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

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 515

To amend title 18, United States Code, to prevent Federal prisoners from

engaging in activities to increase their strength or fighting ability while

in prison.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 13, 1995

Ms. PRYCE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on the Judiciary

A BILL

To amend title 18, United States Code, to prevent Federal

prisoners from engaging in activities to increase their

strength or fighting ability while in prison.

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 ‘‘Prison Security

5 Enhancement Act of 1995’’.

6 SEC. 2. PRISON SECURITY.

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 303 of title 18, United

8 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the follow9 ing new section:
2

•HR 515 IH

1 ‘‘§ 4048. Strength-training of prisoners prohibited

2 ‘‘The Bureau of Prisons shall take care that—

3 ‘‘(1) prisoners under its jurisdiction do not en4 gage in any activities designed to increase their

5 physical strength or their fighting ability; and

6 ‘‘(2) that all equipment designed for this pur7 pose be removed from Federal correctional facili8 ties.’’.

9 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections

10 at the beginning of chapter 303 of title 18, United States

11 Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new

12 item:

‘‘4048. Strength-training of prisoners prohibited.’’.

Æ
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 154 (Friday, August 8, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 46258]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-18261]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER08-1296-000]


Osceola Wind Power II, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial 
Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 
Authorization

August 1, 2008.
    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of 
Osceola Wind Power II, LLC's application for market-based rate 
authority, with an accompanying rate schedule, noting that such 
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR 
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of 
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the 
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 
385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a 
copy of that document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with 
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of 
liability, is August 21, 2008.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet 
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an 
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the 
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the 
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in 
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in 
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link 
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification 
when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance 
with any FERC Online service, please e-mail <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#adebe8ffeee2c3c1c4c3c8fed8ddddc2dfd9edcbc8dfce83cac2db"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f1b7b4a3b2be9f9d989f94a28481819e8385b197948392df969e87">[email protected]</span></a> 
or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-18261 Filed 8-7-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
In the Missouri Court of Appeals

Eastern District

JUNE 30, 2015

THE FOLLOWING CASES WERE AFFIRMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH RULE 

84.16(b) OR RULE 30.25(b).

1. ED101226 STATE OF MISSOURI, RES V MARTY MOSS, APP

2. ED101404 DARRYL J. WALTON, APP V STATE OF MISSOURI, RES

3. ED101501 ANTHONY O'NEAL, APP V STATE OF MISSOURI, RES

4. ED101537 STATE OF MISSOURI, RES V COREY MCCLENDON, APP

5. ED101595 ABDIRAHMAN M. ALI, APP V STATE OF MISSOURI, RES

6. ED102119 KERRI D. SPINK, APP V STATE OF MISSOURI, RES

7. ED102304 LOUISE BREWER, RES V DIV OF ADMIN, APP & DES, RES
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

NO. 03-12-00471- CV
In re John M. Sigman D. H. a/k/a D. T ., Appellan t

v. Texas Depart m ent of Fam ily and P rote ctive Service s, Appellee

F ROM TH E 345 TH DISTRICT CO URT OF TRAVIS CO UNTY NO. D-1 -F M- 11- 0000 99, H ONO RAB LE SCO TT H . JENK INS, J UDGE P RESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
P ER CURIAM

This is a contempt proce eding ancillar y to the appea l of D. H. a/k/a D. T. The subject of this proce eding is J ohn M. Sigman, a ppellant’s attorne y . Ap p el l ant filed her notice of appea l on J uly 16, 2012, and her brief was due September 25, 2012. On September 28, 2012, we order ed counsel to f ile appellant’ s brief no later than October 15, 2012. On October 22, 2012, Mr. Sigman submitt ed a motion to extend the deadline for f iling appe llant’s brief. A ppellant’s brie f, howe ver, ha s not been filed. On Octobe r 23, 2012, John M . Sigman wa s order ed to appe ar in person before this Court on Wednesday , November 14, 2012, at 9:00 a.m., in the courtroom of this Court, to show
cause why he should not be held in contempt and have sanctions imposed for his failure to obey ourSeptember 28, 2012, order
. This order provided that Mr. Sigman would be relieve d of his obliga tion

to appea r before this Court as order ed above if the Clerk of this Court rec eived appellant’ s brief befor e Nove mber 14, 2012.

The show cause hear ing was held in this Court on November 14, 2012, and Sigman appea red a s order ed. At the time of the hear ing, a ppellant’s brie f had not be en filed. After consideration of the rec ord and Sigman’ s explanation for failure to c o mp ly with
our previous o rd er s , we specific ally find that J ohn M. Sigman is in contempt for violating this Court’s order of September 28, 2012, which was sufficie ntly clea r and specific in its require ment that appellant’ s brief was to be filed by Octo b er 1 5 , 2 0 1 2
. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 21.002 (West 2004). J ohn M. Sigman is he reby fined $100 pay able to the Clerk of the Court of Appea ls, Third Dis trict of Tex as, on or before Dece mber 14, 2012, by 5:00 p . m . I f S igma n fails t o pay the $100 fine by Dec ember 14, 2012, he shall be confine d i n a county jail or other lockup within the State for a sufficie nt time to discharg e the full amount of the fine at the daily rate allowed for prisoners serving misdemeanor service s. See In re Miles , 55 S.W .3d 203, 204 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, orig
. proce eding ). I t is order ed that all writs and other proce ss neces s ary for the enfor ceme nt of this judgment be issued.

