alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

WESLEY WAYNE AUSTIN,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

L AWRENCE G. WASDEN ; et al.,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 17

- 35048

D.C. No. 4:16

- cv

- 00172

- BLW

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Idaho

B. Lynn Winmill, Chief Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 18, 2017 **

Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN , and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

Federal prisoner Wesley Wayne Austin appeals pro se from the district

court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging federal claims

arising from his state court conviction

. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §

1291. We review de novo

. Whitaker v

. Garcetti

, 486 F

. 3d 572

, 579 ( 9th

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously conc ludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

DEC 20 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 17

- 35048

Cir

. 2007 ) (dismissal under Heck v. Humphrey , 512 U.S. 477 (1994) ); Resnick v.

Hayes , 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A )

.

We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Austin’s action as Heck

- barred because

success on the claims would necessarily imply the invalidity of his sentence, and

Austin fail ed to show that his sentence has been invalidated. See Heck , 512 U.S. at

486

- 87 ( explaining that if “a judgment in favor of the plaintiff would necessarily

imply the invalidity of his conviction or sentence

. . . the complaint must be

dismissed unless the plaintiff can demonstrate that the conviction or sentence has

already been invalidated”)

.

AFFIRME D.
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSIONWASHINGTON, D.C. 20549 FORM 10-Q/A Amendment No. 1 RQUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
ACT OF 1934 FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED JUNE 30, 2009 £TRANSITION REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 FOR THE TRANSITION FROM __________ TO __________.  COMMISSION FILE NUMBER333-143512  TARA MINERALS CORP. (Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)  Nevada20-5000381(State or other jurisdiction of(I.R.S. Employerincorporation or organization)Identification No.)2162 Acorn CourtWheaton, IL60187(Address of principal executive offices)(Zip code)Issuer's telephone number: (630) 462-2079 Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes R    No £  Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of large accelerated filer, accelerated filer and smaller reporting company in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.  Large accelerated filer oAccelerated filer oNon-accelerated filer oSmaller reporting company þ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes  £   No R As of August 17, 2009, the Company had 41,588,985 outstanding shares common stock.    PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT  The purpose of this Amendment to our FORM 10Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2009 is solely to refile Exhibit 10.5.     PART II  OTHER INFORMATION ITEM 6.     EXHIBITS  (a) Exhibits Number Exhibit  10.1 Modification to the Transfer of Mining Rights Agreement  Centenario*  10.2 Transfer of Mining Rights Agreement  Pirita, La Fe, Suerte*  10.3 Transfer of Mining Rights Agreement - Picacho*  10.4 Convertible Promissory Note - Tara Gold Resource Corp.*  10.5 Distribution Agreement with Fertilizer King Corporation Limited**  31 Rule 13a-14(a) Certifications*  32 Section 1350 Certifications*  *    Filed with our FORM 10Q for June 30, 2009 on August 19, 2009 **  Filed herewith       SIGNATURES   In accordance with Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act, the registrant caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized on August 28, 2009.  TARA MINERALS CORP.    By:   /s/ Francis Richard Biscan Jr. Francis Richard Biscan, Jr., President and Chief Executive Officer    By:   /s/ Clifford A. Brown Clifford A. Brown, Principal Financial and Accounting Officer
EXHIBIT
32.2





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 USC, SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF
THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








In connection with the Quarterly Report
of YaFarm Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
June 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on or about
the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Hong Zhao, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec.
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1)           The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





(2)           Information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.





August
      19, 2008
              By:
              /s/ Hong
      ZhaoHong
      ZhaoChief
      Financial Officer




A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
YaFarm Technologies, Inc. and will be retained by YaFarm Technologies, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

 

ERICK BURGESS,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 09-CV-13019-DT

PROBABILITY PHYSICAL THERAPY, LLC,

Defendant.

