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

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Pop Warner Little Scholars, Inc.,

Barbara Doughty, and Jason Patch,

Plaintiffs

v. Civil No. 06-cv-098-SM

New Hampshire Youth Football & Spirit

Conference; Richard Pelletier;

Robert Schiavoni; Ellen Schiavoni;

and Deborah A. Smith

Defendants

NOTICE OF RULING

Re: (Document No. 7) Motion to Extend Time to Object/Respond

Ruling: Granted in part. Defendants may file a response to

the motion for preliminary injunctive relief on or before April

21, 2006, and may file an answer or other responsive pleading to

the complaint as allowed by rule. A hearing on the request for

preliminary injunctive relief will be held on April 27, 2006, as

scheduled by the clerk. Evidence received upon the application

for preliminary injunctive relief which would be admissible upon

the trial on the merits shall become part of the record and need

not be repeated upon the trial. 

Entered by: Steven J. McAuliffe, Chief Judge

Date: April 11, 2006

cc: Thomas J. Donovan, Esq.

Adam M. Hamel, Esq.

Michael D. Ramsdell, Esq.

Case 1:06-cv-00098-SM Document 15 Filed 04/11/06 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 05-cr-177-01-SM

Augustin Damian

O R D E R

Defendant Damian’s motion to continue the final pretrial conference and

trial is granted (document 14). Defendant Damian shall file a waiver of speedy

trial rights not later than April 4, 2006 . On the filing of such waiver, his

continuance shall be effective. Trial has been rescheduled for the May 2006

trial period. 

The Court finds that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance

outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial, 18

U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv), in that failure to grant a continuance would

unreasonably deny defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective

preparation taking into account the exercise of due diligence under the

circumstances. 

Final Pretrial Conference: April 20, 2006 at 3:00 p.m.

Jury Selection: May 2, 2006 at 9:30 a.m.

Case 1:05-cr-00177-SM Document 15 Filed 03/28/06 Page 1 of 2
2

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

 Chief Judge

March 28, 2006

cc: James Gleason, Esq.

Robert Kinsella, AUSA

US Probation

US Marshal

Case 1:05-cr-00177-SM Document 15 Filed 03/28/06 Page 2 of 2
I

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1294

To amend titles 10 and 14, United States Code, to provide for the use

of gold in the metal content of the Medal of Honor.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 29. 2001

Mr. BACA (for himself, Ms. MCKINNEY, Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, Mr.

CRAMER, Mr. SHERMAN, Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD, Mr. WEXLER, Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi, Mrs. KELLY, Mrs. THURMAN, Mr. RANGEL, and Mr.

REYES) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services

A BILL

To amend titles 10 and 14, United States Code, to provide

for the use of gold in the metal content of the Medal

of Honor.

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

3 SECTION 1. GOLD CONTENT FOR MEDAL OF HONOR.

4 (a) REQUIREMENT FOR GOLD CONTENT.—Sections

5 3741, 6241, and 8741 of title 10, United States Code,

6 and section 491 of title 14, United States Code, are each

7 amended by inserting ‘‘the metal content of which is 90
2

•HR 1294 IH

1 percent gold and 10 percent alloy and’’ after ‘‘appropriate

2 design,’’.

3 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

4 subsection (a) shall apply with respect to any award of

5 the Medal of Honor after the date of the enactment of

6 this Act.

Æ
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-540
In Re: WILBERT GUICE, Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CR-96-240) Submitted: June 19, 1997 Decided: June 27, 1997 Before WILKINS and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Wilbert Guice, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Wilbert Guice has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus fromthis court seeking an order compelling the district court to dismiss the criminal indictment against him. Mandamus is a drastic remedy to be used only in extraordinary circumstances. See Kerr v. United States Dist. Court , 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976). Mandamus relief is only available when there are no other means by which the relief sought could be granted, see In re Beard , 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987), and may not be used as a substitute for appeal. In re Catawba Indian Tribe of South Carolina , 973 F.2d 1133, 1135 (4th Cir. 1992). The party seeking mandamus relief carries the heavy burden of showing that he has "no other adequate means to attain the relief he desires" and that his right to such relief is "clear and indisputable." Allied Chem. Corp. v. Daiflon, Inc. , 449 U.S. 33, 35 (1980). Guice has not made such a showing. Accordingly, we deny mandamus relief. We dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
#### Henry GARCIA, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 44497.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Jan. 26, 1972.

