alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04

- 11

- 00 784

- CR
IN RE Harold BOWENS Original Mandamus Proceeding 1
PER CURIAM Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Karen Angelini, Justice Steven C. Hilbig, Justice
Delivered and Filed: November 16, 2011
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION On October 31, 2011, relator Harold Bowens filed a petition for writ of mandamus, complaining the trial court has failed to rule on his post

- conviction petition for writ of habeas corpus. In 1985, relator was convicted of murder and was sentenced to life in prison. No appeal was taken in this court. Therefore, relator’s felony c onviction became final. Only the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has jurisdiction over matters related to post

conviction relief from an otherwise final felony conviction. See Ater v. Eighth Court of Appeals , 802 S.W.2d 241, 243 (Tex. 1991); see also T EX

. C ODE C RIM

. P ROC

. A NN

. art. 11.07 (West 2011); Board of Pardons & Paroles ex rel. Keene v. Court of Appeals for Eighth Dist. , 910 S.W.2d 481,

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 1985

- CR

- 3726 , styled State of Texas v. Harold Bowens , i n the 290 th Judicial District Court , Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Melisa Skinner presiding.04

- 11

- 00784

- CR

- 2

- 483 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995) (holding that “Article 11.07 provides the exclusive means to challenge a final felony conviction.”). Because the relief sought in relator’s petition relates to post

- conviction relief from an otherwise final felony conviction, we are without jurisdiction to consider his petition for writ of mandamus. Accordingly, relator’s petition is DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION.
PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

D-3 EDDIE ORAH,

Defendant.

 /

Case No. 09-20297

Honorable John Corbett O’Meara

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

This matter came before the court on defendant Eddie Orah’s May 19, 2011 motion for

reconsideration of the court's May 4, 2011 Order Denying Defendant's Motion to Quash Arrest

Warrant and to Dismiss Indictment. Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(h)(2), no response was permitted

unless ordered by the court; therefore, the court ordered the government to respond. The

government filed its response July 21, 2011.

In his motion for reconsideration, defendant Orah again argues that the Fugitive

Disentitlement Doctrine, upon which the court relied in denying his initial motion, is inapplicable

to his case. However, assuming that the doctrine is inapplicable, Defendant is not entitled to any

relief, as his claim that the Indictment should be dismissed fails on the merits.

In arguing that the Indictment should be dismissed, Defendant asserts that he was indicted

only because the alleged victim of his alleged fraud lied. A grand jury's probably cause

determination, however, is immune from this kind of pretrial evidentiary attack. See Costello v.

United States, 350 U.S. 359 (1956). Defendant's motion to dismiss asked the court to weigh the

5:09-cr-20297-JCO-VMM Doc # 43 Filed 09/20/11 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 232
2

evidence supporting the Indictment--something the court cannot do based on Costello. Therefore,

the court must deny Defendant's motion for reconsideration.

ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that defendant Eddie Orah's May 19, 2011 motion for reconsideration

is DENIED.

s/John Corbett O'Meara 

United States District Judge

Date: September 20, 2011

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record on

this date, September 20, 2011, using the ECF system.

s/William Barkholz 

Case Manager

5:09-cr-20297-JCO-VMM Doc # 43 Filed 09/20/11 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 233
I

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4164

To provide for the extension of certain authority for the Marshal of the

Supreme Court and the Supreme Court Police.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 25, 1996

Mr. HYDE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on the Judiciary

A BILL

To provide for the extension of certain authority for the

Marshal of the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court

Police.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That the first sentence of section 9(c) of the Act entitled

4 ‘‘An Act relating to the policing of the building and

5 grounds of the Supreme Court of the United States’’, ap6 proved August 18, 1949 (40 U.S.C. 13n(c)) is amended

7 by striking ‘‘1996’’ and inserting ‘‘2000’’.

Æ
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan



### June 23, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice


### 135522 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan 

### PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices



### v SC: 135522 COA: 280166 Wayne CC: 00-002348-01 EUGENE CARTER, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the November 21, 2007 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).

p0616 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

June 23, 2008

Clerk
<PAGE>

EX 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Michael Anthony, certify that:

1.I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Standard Commerce,
Inc.;

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.I am 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 my supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to me 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 my 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.I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee 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 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.

August 13, 2007

/s/  MICHAEL ANTHONY
________________________
Michael Anthony
Chief Executive Officer,
Chief Financial Officer and Sole Director
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                       6,676,333
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                7,273,766
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                 12,668,615
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            28,872,414
<PP&E>                                     102,144,262
<DEPRECIATION>                            (14,901,196)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             118,609,349
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       28,269,623
<BONDS>                                     65,985,943
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        75,863
<OTHER-SE>                                  28,919,765
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               118,609,349
<SALES>                                    109,669,690
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           109,669,690
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           118,071,895
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           5,874,609
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (14,276,814)
<INCOME-TAX>                               (1,453,640)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (12,823,174)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.69)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1999             MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999             MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                         640,299                   3,417
<SECURITIES>                                        75                  25,442
<RECEIVABLES>                                  360,783                 217,677
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               429,652                 416,945
<PP&E>                                               0                       0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,036,700               1,364,297
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          276,966                 532,440
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                    530,000                 530,000
<COMMON>                                     9,682,451               7,362,318
<OTHER-SE>                                           0                       0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,036,700               1,364,297
<SALES>                                      1,295,159               1,161,442
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0                       0
<CGS>                                          746,285                 763,018
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                (782,539)               (539,951)
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               129,529                  98,602
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             (912,068)               (638,553)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0                       0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (912,068)               (638,553)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                       0




</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-10103

JENARA STEELE; SHANNON STEELE,

Plaintiffs-Appellants

v.

