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

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

v. 

EDWARD BROWN & ELAINE BROWN, 

 Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket no. 1:09-CR-30-GZS 

ORDER ON MOTION FOR PERIODIC VISITS 

 Before the Court is Defendant Elaine Brown’s Motion for Periodic Visits with CoDefendant Edward Brown (Docket # 20). Having received the Government’s Response, the 

Motion is hereby GRANTED WITHOUT OBJECTION. The Government’s Response details 

the arrangements that have been made for the Defendants to meet for at least one hour each day 

in order to plan their defense strategy. The Response further indicates that the Defendants have 

already had several meetings in accordance with this arrangement. Therefore, the Court 

ORDERS that the Defendants be allowed to continue these daily meetings consistent with the 

scheduling and resources available at the Stafford County House of Corrections. 

SO ORDERED. 

 /s/ George Z. Singal 

 United States District Judge 

Dated this 4th day of March, 2009. 

Case 1:09-cr-00030-GZS Document 22 Filed 03/04/09 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Steven A. Swan

v.

U.S. Attorney General

No. 07-fp-112

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 $56.00 is due no later than May

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

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

Medical Center-Devens 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-112-SM.

SO ORDERED.

Date: April 27, 2007

cc: Steven A. Swan, pro se

Bonnie S. Reed, Financial Administrator

Federal Medical Center-Devens, Inmate Accounts

Case 1:07-cv-00112-SM Document 3 Filed 04/27/2007 Page 1 of 1

Swan v. US Attorney General Doc. 3

Dockets.Justia.com
1 In The 

### Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________ N O . 09
- 21
- 00060
- CR NO. 09
- 21
- 00061
- CR

__________________ KEVIN KAMPER , Appellant
V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

__________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the 252nd District C ourt Jefferson County, Texas Trial Cause No s . 16
- 26420, 16
- 26421

__________________________________________________________________ ORDER The clerk’s record in the above styled and numbered cause was filed on March 18, 2021. Appellant’s brief was due on April 19, 2021, but was not filed, and we notified the appellant 1 that neither the brief of the appellant nor a motion for extension of time to file the brief has been filed.

1 Appellant appears to be pro se on appeal.2 We abate the appeal and remand the case to the trial court to conduct a hearing

. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(b)(3). W e direct the trial court to de termine whether appellant desires to pursue his appeal. If appellant desires to pursue his appeal, we direct the trial court to determine why the brief of the appellant has not been filed and whether appellant has retained counsel who has abandoned the app eal. Th is
Court notes that the trial court determined in its order denying appellant’s motion for forensic DNA testing and appointment of counsel that appellant ’s motion did not demonstrate entitlement to appointed counsel. The record of the hearing, including any orders and findings of the trial judge, shall be sent to the appellate court for filing. The transcription of the court reporter’s notes from the hearing and the recommendation of the trial court judge are to be fil ed on or before July 28, 2021

. ORDER ENTERED June 28, 2021

. PER CURIAM Before Golemon , C.J., Kreger and Horton , JJ.
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health 

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meeting. 

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; Immune Cells in Hepatic Injury and Transplantation.                     

*Date:*                         October 23, 2008.                     

*Time:*                         1 p.m. to 5 p.m.                     

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                     

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, Rockledge 6700, 6700B Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20817, (Telephone Conference Call).                     

*Contact Person:*                         Sujata Vijh, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities, NIAID/NIH/DHHS, 6700B Rockledge Drive, MSC 7616, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-594-0985,                         *vijhs@niaid.nih.gov.*

                        (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856,                               ( print page 57373)                            Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)                    

Dated: September 19, 2008. 

Jennifer Spaeth, 

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

 [FR Doc. E8-22846 Filed 10-1-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
Certifications

I, Richard Simpson, 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 Benchmark 2019-B9 Mortgage Trust (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(s) required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreements 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; LNR Partners, LLC; Park Bridge Lender Services LLC; U.S. Bank National Association; CoreLogic Solutions, LLC; Midland Loan Services, a Division of PNC Bank, National Association; CWCapital Asset Management LLC; Pentalpha Surveillance LLC; Computershare Trust Company, National Association; and Wilmington Trust, National Association.