*263Bob Tarrant, Houston, for appellant.

Phyllis Bell, Dist. Atty. and Phyllis Bell and Jack Bodiford, Asst. Dist. Attys., Houston, and Jim D. Vollers, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

OPINION

ODOM, Judge.

This appeal is from a conviction for the offense of unlawful possession of a narcotic drug, to-wit: heroin. Appellant waived, in writing, his right to a trial by jury and the court found him guilty and assessed his punishment at 15 years.

Appellant’s sole ground of error on appeal is that: “The arrest of appellant and the search as incidental to the arrest is illegal because not based on sufficient probable cause.”

Officer D. W. Albert, a narcotics officer with the Houston Police Department, testified that between 1:00 and 1:15 A.M. on March 24, 1969, he received a telephone call from an informant from whom he had received reliable information on previous occasions. The informant told him that the appellant would soon be arriving at the Sahara Motel in Houston, and that he would have a large quantity of heroin in his possession to be disposed of. The informant further stated that the appellant would be driving a 1962 white Oldsmobile automobile bearing license number “ ’68 Texas NGR 820” and that the appellant would be at that location only a short time.

Officer Albert testified that after receiving the call he proceeded to the Sahara Motel, arriving there at approximately 1:30 A.M. Appellant drove up to the motel at approximately 1:45 A.M. in a white 1962 Oldsmobile with license number NGR 820. At this time the officer approached the appellant, identified himself as a narcotics officer. Appellant gave the officer his name and then, at the request of the officer, stepped out of the car. As the appellant stepped out of the car the officer noticed a large bulge in each of his front pants pockets and appellant stated to the officer that the bulges in his pockets were heroin.

The record reflects that after the appellant stated to the officer that the two large bulges in his front pants pockets were heroin, upon request the appellant reached into his pockets and pulled out two “baggies” each containing approximately 5 ounces of a white substance. The appellant was then placed under arrest and a search was made of his person and the automobile and no other contraband was found. The record reflects that the white substance recovered from appellant was 269.9 grams of 17.7 percent pure heroin.

Under the facts of this case, we conclude that the officer had probable cause to arrest and search the appellant. Stuart v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 456 S.W.2d 129.

The judgment is affirmed.

MORRISON, J., not participating.
**Exhibit 32.01**

 

**Officer Certification**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Public Service Company of Colorado (PSCo) on Form 10-Q/Afor the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (Form 10-Q), each of the undersignedofficers of PSCo certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to suchofficer’s knowledge:

 

(1)          The Form 10-Q fully complies withthe requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)          The information contained in the Form 10-Qfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of PSCo as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the Form 10-Q.

 

Date: Dec. 17, 2007

 
| /s/ TIM E. TAYLOR                           |
|---------------------------------------------|
| Tim E. Taylor                               |
| President and Chief  Executive Officer      |
|                                        |
| /s/ BENJAMIN G.S. FOWKE III                 |
| Benjamin G.S. Fowke III                     |
| Vice President and  Chief Financial Officer |

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solelypursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of theReport or as a separate disclosure document.

 

A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging orotherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within theelectronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, hasbeen provided to PSCo and will be retained by PSCo and furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

 

 

1

----
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 7 Received in Senate (RDS)]

  1st Session
H. J. RES. 7

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            February 6, 2001

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
            Recognizing the 90th birthday of Ronald Reagan.