/

ORDER STAYING PROCEEDINGS PENDING SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS AND

SETTING TELEPHONE CONFERENCE

On October 14, 2010, the court held a conference with counsel representing the

parties in this case. The Assistant United States Attorney assigned to this matter also

attended. During the conference, counsel presented the court with a unified time-line

and plan under which to engage in informal discovery aimed at attempting to arrive at

an amicable resolution to this matter. The plan contemplates that the parties will

diligently work toward settlement within the next ninety days. The court is satisfied that

the parties will use this time productively. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that all formal proceedings in this matter are STAYED pending

settlement negotiations between the parties in accordance with the proposed schedule

that was presented to the court. The parties are instructed to notify the court

immediately if they have reached a complete resolution to this matter or if their

negotiations have halted.
S:\Cleland\JUDGE'S DESK\C3 ORDERS\09-13019.BURGESS.Stay.wpd

2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the court will conduct a telephone conference,

on January 13, 2011 at 10:00 a.m. The court will initiate the call.

 S/Robert H. Cleland 

ROBERT H. CLELAND

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: October 15, 2010

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

on this date, October 15, 2010, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

 S/Lisa Wagner 

Case Manager and Deputy Clerk

(313) 234-5522
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 Justice

###### United States Parole Commission 

# Agency Holding Meeting:

Department of Justice, United States Parole Commission. 

# Date and Time:

12 p.m., Thursday, August 14, 2008. 

# Place:

U.S. Parole Commission, 5550 Friendship Boulevard, 4th Floor, Chevy Chase, Maryland 20815. 

# Status:

Closed. 

# Matters Considered:

The following matter will be considered during the closed portion of the Commission's Business Meeting:  Petition for reconsideration involving one original jurisdiction case pursuant to 28 CFR 2.27. 

# Agency Contact:

Thomas W. Hutchison, Chief of Staff, United States Parole Commission, (301) 492-5990. 

Dated: August 14, 2008. 

Rockne J. Chickinell, 

General Counsel,  U.S. Parole Commission.

[FR Doc. E8-18563 Filed 8-8-08; 3:30 pm] 

BILLING CODE 4410-31-M
2:09-cv-13564-BAF-MJH Doc # 1 Filed 09/10/09 Pg 1 of 6 Pg ID 1
2:09-cv-13564-BAF-MJH Doc # 1 Filed 09/10/09 Pg 2 of 6 Pg ID 2
2:09-cv-13564-BAF-MJH Doc # 1 Filed 09/10/09 Pg 3 of 6 Pg ID 3
2:09-cv-13564-BAF-MJH Doc # 1 Filed 09/10/09 Pg 4 of 6 Pg ID 4
2:09-cv-13564-BAF-MJH Doc # 1 Filed 09/10/09 Pg 5 of 6 Pg ID 5
2:09-cv-13564-BAF-MJH Doc # 1 Filed 09/10/09 Pg 6 of 6 Pg ID 6
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15**  **- 1466** 

ANTHONY T. WATSON , Plaintiff

– Appellant ,

v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., as Successor by Merger to BAC Home Loans Servicing L.P. formerly known as Countrywide Home Loans Servicing, L.P. , Defendant

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Greenbelt

. Peter J. Messitte, Senior District Judge. ( 8:14

- cv - 01335

- PJM )

Submitted : September 24, 2015 Decided: October 23, 2015

Before SHEDD, WYNN, and HARRIS , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Anthony T. Watson, Appellant Pro Se. Craig Robert Haughton, MCGUIREWOODS LLP, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Anthony T. Watson appeals the district court ’ s order dismissing his civil complaint for failure to state a claim. We
have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district

court. Watson v. Bank of Am. , No. 8:14

- cv - 01335

- PJM (D. Md.,
Mar. 30, 2015) . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

mate rials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

DIEGO PASCUAL FRANCISCO

,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

, Appellee

.

No. 4D 14

- 4039

[ June 3, 2015 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for

the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County ; Stephen A. Rapp

, Judge; L.T. Case No. 502012CF007694AXXXMB

.

