIT 3 

Declarations of Peter Hendrickson with regard to W-4s and other documents furnished to the 

Personnel Management, Inc. Human Resources department as indicated in Exhibit 2.

Case 2:08-cr-20585-GER-DAS Document 90-5 Filed 03/26/2010 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:08-cr-20585-GER-DAS Document 90-5 Filed 03/26/2010 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:08-cr-20585-GER-DAS Document 90-5 Filed 03/26/2010 Page 3 of 3
Form of Election for Director Deferral of Restricted Stock Awards




 Exhibit 10.23 
 PLAINS EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION COMPANY 
 DIRECTOR’S DEFERRAL ELECTION FORM

 EFFECTIVE YEAR          
  

							
	Director’s Name	 	  
	  	Social Security #	 	  


 I hereby elect to defer all Restricted Stock Awards to which I may become entitled for my services in
             as a member of the board of directors (the “Board”) of Plains Exploration & Production Company (the “Company”). 
 In lieu of payment or transfer to me of Restricted Stock Awards, an equivalent number of Restricted Stock Units will be credited to an account for me. The Restricted
Stock Units credited to my account will become fully vested and non-forfeitable upon my completion of the earlier of (i) one full year of service as a member of the Board commencing on the date of grant or (ii) the next annual meeting of
the Company’s stockholders. I will forfeit all rights to any unvested Restricted Stock Units should I leave or be removed from the Board for any reason prior to vesting. All vested Restricted Stock Units in my Restricted Stock Unit Account will
be distributed to me in the form of Company common stock as soon as administratively feasible (but no later than 60 days) after the date of my complete separation from service as a member of the Board. 
 I acknowledge that I have received sufficient information to make an informed election and that I have had answered to my satisfaction any questions that I may have had.
I further understand that my choice to defer compensation involves both a financial and tax risk and that neither the Company, nor any of its employees, is providing any assurances of returns, preservation of principle, or specific tax treatment on
any amounts deferred. 
 This election does not limit in any way the right of the Company or its Stockholders to terminate my board service in accordance
with the Articles and Bylaws of the Company. The Company retains the right to amend or terminate this agreement in whole or in part at any time, but no such amendment or termination shall affect my rights to, or the distribution of, amounts deferred
as of the date of such amendment or termination. 
  

							
	DIRECTOR	 	
			
	  
	 	Date: December 31,         	 	
	
	PLAINS EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION COMPANY
				
	By:	 	  
	 	Date: December 31,
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 131 (Monday, July 8, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 35817]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-17254]


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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Committee Management; Notice of Establishment

    The Deputy Director of the National Science Foundation has 
determined that the establishment of a United States Antarctic Program 
Blue Ribbon Panel, is necessary and in the public interest in 
connection with the performance of duties imposed upon the Director, 
National Science Foundation (NSF), by 42 USC 1861 et seq. This 
determination follows consultation with the Office of Management and 
Budget and with the Committee Management Secretariat, General Services 
Administration.
    NAME OF COMMITTEE: United States Antarctic Program (USAP) Blue 
Ribbon Panel.
    PURPOSE & OBJECTIVE: The objective of the United States Antarctic 
Program (USAP) Blue Ribbon Panel is to recommend to the National 
Science Foundation (NSF) promising approaches that NSF can take to 
realize significant savings in the USAP. The Panel's charge is to:
<bullet> examine full range of infrastructure, management, and 
scientific options of operations, including the eventual replacement of 
South Pole Station; develop several budget scenarios, including one to 
correspond to a five to seven year freeze in total USAP funding;
<bullet> examine the efficiency and appropriateness of the management 
of infrastructure, management, and scientific options of operations; 
and
<bullet> evaluate how the science programs are implemented.
    BALANCE MEMBERSHIP PLANS: Approximately twelve persons from the 
external community will serve on the Panel. These members will be 
experts in a broad range of areas, including infrastructure management 
in hostile environments, difficult logistics, communications, 
international collaboration, and research that involves remote 
operations of facilities or instruments. The members of the Panel will 
reflect a broad, senior-level perspective on these areas and will be 
individuals who have made overarching decisions on complex and 
challenging programs. The Panel will begin its work in late Summer and 
complete its report by next Spring.
    RESPONSIBLE NSF OFFICIALS: Mr. Erick Chiang, Acting Deputy 
Director, Office of Polar Programs, National Science Foundation, 4201 
Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22230 (703 306-1030).

    Dated: July 2, 1996.
M. Rebecca Winkler,
Committee Management Office.
[FR Doc. 96-17254 Filed 7-5-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
N OTE : This disposition is nonprecedential.


# United States **Court of Appeals**  **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

MACDERMID PRINTING S OLUTIONS, LLC, Appellant

v.

E.I. DUPONT DE NEMOURS & COMPANY
, Appellee

______________________

2015

- 1750

______________________
Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board

, in No. 95/001,962.

______________________

JUDGMENT

______________________

J OHN R ICHARD H ORVACK
, J R

. , Carmody Torrance Sa ndak & Hennessey LLP, New Haven, CT, argued for appe llant. Also represented by J OHN L OUIS C ORDANI

.

C HARLES E. L IPSEY , Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, Reston, VA, argued for appellee. Also represented by E RIKA A RNER ; A ARON G LEATON C LAY
, H OWARD W ARREN L EVINE
, Washington, DC; J EFFREY D ANIEL S MYTH
, J ENNIFER S WAN
, Palo Alto, CA; M ARY K. F ERGUSON
, Boston, MA; M ICHAEL S. M ARCUS
, Blank Rome LLP, Washington, DC.______________________

T HIS C AUSE having been heard and considered, it is

O RDERED and A DJUDGED :

P ER C URIAM (T ARANTO
, L INN
, and H UGHES
, Circuit Judges ).

AFFIRMED

. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

E NTERED BY O RDER OF THE C OURT

March 16, 2016 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole Date Daniel E. O’Toole Clerk of Court
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 99.1

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

I, Eli Dabich, Jr., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual
Report of Synergy 2000, Inc. on Form 10-KSB for the annual period ended December
31, 2002 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form
10-KSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and
results of operations of Synergy 2000, Inc.

BY: /S/ ELI DABICH, JR.
    ------------------------------------------
    NAME:  ELI DABICH, JR.
    TITLE: CHAIRMAN, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, Jeanette T. Smith, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual
Report of Synergy 2000, Inc. on Form 10-KSB for the annual period ended December
31, 2002 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form
10-KSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and
results of operations of Synergy 2000, Inc.

BY: /S/ JEANETTE T. SMITH
    -------------------
NAME: JEANETTE T. SMITH
TITLE: EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
Exhibit
32.2





CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Ecoland
International, Inc. for the fiscal quarter ending February 29, 2008, I, David
Wallace, Chief Financial Officer of Ecoland International, Inc., hereby certify
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief,
that:





1.           Such
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ending February 29, 2008,
fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and





2.           The
information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal
quarter ending February 29, 2008, fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of Ecoland International,
Inc.





Dated:
April 10, 2008.





/s/  David
      WallaceDavid
      Wallace, Chief Financial Officer ofEcoland
      International, Inc.