Whereas February 6, 2001, is the 90th birthday of Ronald Wilson Reagan;
Whereas both Ronald Reagan and his wife Nancy Reagan have distinguished records 
        of public service to the United

States, the American people, and the international community;

Whereas Ronald Reagan was twice elected by overwhelming margins as President of 
        the United States;
Whereas Ronald Reagan fulfilled his pledge to help restore ``the great, 
        confident roar of American progress, growth, and optimism'' and ensure 
        renewed economic prosperity;
Whereas Ronald Reagan's leadership was instrumental in extending freedom and 
        democracy around the globe and uniting a world divided by the Cold War;
Whereas Ronald Reagan is loved and admired by millions of Americans, and by 
        countless others around the world;
Whereas Ronald Reagan's eloquence united Americans in times of triumph and 
        tragedy;
Whereas Nancy Reagan not only served as a gracious First Lady but also led a 
        national crusade against illegal drug use;
Whereas together Ronald and Nancy Reagan dedicated their lives to promoting 
        national pride and to bettering the quality of life in the United States 
        and throughout the world; and
Whereas the thoughts and prayers of the Congress and the country are with Ronald 
        Reagan in his courageous battle with Alzheimer's disease: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That the Congress, on behalf 
of the American people, extends its birthday greetings and best wishes 
to Ronald Reagan on his 90th birthday.

            Passed the House of Representatives February 6, 2001.

            Attest:

                                                 JEFF TRANDAHL,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
Order entered December 5, 2022

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05
- 22
- 00831
- CV
AALIYAH MARSHALL & ALL OTHER OCCUPANTS , Appellant
V. CEDAR GLEN APARTMENTS , Appellee
O n Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 4

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC
- 22
- 03692
- D

O RDER On November 14, 2022, after court reporter Coral L

. Wahlen informed the Court that appellant had not requested the reporter’s record, we directed a ppellant to file, within ten days, written verification she had requested the record. Although we cautioned appellant that failure to comply could result in the appeal being submitted without the reporter’s record, see T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 37.3(c), appellant h as yet to comply. Accordingly, we ORDER the appeal submitted without the reporter’s record. See id.As the clerk’s record has been filed, we ORDER appellant to file her brief

no later than January 4, 2023.
/s/ BILL PEDERSEN, III JUSTICE
**
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

**PURSUANT TO RULE 13A-14(A) UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, David DiDomenico, certify that: 

 
1.
I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Osprey TechnologyAcquisition Corp.; and 

 
2.
Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state amaterial 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. 

Date: May 20, 2020 

 

/s/ David DiDomenico
David DiDomenicoChief Executive Officer and President(Principal Executive Officer)**
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 05-cr-184-01-SM

Theoun So

O R D E R

Defendant So’s motion to continue the final pretrial conference and trial is

granted (document 8). Trial has been rescheduled for the February 2006 trial

period. Defendant So shall file a waiver of speedy trial rights not later than

October 26, 2005. On the filing of such waiver, his continuance shall be

effective.

The Court finds that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance

outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial, 18

U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv), in that failure to grant a continuance would

unreasonably deny defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective

preparation taking into account the exercise of due diligence under the

circumstances. 

Final Pretrial Conference: January 30, 2006 at 3:00 p.m.

Jury Selection: February 7, 2006 at 9:30 a.m.

Case 1:05-cr-00184-SM Document 9 Filed 10/20/05 Page 1 of 2
2

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

 Chief Judge

October 20, 2005

cc: Bjorn Lange, Esq.

Debra Walsh, AUSA

US Probation

US Marshal

Case 1:05-cr-00184-SM Document 9 Filed 10/20/05 Page 2 of 2
#### Joe J. BONI v. SOVEREIGN CAMP, W. O. W.

No. 1329.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. First Circuit.

May 8, 1934.

Haas & Haas, of Opelousas, for appellant.

Lewis & Lewis, of Opelousas, for appellee.

MOUTON, Judge.

