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

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Richard E. Hartford

v. No. 05-fp-443

U.S. Social Security Administration, Commissioner

ORDER GRANTING REQUEST TO

PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis is hereby

granted, but only for the purpose of waiving the filing fee. 

This case has been assigned civil number 05-cv-443-SM. 

SO ORDERED.

_________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge 

Date: December 22, 2005

cc: Janine Gawryl, Esq.

Case 1:05-cv-00443-SM Document 5 Filed 12/22/05 Page 1 of 1
#### Henry WITT, Appellant, v. Scott M. LOFTIN and John W. Martin, as Trustees of Florida East Coast Railway Company, Appelles.

Supreme Court of Florida. Division A.

June 15, 1954.

Rehearing Denied July 5, 1954.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

William Edmondson

v. Civil No. 05-cv-445-JD

NH Department of Corrections,

Commissioner, et al.

ORDER

Re: Document No. 37, Motion For Stay Pending Service of 

 Answer

Ruling: DENIED. Where, as here, one of the defendants

controls whether plaintiff gets his mail and claims it never got

a copy from defense counsel, it is incumbent on the state to make

sure prisoners get mail from the AG’s office. This is the second

instance in six months where the prison denies getting mail from

the AG’s office for a prisoner which suggests that the AG’s

office might double check that its administrative staff is in

fact sending hard copies to prisoners when it makes ECF filings.

James R. Muirhead

U.S. Magistrate Judge

Date: June 27, 2006

cc: Mary E. Maloney, Esq.

 William Edmondson, pro se

 

 

Case 1:05-cv-00445-JD Document 39 Filed 06/27/06 Page 1 of 1
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.                  

###### Nuclear Regulatory Commission

The ACRS Subcommittee on Materials, Metallurgy & Reactor Fuels will hold a meeting on October 1, 2008, at 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, Room T-2B3.

The meeting will be open to public attendance.

The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows:

## Wednesday October 1, 2008—8:30 a.m.-5 p.m.

The Subcommittee will receive a briefing on the proposed rule amendment to 10 CFR 50.61, “Alternate Fracture Toughness Requirements for Protection Against Pressurized Thermal Shock Events.” The Subcommittee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff and other interested persons regarding this matter. The Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee.

                    Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written comments should notify the Designated Federal Officer, Mr. Michael Benson (Telephone: 301-415-6396) 5 days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic recordings will be permitted only during those portions of the meeting that are open to the public. Detailed procedures for the conduct of and participation in ACRS meetings were published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on September 26, 2007 (72 FR 54695).                

Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by contacting the Designated Federal Official between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. (ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact the above named individual at least two working days prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes to the agenda.

                        Dated:                         *September 9, 2008.*

Cayetano Santos,

Chief, Reactor Safety Branch A, ACRS.

[FR Doc. E8-21666 Filed 9-16-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDG MENT

No. 04

- 22

- 00395

- CR

Sean Dominic MCCAULIFFE

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 437th Judicial District Court

, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2021CR3471

Honorable Melisa C. Skinner , Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARTINEZ

, JUSTICE RODRIGUEZ , AND JUSTICE

VALENZUELA

In accordance with this court’s memorandum opinion of this date, appellant’s motion to

dismiss is GRANTED and this appeal is DISMISSED. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.2(a).

SIGNED March 22, 2023.

_________________________________ Liza A. Rodriguez , Justice
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-6567

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

ROBERT FENN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior

District Judge. (1:12-cr-00510-JCC-1)

Submitted: September 26, 2014 Decided: October 1, 2014

Before KING, GREGORY, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James W. Hundley, BRIGLIAHUNDLEY, P.C., Vienna, Virginia, for 

Appellant. Dana J. Boente, United States Attorney, Alicia J. 

Yass, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Lindsay A. 

Kelly, Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, 

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Robert Fenn appeals from the district court’s order 

denying his motion for a new trial in his criminal conviction 

for receipt of child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C.

§ 2252(a)(2) (2012), and possession of child pornography, in 

violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(4)(B) (2012). After careful 

review, we affirm the denial of Fenn’s motion for a new trial.

We review the district court’s denial of Fenn’s motion 

for a new trial for abuse of discretion. United States v. 

Bartko, 728 F.3d 327, 334 (4th Cir. 2013), cert. denied, 134 S. 

Ct. 1043 (2014). Generally speaking, the district court has 

broad discretion to grant or deny a motion for a new trial. 

United States v. Perry, 335 F.3d 316, 320 (4th Cir. 2003). 

The court may vacate its judgment and grant a new 

trial if the interest of justice so requires. Fed. R. Crim. P. 

33(a). To obtain a new trial due to newly discovered evidence, 

Fenn must show (1) the evidence is newly discovered, (2) the 

evidence could not have been discovered at trial through the 

exercise of due diligence, (3) the evidence is not merely 

cumulative or impeaching, (4) the evidence is material, and 

(5) the evidence probably would result in acquittal at a new 

trial. United States v. Chavis, 880 F.2d 788, 793 (4th Cir. 

