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

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Darren Starr

v. Civil No. 07-cv-311-SM

Northern NH Correctional

Facility, Warden, et al.

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. 

SO ORDERED.

_________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge 

Date: October 2, 2007

cc: Darren Starr, pro se

Case 1:07-cv-00311-SM Document 3 Filed 10/02/2007 Page 1 of 1

Starr v. Northern NH Correctional Facility, Warden Doc. 3

Dockets.Justia.com
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Olga L. Bogdanov,

Chapter 7 Trustee

v. Civil No. 06-cv-384-JD

B&H Foto & Electronics Corp.

O R D E R

This case was filed at the same time and by the same

plaintiff as the following cases: Bogdanov v. Concentra

Integrated Services, Inc., 06-cv-382-JD; Bogdanov v. Nsight

Technologies, LLC, 06-cv-383-SM; Bogdanov v. Physicians Specialty

Hospital of ElPaso East, L.P., 06-cv-385-PB; and Bogdanov v.

Christus Health Corporation, 06-cv-386-SM. Motions to withdraw

the reference from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the

District of New Hampshire, along with the bankruptcy court’s

report and recommendation on each motion, are pending in all five

cases. The motions to withdraw the reference raise the same

legal principles and share similar factual bases. 

As such, with respect to the motions to withdraw the

reference from the bankruptcy court, these may be related cases

under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a) and Local Rule 42.1. 

Unless the parties or counsel advise the court otherwise, these

cases will be consolidated solely for the purpose of addressing

Case 1:06-cv-00386-SM Document 3 Filed 10/24/2006 Page 1 of 2

Bogdanov v. Christus Health Corp. Doc. 3

Dockets.Justia.com
2

the motions to withdraw the reference. Any objection or other

response to the order of consolidation shall be filed on or

before November 6, 2006.

In addition, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(c)(2) the parties

each shall file a notice as to whether each consents to referral

of the adversary proceedings to the bankruptcy court, if the

motions for withdrawal of the reference were denied, “to hear and

determine and to enter appropriate orders and judgments, subject

to review under section 158.” Consents or notice that a party

does not consent to referral under § 157(c)(2) shall be filed on

or before November 6, 2006.

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

United States District Judge

October 24, 2006

cc: Geraldine L. Karonis, Esquire

B&H Foto & Elecctronics Corp.

Olga L. Bogdanov, pro se

US Bankruptcy Court-NH, Clerk

Case 1:06-cv-00386-SM Document 3 Filed 10/24/2006 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Robin Rodriguez

v.

U.S. Department of Justice

No. 07-fp-55

O R D E R

Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis is granted,

but pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, as amended, the filing fee must

be paid as follows: the sum of $16.60 is due no later than April

23, 2007. In addition, 20% of each preceding month’s income

credited to plaintiff’s account to be remitted by the New

Hampshire State Prison when the amount in the account exceeds

$10.00 until the sum of $350.00 has been paid. Failure to pay

the fee as ordered will result in dismissal of the action without

prejudice. In all other respects plaintiff’s request for in

forma pauperis has been granted.

This case has been assigned civil number 07-cv-55-SM.

SO ORDERED.

Date: March 23, 2007

cc: Robin Rodriguez, pro se

Bonnie S. Reed, Financial Administrator

New Hampshire State Prison, Inmate Accounts

Case 1:07-cv-00055-SM Document 5 Filed 03/23/2007 Page 1 of 1

Rodriguez v. US Department of Justice Doc. 5

Dockets.Justia.com
<PAGE>
                                                                 Exhibit 32(a)



                                    TXU CORP.
                       Certificate Pursuant to Section 906
                         of Sarbanes - Oxley Act of 2002
                              CERTIFICATION OF CEO




       The undersigned, C. John Wilder, President and Chief Executive of
TXU Corp. (the "Company"), DOES HEREBY CERTIFY that:

   1.  The Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30,
       2004 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)
       or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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

       IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has caused this instrument to be
executed this 6th day of August, 2004.