GREEN TREE SERVICING, L.L.C.; REO PROPERTIES CORP.,

Defendants-Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:09-CV-603

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

We affirm for essentially the reasons stated by the district court.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

December 12, 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: 11-10103 Document: 00511692028 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/12/2011
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Department of Justice Drug Enforcement Administration
 By Notice dated March 28, 2008, and published in the 
                    **Federal Register**
                     on April 4, 2008 (73 FR 18570), Rhodes Technologies, 498 Washington Street, Coventry, Rhode Island 02816, made application by renewal to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to be registered as a bulk manufacturer of the basic classes of controlled substances listed in schedules I and II: Drug
ScheduleTetrahydrocannabinols (7370)
IMethylphenidate (1724)
IICodeine (9050)
IIDihydrocodeine (9120)
IIOxycodone (9143)
IIHydromorphone (9150)
IIHydrocodone (9193)
IIOripavine (9330)
IIThebaine (9333)
IIOxymorphone (9652)
IINoroxymorphone (9668)
IIFentanyl (9801)
II
 The company plans to manufacture the listed controlled substances in bulk for conversion and sale to dosage form manufacturers. No comments or objections have been received. DEA has considered the factors in 21 U.S.C. 823(a) and determined that the registration of Rhodes Technologies to manufacture the listed basic classes of controlled substances is consistent with the public interest at this time. DEA has investigated Rhodes Technologies to ensure that the company's registration is consistent with the public interest. The investigation has included inspection and testing of the company's physical security systems, verification of the company's compliance with state and local laws, and a review of the company's background and history. Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823, and in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33, the above named company is granted registration as a bulk manufacturer of the basic classes of controlled substances listed. Dated: July 28, 2008. Joseph T. Rannazzisi, Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration.


[FR Doc. E8-17972 Filed 8-5-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
cbmg_ex1031.htm


Exhibit 10.31


 




  





1











  






 


 




  





2











  






 


 




  





3











  






 


 




  





4











  






 


 




  





5











  






 


 




  





6











  






 


 




  





7











  






 


 




  





8











  






 


 




  





9











  






 


 




  





10











  






 


 




  





11











  






 


 




  





12











  






 


 




  





13











  






 


 


14
I

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4146

To provide for the collection of certain information, in the next decennial

census of population, relating to individuals who regularly provide care

to a family member who is unable to care for himself or herself due

to age or a continuing physical or mental condition or impairment.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 24, 1996

Mr. CANADY of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred to

the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight

A BILL

To provide for the collection of certain information, in the

next decennial census of population, relating to individuals who regularly provide care to a family member

who is unable to care for himself or herself due to

age or a continuing physical or mental condition or impairment.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Family Caregiver In5 formation Act’’.
2

•HR 4146 IH

1 SEC. 2. REQUIREMENT.

2 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Commerce shall

3 take such measures as may be necessary to ensure that,

4 as part of the decennial census of population taken in the

5 year 2000, information shall be compiled relating to the

6 subject of family caregivers.

7 (b) SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS.—The information

8 compiled shall include such matters as—

9 (1) the age and sex of the caregiver;

10 (2) how the caregiver is related to the care re11 cipient;

12 (3) the amount of time the caregiver regularly

13 devotes to assisting the care recipient;

14 (4) whether or not the caregiver, in turn, suf15 fers from any serious medical or other debilitating

16 impairment or condition;

17 (5) the financial status of the caregiver and the

18 estimated financial costs to the caregiver associated

19 with caring for the care recipient; and

20 (6) whether the care recipient is receiving or el21 igible to receive any other form of assistance (wheth22 er public or private and whether financial or in23 kind).

24 (c) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of this section:

25 (1) FAMILY CAREGIVER.—The term ‘‘family

26 caregiver’’ means an individual who regularly assists
3

•HR 4146 IH

1 a care recipient (to whom the caregiver is related)

2 in carrying out 2 or more activities of daily living.

3 (2) CARE RECIPIENT.—The term ‘‘care recipi4 ent’’ means an individual who requires substantial

5 assistance from another individual, in carrying out 2

6 or more activities of daily living, due to age or a

7 physical or mental condition or impairment which

8 has lasted or is expected to last longer than 3

9 months.

10 (3) ACTIVITY OF DAILY LIVING.—The term ‘‘ac11 tivity of daily living’’ includes bathing, dressing, eat12 ing, transferring, toileting, shopping for personal

13 items, obtaining and taking medication, managing

14 money, using the telephone, or performing light or

15 heavy housework.

Æ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

 

UNITED STATES FIRE INSURANCE 

COMPANY,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 09-12362

POLESTAR CONSTRUCTION 

OF FLORIDA, LLC, et al.

Defendants.

 /

CORRECTION TO ORDER OF REFERENCE TO 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

On June 18, 2010, the court issued an order of reference that erroneously stated

that the settlement conference would be held on either the morning of June 13, 2010 in

Ann Arbor or the morning of June 15, 2010 in Detroit. The order should have stated

that the settlement conference would be held on either the morning of July 13, 2010 in

Ann Arbor or the morning of July 15, 2010 in Detroit. 

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the order of reference [Dkt. # 40] is

AMENDED to reflect this correction.

s/Robert H. Cleland 

ROBERT H. CLELAND

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: June 18, 2010
S:\Cleland\JUDGE'S DESK\C1 ORDERS\09-12362.USFIRE.AmendedOrderofReference.npk.wpd

2

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of record

on this date, June 18, 2010, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

s/Lisa G. Wagner 

Case Manager and Deputy Clerk

(313) 234-5522