1989).
3

We have reviewed the record and conclude that the 

newly discovered evidence likely would not have resulted in 

acquittal. We thus conclude that the district court did not 

abuse its discretion in denying Fenn’s motion for a new trial.

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s decision. 

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.

AFFIRMED
(logo)LNR

          Partners, LLC

 

 

ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE

 

OF

 

LNR PARTNERS, LLC

 

 

The undersigned, Job Warshaw,being the President of LNR Partners, LLC (the “Special Servicer”), as specialservicer under the applicable Pooling and Servicing Agreement for thetransactions listed on Schedule I hereto, hereby certifies, subject toany limitations listed on Schedule I hereto, as of the date hereof, onbehalf of the Special Servicer, solely in his capacity as an authorized officerof the Special Servicer and not in his individual capacity, as follows:

 

1.            A review ofthe activities performed by the Special Servicer during the period commencingon January 1, 2019 and ending on December 31, 2019 (or any other shorter periodset forth on Schedule I hereto) (the “'Reporting Period”), and of theSpecial Servicer’s performance under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement hasbeen made under my supervision; and

 

2.            To the bestof my knowledge, based on such review and using the applicable servicingcriteria under Item 1122 of Regulation AB, the Special Servicer has fulfilledall of its obligations under the applicable Pooling and Servicing Agreement inall material respects throughout the Reporting Period.

 

LNR PARTNERS, LLC,

a Florida limited liabilitycompany

 

 

By: /s/ Job Warshaw

Job Warshaw

President

 

 

Dated: February 20, 2020

 

 

1601 Washington Avenue • Suite 700 • Miami Beach,Florida 33139-3164

Telephone: (305) 695-5600 • Fax: (305) 695-5601

 

 

 

**Schedule I**

 

 

MSC 2018-L1

Morgan Stanley Capital I Trust2018-L1, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2018-L1

(Playa Largo, Shoppes at chinoHills – under MSC 2018-H3)

 

 

Morgan Stanley Capital I Inc.

1585 Broadway

New York, NY 10036

Jane Lam

 

Morgan Stanley Capital I Inc.

1633 Broadway, 29thFloor

New York, NY 10019

Legal Compliance
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Corey Henry, certify that:

1.             I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be
filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2018-4 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);

2.             Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do 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, all of the distribution, servicing and other
information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

4.            Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement required in this report
under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement in all material respects; and

5.             All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed
securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and
15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: Wells Fargo Bank, National
Association.



| | By:    | /s/ Corey Henry                                                                          | 
| | ------ | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 
| | Name:  | Corey Henry                                                                             
| | Title: | President and Chief Executive Officer Santander Drive Auto Receivables LLC, as Depositor
| |        | (senior officer in charge of securitization of the depositor)                           
| | Date:  | March 30, 2020
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

REYNALDO LAMPLEY,

Defendant.

8:23CR121

AMENDED ORDER

This matter comes before the Court on the Motion to Extend (Filing No. 46). After 

review of the motion and for good cause shown, the Court finds the extensions should be

granted. Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Extend (Filing No. 46) is granted and the order

(Filing No. 43) is amended as follows: 

1. On or before February 15, 2024, the government shall file its brief in opposition to 

the defendant’s motion. See NECrimR 12.3(c). 

2. On or before February 22, 2024, the parties shall meet and confer to resolve any 

issues not requiring an evidentiary hearing, agree upon any factual stipulations to be 

presented to the court, and discuss proposed exhibits and witnesses. 

3. On or before February 29, 2024, the parties shall deliver to the undersigned’s 

chambers via email to nelson@ned.uscourts.gov or hand delivery their proposed 

witness list(s), exhibit list(s), and copies of all exhibits. 

4. The telephonic status conference set for February 8, 2024, is cancelled. A telephonic

status conference to discuss prehearing matters and the scheduling of an evidentiary 

hearing will be held before the undersigned magistrate judge on March 7, 2024, at 

11:30 AM. Counsel shall use the conferencing instructions at Filing No. 44 to 

participate in the call. 

Dated this 17th day of January 2024. 

BY THE COURT:

s/Michael D. Nelson

United States Magistrate Judge

8:23-cr-00121-RFR-MDN Doc # 47 Filed: 01/17/24 Page 1 of 1 - Page ID # 92
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AT 03/31/2000 AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT
OF OPERATIONS FOR THE 3 MONTHS ENDED 03/31/2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                           3,842
<SECURITIES>                                    23,525
<RECEIVABLES>                                   10,319
<ALLOWANCES>                                       822
<INVENTORY>                                     13,606
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                54,923
<PP&E>                                          18,457
<DEPRECIATION>                                  12,441
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  98,441
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           15,306
<BONDS>                                          1,940
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          1
<COMMON>                                            38
<OTHER-SE>                                      54,611
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    98,441
<SALES>                                         15,939
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                15,939
<CGS>                                           10,723
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   10,723
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  31
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,932
<INCOME-TAX>                                       718
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,185
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,185
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .26
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .26


</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

John R. Crooker

v. Civil No. 05-cv-008-JD

Anheuser-Busch, Inc.