                                            /s/ C. John Wilder
                                       ---------------------------------------
                                       Name:    C. John Wilder
                                       Title:   President and Chief Executive







A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to TXU Corp. and will be retained by TXU Corp. and furnished  to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 32





CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)





In connection with the Quarterly Report of Simulations Plus, Inc., a California corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended May 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Walter S. Woltosz, Chief Executive Officer of the Company and Momoko A. Beran, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, respectively, do each hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, that to his/her knowledge:





(1)
The 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 the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.













/s/     Walter S. Woltosz


Walter S. Woltosz


Chief Executive Officer


(Principal Executive Officer)


July 14, 2011








/s/     Momoko A. Beran


Momoko A. Beran


Chief Financial Officer


(Principal Financial Officer)


July 14, 2011





(A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Simulations Plus, Inc. and will be retained by Simulations Plus, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.)
1

The Honorable Lyle E. Strom, United States District Judge for the District of

Nebraska.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 09-3798

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Nebraska.

Antonio R. Azpeitia, also known as *

Markei Pena, also known as * [UNPUBLISHED]

Antonio Ramirez, *

*

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: June 29, 2010

Filed: July 9, 2010

___________

Before WOLLMAN, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Pursuant to a written plea agreement containing a waiver of his right to appeal,

Antonio Azpeitia pleaded guilty to unlawful reentry, in violation of 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326(a) & (b)(1), and being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18

U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(5)(A) & 924(a)(2). The district court1

 sentenced Azpeitia to 140

months in prison and 3 years of supervised release. On appeal, his counsel has moved
-2-

to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).

The government has moved to dismiss the appeal.

We will enforce the appeal waiver in this case because Azpeitia’s appeal falls

within the scope of the waiver, the record shows the requisite knowledge and

voluntariness, and enforcing the appeal waiver would not constitute a miscarriage of

justice. See United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc)

(court should enforce appeal waiver and dismiss appeal where it falls within scope of

waiver, both plea agreement and waiver were entered into knowingly and voluntarily,

and no miscarriage of justice would result; one important way district court can ensure

plea agreement and appeal waiver are knowing and voluntary is to question defendant

properly about decision to enter agreement and to waive right to appeal); see also

United States v. Estrada-Bahena, 201 F.3d 1070, 1071 (8th Cir. 2000) (per curiam)

(enforcing appeal waiver in Anders case). 

Having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75,

80 (1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues not covered by the appeal waiver.

Accordingly, we grant counsel leave to withdraw, and we grant the government’s

motion to dismiss this appeal. 

______________________________
I

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1557

To amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to permit

local educational agencies to use funds made available under the innovative education program to support certain community service programs.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 24, 2001

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

Committee on Education and the Workforce

A BILL

To amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act

of 1965 to permit local educational agencies to use funds

made available under the innovative education program

to support certain community service programs.

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

3 SECTION 1. USE OF FUNDS.

4 Section 6301(b) of the Elementary and Secondary

5 Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7351(b)) is amended—

6 (1) in paragraph (8), by striking ‘‘and’’ at the

7 end;
2

•HR 1557 IH

1 (2) in paragraph (9), by striking the period at

2 the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and

3 (3) by adding at the end the following new

4 paragraph:

5 ‘‘(10) community service programs under which

6 qualified school personnel train and mobilize young

7 people to measurably strengthen their communities

8 through nonviolence, responsibility, compassion, re9 spect, and moral courage.’’.

Æ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 06-cr-137-PB

Madeline Sanchez-Marrero

O R D E R

The defendant has moved to continue the January 4, 2007 

trial in the above case, citing the need for additional time to

engage in plea negotiations in this matter. The government does

not object to a continuance of the trial date.

Accordingly, to allow the parties additional time to

negotiate a plea agreement or properly prepare for trial, the

court will continue the trial from January 4, 2007 to March 6,

2007. In agreeing to continue the trial, the court finds

pursuant to 18 U.S.C.A. § 3161(h)(8)(A) that for the above-stated

reasons, the ends of justice served in granting a continuance

outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a

speedy trial.

Case 1:06-cr-00137-PB Document 9 Filed 12/20/06 Page 1 of 2
2

The December 19, 2006 final pretrial conference is continued

to February 22, 2007 at 3:45 p.m.