We further abate this appea l and rema nd the cause to the dist ri ct court with instructions to appoint new counsel for appellant by November 21, 2 0 12. The district court shall order the appropr iate supplemental cler k’s rec ord to be prepa

red and forwa

rded to this Court no later than Dec ember

5, 2012.

2Be fore Chief J ustice Jones, J ustices Rose and Goodw in

Abated Filed: Nove mber 14, 2012

3
240 So.2d 694

#### In re Jim BAINES v. CITY OF BIRMINGHAM. Ex parte Jim BAINES.

6 Div. 819.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

Nov. 5, 1970.

George C. Longshore, Birmingham, for petitioner.

William C. Walker, Birmingham, opposed.

COLEMAN, Justice.

Petition of Jim Baines for certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals to review and revise the judgment and decision of that Court in Baines v. City of Birmingham, 46 Ala.App. 267, 240 So.2d 689 (6 Div. 41).

Writ denied.

SIMPSON, MERRILL, HARWOOD, BLOODWORTH, MADDOX and McCALL, JJ., concur.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6385

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

ERIC LAVELL SKIPWITH,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Senior District 

Judge. (1:14-cr-00092-JFM-2; 1:15-cv-03267-JFM)

Submitted: October 18, 2016 Decided: October 20, 2016

Before WILKINSON, KING, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Eric Lavell Skipwith, Appellant Pro Se. Rod J. Rosenstein, 

United States Attorney, Christopher John Romano, Assistant 

United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Eric Lavell Skipwith seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The 

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues 

a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B)

(2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a 

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies 

relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by 

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the 

district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is 

debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 

(2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). 

When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the 

prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural 

ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable 

claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. 

at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that 

Skipwith has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we 

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

 

65 CADILLAC SQUARE JPMC 2006-CIBC14

REO LLC,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 09-13299

DTWR, LLC, et al.,

Defendants.

/

ORDER SETTING DEADLINE TO PARTICIPATE IN FACILITATION

AND SETTING TELEPHONE CONFERENCE

On October 19, 2009, the parties in the above-captioned matter appeared,

though counsel, for a scheduling conference. During the scheduling conference,

counsel requested a brief delay of formal discovery proceedings in order to pursue a

settlement to this action. About a month later, in a subsequent conference, counsel

indicated that they were working diligently toward an amicable resolution of this action

and that a further adjournment of proceedings was necessary to continue their efforts. 

Since that time, this case has been on the court’s inactive docket while the parties

continued working toward a settlement. From time to time, counsel has required further

prompting or intervention by the court to, for example, select a facilitator and set a

facilitation date. Yet, to this date, final facilitation has not occurred. The court’s

patience is dwindling. If this case is to facilitate, it must do so immediately. If, instead,

the parties want to proceed to trial, the court will place this case back on its active

docket, on a fast track to a bench trial. Under either scenario, the court is no longer

content to allow this case to remain in limbo indefinitely. The court will therefore set a

2:09-cv-13299-RHC-VMM Doc # 38 Filed 04/18/11 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 602
S:\Cleland\JUDGE'S DESK\C3 ORDERS\09-13299.65CADILLAC.Faciliation.wpd

2

firm deadline by which the facilitation must occur. If the case does not facilitate, or does

not settle, the matter will be reopened and a scheduling order will be issued. 

Accordingly, 

 IT IS ORDERED that the parties are DIRECTED to complete, not merely

schedule, facilitation by May 20, 2011. Counsel and party representatives with full

settlement authority shall personally appear at the facilitation, prepared to facilitate in

good faith. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel shall participate in a telephone

conference on May 25, 2011 at 11:00 a.m. The court will initiate the call.

s/Robert H. Cleland 

ROBERT H. CLELAND

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: April 18, 2011

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

on this date, April 18, 2011, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

s/Lisa G. Wagner 

Case Manager and Deputy Clerk

(313) 234-5522

2:09-cv-13299-RHC-VMM Doc # 38 Filed 04/18/11 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 603
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 22 (Friday, February 1, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6183-6184]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-1816]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding 
Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for 
approval,