PROCEDURAL ORDER

John R. Crooker brought suit against his former employer,

Anheuser-Busch, Inc. (“A-B”), alleging that he was entitled to

benefits under a severance agreement. He brought claims that A-B

denied him benefits in violation of the Employee Retirement

Income Security Act (“ERISA”), that A-B violated public policy to

the extent it required him to return to work following his injury

in order to qualify for the disputed benefits, and that he should

be allowed to return to work to satisfy that requirement if it

were legally imposed on him. On February 21, 2006, the parties’

filed a joint motion to stay the case, pending remand for

administrative review of Crooker’s claims for benefits. The

joint motion was granted on February 22, 2006.

When the case was stayed, Crooker’s motion to amend the

ERISA administrative record was pending, without response from AB. The parties represented in their joint motion for a stay that

Crooker’s request for discovery was withdrawn. Because the

administrative record will be augmented following the current

Case 1:05-cv-00008-JD Document 45 Filed 03/13/06 Page 1 of 2
2

administrative proceedings, the pending motion no longer relates

to the record that will be filed when, and if, this litigation is

resumed. Therefore, the motion to amend is terminated without

prejudice. See LR 83.10. In addition, it appears to be

appropriate to administratively close this case, pending

resolution of the administrative proceedings. The case may be

reopened upon the motion of either party at any time before a

final judgment is entered.

Conclusion

For the foregoing reasons, the plaintiff’s motion to amend

the record (document no. 41) is terminated without prejudice. 

The case is administratively closed, pending resolution of the

administrative proceedings.

SO ORDERED.

Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

United States District Judge

March 13, 2006

cc: David A. Garfunkel, Esquire

Andrea K. Johnstone, Esquire

Paul B. Kleinman, Esquire

Shenanne Ruth Tucker, Esquire

Case 1:05-cv-00008-JD Document 45 Filed 03/13/06 Page 2 of 2
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 181 (Wednesday, September 17, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 53891]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-21661]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[FEMA-3290-EM]


Texas; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of an Emergency Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of an emergency declaration for 
the State of Texas (FEMA-3290-EM), dated August 29, 2008, and related 
determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: September 7, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance 
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3886.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the incident 
period for this emergency is closed effective September 7, 2008.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) 
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community 
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment 
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, 
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In 
Presidential Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidential Declared 
Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and 
Households; 97.050, Presidential Declared Disaster Assistance to 
Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--
Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, 
Hazard Mitigation Grant.)

R. David Paulison,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. E8-21661 Filed 9-16-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
#### POOLE v. HOME INS. CO.

No. 3825.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. First Circuit.

March 22, 1954.

Talley & Anthony, Bogalusa, for appellant.

Deutsch Kerrigan & Stiles, Malcolm W. Monroe, New Orleans, for appellee.

CAVANAUGH, Judge.

Plaintiff instituted this suit against the defendant for the sum of $1275.50, with legal interest from judicial demand until paid, for damages suffered by his wooden hull cruiser “Maxine P” which became stranded in a marsh or mud bank in St. Tammany Parish on January 22, 1952. The defendant had issued its yacht policy number Y 410303 on July 3, 1951,. and accepted a premium of $120 from the'plaintiff. The accident occurred to plaintiff’s cruiser when plaintiff was using it in the Louisiana marsh in Bayou Brendeau off Bay St. Louis, Mississippi, when a storm blew the cruiser on a shell reef or mud bank. Plaintiff made proof of loss for damages in the amount of $328.75, which was paid by defendant by draft on April 17, 1952. The present suit is for additional damages which the plaintiff contends happened to the engine and which he did not discover until after the claim was paid. It is his contention now that the settlement and compromise agreement was based on an error of fact and that he should be entitled to recover the additional sum because he did not know the motor was damaged when he made the settlement.

The defendant filed an exception of no cause and no right of action predicated upon the ground that there had been a complete settlement, satisfaction and discharge of any and all claims plaintiff had arising out’of the stranding of. the cruiser. It also pled the prescription of twelve months provided for in the policy within which to bring the suit after the happening of the loss.

The Trial Judge sustained the exceptions and dismissed the plaintiff’s suit. From this dismissal, the plaintiff has devolutively appealed to this court.

 The exceptions were filed by the defendant on June 25, 1953, were heard by the District Judge on July 20, 1953, and sustained. The plaintiff obtained an order for a devolutive appeal on September 4, 1953, and filed a devolutive appeal bond on September 8, 1953. We do not find that the record in this case contains a formal judgment rendered and filed by the District Judge in the lower court. The certificate of the Clerk of Court is dated 'October 29, 1953, and- it is certified by him that the record *417contains all of the papers'and documents filed and a certified copy of the minute entries in the suit. Of course, since there is no judgment in the record and the Clerk’s certificate is complete, this appeal is premature because the judgment has not been rendered and signed. No appeal lies from an unsigned judgment. The District Court still has jurisdiction of this case. Greene v. Baynard, 194 La. 409, 193 So. 690; Perrodin v. Tillson, La.App., 52 So.2d 306. The only action we can take-in this matter is to dismiss the appeal ex proprio motu.

For the reasons assigned, the appeal is dismissed at the cost of appellant.