SO ORDERED.

/s/Paul Barbadoro 

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

December 20, 2006

cc: Ray Raimo, Esq.

Terry Ollila, AUSA

United States Probation

United States Marshal

Case 1:06-cr-00137-PB Document 9 Filed 12/20/06 Page 2 of 2
#### Robert Owen EMMETT, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Supreme Court of Florida. Division A.

Sept. 28, 1956.

Clifford J. Krueger, for appellant.

Richard W. Érvin, Atty. Gen., and David U. Tumin, Asst. Atty. Gen., for ap-pellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks modification of a judgment of conviction and sentence to 15 years in the State Prison for commission of the offense of manslaughter to which he pleaded guilty.

It is contended that the circumstances reflected by the record justify the conclusion that the sentence was excessive and constituted cruel and unusual punishment within the prohibitions of Section 8 of the Declaration of Rights of the Constitution of Florida, F.S.A. and amendment Article VIII of the Constitution of the United States.

The position of the appellant is adequately disposed of by the decisions of this court in Walker v. State, Fla.1950, 44 So.2d 814; and La Barbera v. State, Fla. 1953, 63 So.2d 654. There is nothing appearing in the record before us that would justify any recession from the decisions cited. The. matters and things set out in the record and briefs may be appropriate for consideration by the Pardon Board, but they do not justify the intervention of this court.

On the basis of the authorities cited, the judgment appealed from is

Affirmed.

DREW, ■ C. J., and TERRELL, HOB-SON and THORNAL, JJ., concur.
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 16

- 5008

_____________________________
J OHN F RANK S ABOR III
, Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Okaloosa County

. Michael A. Flowers , Judge

. March 28, 2018

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
L EWIS , K ELSEY , and W INSOR , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Steven L. Seliger, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant; John Frank Sabor III, pro se, Appellant

. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee
, for Appellee.
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

___________________________

No. 02-19-00149-CV

___________________________

On Appeal from the 352nd District Court

Tarrant County, Texas

Trial Court No. 352-290806-17

Before Womack, J.; Sudderth, C.J.; and Gabriel, J.

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

MATTHEW MURRAY AND COCA-COLA REFRESHMENTS USA, INC.,

Appellants

V.

STEPHEN WATSON AND LYNNDORA RANSOM, INDIVIDUALLY, AND ON 

BEHALF OF DESMOND JONES, DECEASED, Appellees
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT

We have considered “Appellants’ Unopposed Motion to Dismiss Appeal.” We 

grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1), 43.2(f).

Appellants must pay all costs of this appeal except costs associated with the 

cross-appeal that this court has already ordered cross-appellants to pay. See Tex. R. 

App. P. 42.1(d), 43.4.

Per Curiam

Delivered: August 27, 2019
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                                                   EXHIBIT 11
                     LINENS 'N THINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                   COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER COMMON SHARE
                      (IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT SHARE AMOUNTS)


                                                                 FOR THE THIRTEEN WEEKS ENDED     FOR THE THIRTY-NINE WEEKS ENDED
                                                                -------------------------------- -----------------------------------
                                                                  SEPT. 26,         SEPT. 27,         SEPT. 26,         SEPT. 27,
                                                                     1998              1997             1998               1997
                                                                --------------     -------------     ------------      -------------
                                                                          (UNAUDITED)                         (UNAUDITED)
<S>                                                             <C>                <C>               <C>               <C>         
Basic

    Weighted-average number of shares outstanding                      38,955            38,617           38,868             38,563
                                                                ==============     =============     ============      =============

    Net income applicable to common shares                        $    11,018        $    7,532        $  15,319            $ 8,872
                                                                ==============     =============     ============      =============

    Per-share amounts
        Net income per share                                            $0.28             $0.20            $0.39              $0.23
                                                                ==============     =============     ============      =============

Diluted

    Weighted-average number of shares outstanding                      40,508            39,676           40,387             39,423
                                                                ==============     =============     ============      =============

    Net income applicable to common shares                        $    11,018        $    7,532         $ 15,319            $ 8,872
                                                                ==============     =============     ============      =============

    Per-share amounts
        Net income per share                                            $0.27             $0.19            $0.38              $0.23
                                                                ==============     =============     ============      =============


</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Gregorio ROBLES-PONCE, aka, Gregorio-Ponce-Robles Defendant—Appellant.