In this case, for the reasons stated in the ease of Joe J. Boni et al. v. Sovereign Camp, W. O. W., 154 So. 678, the judgment appealed from is affirmed, with cost.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6617
MICHAEL ALLEN KOKOSKI, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CHARLES T. FELTS, Warden, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Beckley. Robert C. Chambers, District Judge. (5:06-cv-00763) Submitted: July 23, 2007 Decided: August 17, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Allen Kokoski, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.* Insofar as Kokoski seeks authorization to file a second or successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion, we deny relief. - 2 - PER CURIAM: Michael Allen Kokoski, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order and judgment accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241 (West 2006 & Supp. 2007) petition. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. * Kokoski v. Felts , No. 5:06-cv-00763 (S.D.W. Va. Apr. 12, 2007). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal c ontentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
I

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1195

To expand the class of beneficiaries who may apply for adjustment of status

under section 245(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act by extending

the deadline for classification petition and labor certification filings.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 22, 2001

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

Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To expand the class of beneficiaries who may apply for

adjustment of status under section 245(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act by extending the deadline

for classification petition and labor certification filings.

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

3 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF DEADLINE.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 245(i)(1)(B)(i) of the Im5 migration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1255(i)(1)(B)(i))

6 is amended by striking ‘‘April 30, 2001;’’ and inserting

7 ‘‘April 30, 2002;’’.
2

•HR 1195 IH

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

2 subsection (a) shall take effect as if included in the enact3 ment of the Legal Immigration Family Equity Act (as en4 acted into law by Public Law 106–553).

Æ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Chukwuma E . Azubuko

V .

Massachusetts' Lawyers Weekly

No . 06-fp-26 6

ORDER GRANTING REQUEST TO

PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERI S

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 06-cv-266-SM .

SO ORDERED .

R . Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judg e

Date : July 27, 200 6

cc : Chukwuma E . Azubuko, pro se

Case 1:06-cv-00266-SM Document 6 Filed 07/27/2006 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIR E

United States of America

V .

Jacauie P . Vieira

Criminal No . 05-cr-214-01-JD

O R D E R

The assented to motion to reschedule jury trial (document no .

37) filed by defendant is granted .

Defendant shall file a waiver of speedy trial rights within 10

days . The court finds that the ends of justice served by granting

a continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and the

defendant in a speedy trial, 18 U .S .C . § 3161 (h) (8) (B) (iv) , for the

reasons set forth in the motion .

SO ORDERED .

/s/ Joseph A . DiClerico, Jr .

Joseph A . DiClerico, Jr .

United States District Judge

Date : April 8, 200 8

cc : Michael J . Sheehan, Esq .

Thomas A . Brant, Esq .

Mark Zuckerman, Esq .

U .S . Marsha l

U .S . Probation

Case 1:05-cr-00214-JD Document 38 Filed 04/08/08 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-1998
<CASH>                                         107,192
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  295,060
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    170,968
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               589,198
<PP&E>                                         267,203
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (70,660)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,134,576
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          854,600
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,993
<OTHER-SE>                                     275,983
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,134,576
<SALES>                                        487,605
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               855,989
<CGS>                                           28,266
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   28,266
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,937,915
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                (422)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0 
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (1,109,770)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.28)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.28)
        

</TABLE>
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit ____________

No. 23-40414

Summary Calendar

____________

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Leonel Deleon Cuellar, 

Defendant—Appellant.

______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:23-CR-116-1

______________________________

Before Smith, Higginson, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Leonel Deleon 

Cuellar has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance 

with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 

F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Deleon Cuellar has not filed a response. We have 

reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected 

_____________________

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

January 19, 2024

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 23-40414 Document: 00517038944 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/19/2024
No. 23-40414

2

therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no 

nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for 

leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further 

responsibilities herein, and the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. 

R. 42.2.

Case: 23-40414 Document: 00517038944 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/19/2024
#### Ernest DAVIS v. ISTROUMA WATER CO., Inc., et al.

No. 1408.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. First Circuit.

Jan. 21, 1935.

J. Y. Sanders, Jr., and Ben R. Bliller, both of Baton Rouge, for appellant.

Chas. A. Holcombe, of Baton Rouge, for appellees.

ELLIOTT, Judge.

In this case, for the reasons assigned in the consolidated cases, Waddell v. Langlois (La. App.) 158 So. 665, in acting on the appeal in case No. 7169, the judgment appealed from herein is affirmed; plaintiff-appellant to pay the cost in both courts.