[[Page 6184]]

pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et 
seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 225), and all other 
applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company 
and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the 
power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the 
banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, 
including the companies listed below.
    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings 
required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the 
Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The applications also will be available 
for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested 
persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated 
in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the 
acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether 
the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards 
in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, 
nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States. 
Additional information on all bank holding companies may be obtained 
from the National Information Center website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these 
applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the 
offices of the Board of Governors not later than February 25, 2008.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond (A. Linwood Gill, III, Vice 
President) 701 East Byrd Street, Richmond, Virginia 23261-4528:
    1. Community Bankers Acquisition Corp., Great Falls, Virginia (to 
be renamed Community Bankers Trust Corporation), to acquire 100 percent 
of the voting securities of BOE Financial Services of Virginia, Inc., 
and thereby indirectly acquire Bank of Essex, both of Tappahannock, 
Virginia.
    B. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (Burl Thornton, Assistant Vice 
President) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414:
    1. NRBC Holding Corporation, to become a bank holding company by 
acquiring 100 percent of the voting shares of The National Republic 
Bank of Chicago, both of Chicago, Illinois.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, January 28, 
2008.
Jennifer J. Johnson,
Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. E8-1816 Filed 1-31-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
#### Gerald M. Hampleman, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. County Board of School Trustees of Perry County, Illinois, et al., Defendants-Appellants, (Consolidated With) James G. Heiman and Ruth E. Heiman, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. County Board of School Trustees of Perry County, Illinois, et al., Defendants-Appellants, (Consolidated With) Tamaroa Community High School, School District No. 102, Perry County and Washington County, Illinois, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. The County Board of School Trustees, et al., Defendants-Appellees.

Gen. No. 66-41.

Fifth District.

October 13, 1966.

*432Hodson & Pennock, of Centralia (Lloyd Middleton, of Pinckneyville, of counsel), for appellants; Hill & Hill, of Benton, for appellees.

Opinion by

JUSTICE EBERSPACHER.

Not to be

published in full.
Exhibit 99.1

Certification
of Chief Executive Officer underSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I
hereby certify that the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A (Amendment No. 1) of OSullivan Industries Holdings, Inc.
for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2002 fully complies with the requirements of
section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the
information contained in such annual report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of OSullivan Industries Holdings, Inc.

|Date:   August 29, 2003 |  |  | /s/ Richard D. Davidson              
|----------------------- |  |  | -------------------------------------
|                        |  |  |                                      
|                        |  |  | Richard D. Davidson                  
|                        |  |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
|                        |  |  |                                      

A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 has been provided to OSullivan Industries Holdings, Inc.
and will be retained by OSullivan Industries Holdings, Inc. and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4282

AN ACT

To amend the National Defense Authorization Act

Defense assistance to local educational agencies.tion relating to the provision of Department offor Fiscal Year 1993 to make a technical correc-
104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4282

AN ACT

To amend the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal

Year 1993 to make a technical correction relating to

the provision of Department of Defense assistance to

local educational agencies.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 4282 EH

1 SECTION 1. TECHNICAL CORRECTION RELATING TO DE2 PARTMENT OF DEFENSE ASSISTANCE TO

3 LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES.

4 Section 386(c)(1) of the National Defense Authoriza5 tion Act for Fiscal Year 1993 (Pub. L. 102–484; 20

6 U.S.C. 7703 note) is amended—

7 (1) by striking ‘‘section 8003(a)’’ and inserting

8 ‘‘section 8003(a)(1)’’; and

9 (2) by striking ‘‘(20 U.S.C. 7703(a))’’ and in10 serting ‘‘(20 U.S.C. 7703(a)(1))’’.

Passed the House of Representatives September 28,

1996.

Attest:

Clerk.
#### CRAVEN COUNTY v. HALL

No. 575P87.

Case below: 87 N.C. App. 256.

Petition by plaintiffs for, discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 3 February 1988.
Exhibit
 32

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



In
 connection with the report on Form 10-Q ofInfrastructure
 Developments Corp.,
 for thequarterly period
 endedMarch 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and
 Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I,Thomas Morgan,
 do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the
 Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:



| | (1) | This 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 this report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the registrant at the end of the period covered by this report and results of operations of the registrant for the period covered by this report.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date:May14,
 2010



/s/
 Thomas Morgan

Thomas
 Morgan,Chief Executive Officer
 and Chief Financial Officer



This
 certification accompanies this report pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent
 required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the registrant for the purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange
 Act of 1934, as amended. This certification shall not be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933,
 as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of this report), irrespective
 of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.



22
Document Headings

                    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 Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration 

          - [TA-W-62,677] 

Pursuant to section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on January 14, 2008 in response to a petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers of Llink Technologies, LLC, Brown City, Missouri. 

The Department has determined that this petition is a photocopy of petition number TA-W-62,630, instituted on January 3, 2008. The investigation of that petition is ongoing and determination has not yet been issued. Therefore, further investigation in the case would serve no purpose, and this investigation has been terminated. 

Signed at Washington, DC, this 23rd day of January, 2008. 

Elliott S. Kushner, 

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

 [FR Doc. E8-1828 Filed 1-31-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P