No. 02-50291.

D.C. No. CR-01-03278-JMF.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted Feb. 4, 2003.

Decided March 5, 2003.

*323Before MESKILL,* FERGUSON, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.

*

 The Honorable Thomas J. Meskill, Senior Circuit Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM **

Gregorio Robles-Ponce appeals from a judgment of conviction for violation of 21 U.S.C. § 952 and § 960, entered after a conditional guilty plea reserving his right to appeal the denial of his motion to suppress marijuana discovered in a border search of his 1989 Ford van at the Calexico Port of Entry.

At the hearing on Robles-Ponce’s suppression motion, no testimony was taken. The District Court ruled that, assuming all of the Defendant’s allegations of intrusiveness to be true, the non-routine border search doctrine requiring reasonable suspicion did not apply to the search of Robles-Ponce’s vehicle because it applied only to searches of a person’s body. Without making any factual findings concerning the degree of intrusiveness the search posed or the existence of reasonable suspicion sufficient to justify a non-routine search, the District Court denied the motion.

Robles-Ponce claims that *United States v. Molina-Tarazon,*279 F.3d 709 (9th Cir. 2002), decided shortly after his conviction, requires that we reverse the District Court and suppress the evidence. *Molinar-Tarazon*involved a border search of a motor vehicle and held that non-routine border searches can apply to “some searches of inanimate objects.” *Id.*at 713. The Court acknowledged that the critical factor in determining whether a border search was routine or non-routine was the degree of intrusiveness the searched posed, and provided a non-exhaustive list of factors to be considered in making that determination. *See id.*

The government’s attempts to distinguish *Molina-Tarazon*or diminish its impact are unpersuasive. Robles-Ponce’s claim that the evidence must be suppressed is, at best, premature.

We vacate the judgment and remand to the District Court for farther proceedings in light of *United States v. Molinar-Tarazon.*

VACATED AND REMANDED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**Exhibit      32(b)**

**TXU      CORP.**

**Certificate      Pursuant to Section 906**

**of      Sarbanes – Oxley Act of 2002**

**CERTIFICATION      OF CFO**

|   | 1. | The                Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2007                (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or                15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;                and |
|--------|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 2. | Information                contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,                the                financial condition and results of operation of the                Company. |
|--------|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |   | /s/                  David A.                  Campbell             |   |
|--------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Name:  | David                A. Campbell                                    |   |
|   | Title: | Executive                Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |   |
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Robert V. Towle

v. Civil No. 06-464-JL

New Hampshire Department

of Corrections, Commissioner,

et al.

 O R D E R

On or before ten days from today the parties shall file

memoranda limited to ten pages on the following issue: whether,

despite the court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the

defendants on mootness grounds, the plaintiff is nonetheless

entitled to recover costs as “prevailing party” under 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1988.

SO ORDERED.

 

Joseph N. Laplante

United States District Judge

Dated: April 30, 2008

cc: Robert V. Towle, pro se

Glenn A. Perlow, Esq.

Case 1:06-cv-00464-JL Document 55 Filed 04/30/08 Page 1 of 1
<PAGE>


                                                                      EXHIBIT 32


  WRITTEN STATEMENT OF THE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE AND FINANCIAL OFFICER
                           PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. "1350

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. "1350, I, the undersigned
President and Chief Executive and Financial Officer of Avenue Entertainment
Group, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended March 31,
2005 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company.


                                                              /s/ Cary Brokaw
                                                              ------------------
May 18, 2005                                                  Cary Brokaw
|Structure Data for U.S. Banking Offices of Foreign Entities

Structure and Share | 
About




December 2000


By Country
  By Type
  ASCIIHome | 
Banking Information and RegulationAccessibility | 
Contact us
Last update: June 30, 2008
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------