Diego Pascual Francisco, Crawfordville, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Mitchell A.

Egber, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed. See Iacono v. State , 930 So. 2d 829, 831 (Fla. 4th DCA

2006).

C IKLIN

, C ONNER and K LINGENSMITH

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4152 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4152

To designate the Federal building located at 100 Alabama Street NW., in 
         Atlanta, Georgia, as the ``Sam Nunn Federal Center''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 24, 1996

Mr. Lewis of Georgia introduced the following bill; which was referred 
         to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To designate the Federal building located at 100 Alabama Street NW., in 
         Atlanta, Georgia, as the ``Sam Nunn Federal Center''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The Federal building located at 100 Alabama Street NW., in Atlanta, 
Georgia, shall be known and designated as the ``Sam Nunn Federal 
Center''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the Federal building referred to in 
section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Sam Nunn Federal 
Center''.
                                 <all>
```
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 Commerce

###### National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

          - RIN 0648-XJ62

# AGENCY:

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) will host a public workshop on proposed gear modifications to trawl sweeps used in the BSAI flatfish fisheries, at Dantrawl, in Seattle.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held on September 8, 2008, 1 p.m.-5 p.m.

# ADDRESSES:

Dantrawl, 1121 NW 52nd, Seattle, WA 98107.

*Council address*: North Pacific Fishery Management Council, 605 W. 4th Ave., Suite 306, Anchorage, AK 99501-2252.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Diana Evans, Council staff, Phone: 907-271-2809.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The agenda will be as follows:

(1) Introductions; (2) Latest research results; (3) Gear designs (bobbins, placement, rope types, with net reels and without net reels, practical applications); (4) Council June motion; (5) Draft regulations; (6) Monitoring and enforcement issues (identify problems and suggest solutions).

These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Gail Bendixen at 907-271-2809 at least 7 working days prior to the meeting date.

Dated: August 4, 2008.

Tracey L. Thompson,

Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. E8-18161 Filed 8-6-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-22-S
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 610

To prohibit States from discriminating in the admission to the practice

of law of graduates of accredited and certified law schools.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 20, 1995

Mr. MEEHAN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To prohibit States from discriminating in the admission to

the practice of law of graduates of accredited and certified law schools.

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

3 SECTION 1. FINDINGS.

4 The Congress finds that—

5 (1) the vast majority of States only allow out6 of-State residents having gone to schools accredited

7 by the American bar Association to sit for the bar;

8 (2) many law school graduates are being re9 stricted in their admission to practice law because
2

•HR 610 IH

1 they have elected to attend a school that is not so

2 accredited;

3 (3) each State requires bar applicants to pass

4 its individual exam of minimum competency before

5 the applicants can practice law within its borders;

6 and

7 (4) States should rely on such exams, not arbi8 trary distinctions in State accrediting and certifying

9 procedures, to distinguish between qualified and un10 qualified candidates for admission.

11 SEC. 2. STATE RESTRICTIONS ON ADMISSIONS TO PRAC12 TICE OF LAW.

13 No State shall discriminate in the admission of indi14 viduals to the practice of law on the basis of whether such

15 individuals successfully completed a program of post-bac16 calaureate legal education of a law school that—

17 (1) is approved by the accrediting or certifying

18 agency of the State in which the law school is lo19 cated,

20 (2) is approved by an educational accrediting

21 agency recognized by the State in which the law

22 school is located, or

23 (3) is approved by the American Bar Associa24 tion.

Æ
#### The People of the State of New York v. James Pramo.

Motion granted.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4269 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4269

  To relieve the Puerto Rico Housing Bank and Finance Agency and its 
   assignees of liability for certain loans subject to the Truth-in-
                              Lending Act.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 27, 1996

Mr. Romero-Barcelo introduced the following bill; which was referred to 
            the Committee on Banking and Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To relieve the Puerto Rico Housing Bank and Finance Agency and its 
   assignees of liability for certain loans subject to the Truth-in-
                              Lending Act.

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

SECTION 1. DEFINITIONS AND RULES OF CONSIDERATION.

    (a) Unless otherwise provided, the terms used in this Act have the 
same meaning and are subject to the same rules of construction as those 
set forth in the Truth-in-Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 1601-1667) and its 
implementing regulation.
    (b) The term ``Housing Bank'' refers to the Puerto Rico Housing 
Bank and Finance Agency, created pursuant to Act No. 146 of June 30, 
1961, P.R. LAWS ANN. tit. 7, sec 901 et seq. (1961).

SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON LIABILITY.

    (a) For any credit transaction subject to the Truth-in-Lending Act 
(15 U.S.C. 1601-1667) in which the Housing Bank was a creditor, and 
which was consummated before the date of enactment of this Act, neither 
the Housing Bank nor any of its assignees shall have any civil, 
criminal, or administrative liability under the Truth-in-Lending Act 
for any failure of the Housing Bank to comply with the provisions of 
that Act or any regulations promulgated pursuant to it.
    (b) No consumer who consummated a credit transaction subject to the 
Truth-in-Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 1601-1667) in which the Housing Bank 
was a creditor, and which was consummated before the date of enactment 
of this Act, shall have any rescission right under section 125 of the 
Truth-in-Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 1635) against an assignee for the 
failure by the Housing Bank to deliver any disclosures required 
thereunder.
                                 <all>
```
#### Joe Powell *alias*Joe Ceniceros v. State

No. 25432.

October 31, 1951.

Appellant’s Motion for Rehearing Denied (Without Written Opinion) December 12, 1951.

Hon. Owen M. Lord, Judge Presiding.

*W. J. Baldwin,*Beaumont, for appellant.

*Ramie H. Griffin,*Criminal District Attorney, *Joe B. Goodwin,*Assistant Criminal District Attorney, Beaumont, and *George P. Blackburn,*State’s Attorney, Austin, for the state.

WOODLEY, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of an assault with intent to rape upon his daughter, and the jury assessed his punishment at 25 years in the penitentiary.

The daughter testified to facts which, if believed by the jury, are sufficient to support their verdict. They need not be discussed.

Bill of Exception No. 1 complains that the child, who was under 14 years of age, was not a competent witness, both because of her immaturity and because of her alleged mental deficiency.

*541The bill reveals that the question of the competency of the witness was first raised after she had given her testimony, when appellant objected “to any of said testimony going to the jury.”

It is noted that appellant, in his motion for new trial, suggested that the court should hear evidence on the issue of the competency of the witness. But from the bill, it appears that no evidence was heard and appellant relies alone on the testimony of the witness given on cross-examination to show her incompetence.

We are unable to agree that an abuse of discretion on the part of the trial court in permitting the child witness to testify is shown. She testified in answer to the district attorney’s question : “That did happen, I am telling the truth. I know what will happen to me if I don’t tell the truth. If I am telling a lie God will punish me and the judge will punish me if I am telling a lie.”

Appellant’s remaining bill is directed to the refusal of the following requested charge: “You are further charged as a part of the law in this case that if you believe from the evidence, or have a reasonable doubt thereof, that the prosecutrix was told by her mother to testify to the offense of assault with intent to rape or rape as its defenses have been defined to you herein, for the reason of a family dispute between the Defendant and Defendant’s wife, you will find the Defendant ‘not guilty’.”

The trial judge properly refused to give such charge, it being on the weight of the evidence and being an incorrect statement of the law. If the testimony of this child be true, it is immaterial that she may have been told to relate it by reason of a family quarrel.

The weight to be given the testimony was for the jury. Appellant did not testify. He did not call his wife to the stand, and the state could not.

We would not be authorized to disturb the jury’s verdict, the evidence being sufficient to sustain their findings.

No error appearing, the judgment is affirmed.

Opinion approved by the Court.