Date:	March 28 , 2024

/s/ Richard Simpson___________________Richard SimpsonPresident, Citigroup Commercial Mortgage Securities Inc.(senior officer in charge of securitization of the depositor)

Benchmark 2019-B9 Certifications


---
29

B.9. Number of Agricultural Bank Failures

Year Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Total

1987...... 22 19 12 16 69

1988...... 11 6 12 7 36

1989...... 5 7 5 5 22

1990...... 3 5 6 3 17

1991...... 2 2 3 1 8

1992...... 1 1 1 4 7

1993...... 1 2 2 0 5

1994...... 0 0 0 0 0

1995...... 0 0 0 0 0

1996...... 0 2 0 0 2

1997...... 0 0 0 1 1

1998...... 0 0 1 0 1

1999...... 0 1 0 0 1

2000...... 0 0 0 0 0

2001...... 0 0 0 0 0

2002...... 1 0 0 1 2

2003...... 0 1 0 0 1

2004...... 0 1 0 0 1

2005...... 0 0 0 0 0

2006...... 0 0 0 0 0

2007...... 0 0 0 0 0

2008...... 1 0 0 n.a. n.a.

 Note. Data exclude banks assisted to prevent failure. Industrial banks and

mutual savings banks also are excluded. Agricultural banks are defined in

the introduction to section B.

 n.a. Not available.
Exhibit 32.1


                    CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO
                     18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                      AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
          SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and
(b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of the
undersigned officers of M Power Entertainment Inc., a Delaware corporation
(the "Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:

     .    The Quarterly Report for the period ended June 30, 2005 (the "Form
           10-QSB") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of
           Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and

     .    the information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in
           all material respects, the financial condition and results of
           operations of the Company.



Date: May 15, 2006



/s/  Gary F. Kimmons
----------------------
Gary F. Kimmons
Chief Executive Officer
Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT
32.1





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Annual Report of The Dress Barn, Inc. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended July 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, David R. Jaffe,
President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge that:





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





The
foregoing certification is provided solely for purposes of complying with the
provisions of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and is not intended
to be used for any other purpose.





/s/ David R. JaffeDavid
      R. JaffePresident,
      Chief Executive Officer and DirectorSeptember
      24, 2010
**Exhibit 32.1**

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report onForm 10-Q of BPZ Energy, Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarter endedJune 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (the “Report”), I, Manuel Pablo Zuniga-Pflucker, as Chief ExecutiveOfficer of the Company, certify, pursuant to and solely for the purpose of 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

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

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

 
| */s/ Manuel Pablo Zuniga-Pflucker*    |   |
|---------------------------------------|--------|
| Manuel Pablo Zuniga-Pflucker          |
| President and Chief Executive Officer |
| September 26, 2006                    |

 

1

----
FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

December 12, 2014

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

BOBBY GREEN,

 Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

ROBERT C. PATTON, Director DOC,

 Respondent - Appellee.

No. 14-6192

(D.C. No. 5:13-CV-00756-M)

(W.D. Okla.)

ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY*

Before GORSUCH, MURPHY, and HOLMES, Circuit Judges.

After pleading guilty to state drug charges Bobby Green won a partially

suspended sentence and probation. Soon, though, the state alleged that Mr. Green

had committed more drug crimes, violating the terms of his probation and

warranting revocation of his suspended sentence. Mr. Green sought to avoid this

result, arguing that the government’s evidence against him stemmed from a

Fourth Amendment violation and should be suppressed. The state court disagreed

and proceeded to revoke Mr. Green’s suspended sentence. After failing to

overturn this result on appeal in state court, Mr. Green sought habeas corpus

*

 This order is not binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of

the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its

persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.
relief in federal district court under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. But that court eventually

denied Mr. Green’s requested relief, too, as well as his later request for a

certificate of appealability.

Mr. Green now renews his COA request before us, but before we may grant

it he must make “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28

U.S.C. § 2253. And that he has not done. As the district court explained, the

Oklahoma courts afforded Mr. Green a full and fair opportunity to litigate his

Fourth Amendment claim — and in those circumstances federal courts are

precluded from granting federal habeas relief on Fourth Amendment claims. See

Stone v. Powell, 428 U.S. 465, 494 (1976). Mr. Green separately contends that

the Oklahoma trial court abused its discretion when it decided to revoke his

suspended sentence in full rather than in part. But Mr. Green failed to pursue this

argument in district court. Neither, in any event, does he seek to explain to us

how the state court’s actions might violate the federal Constitution or laws,

prerequisites to federal habeas relief. 

Mr. Green’s request for a COA is denied, as is his motion to proceed in

forma pauperis, and this appeal is dismissed. Mr. Green is reminded that he must

pay the filing fee in full.

ENTERED FOR THE COURT

Neil M. Gorsuch

Circuit Judge

- 2 -
**EXHIBIT
        23**
 
 **CONSENT
        OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**
  We
          consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.
          33-47415 on Form S-8, No. 33-17488 on Form S-8, No. 33-60196 on Form S-8,
          No.
          333-18135 on Form
          S-8, No.
          333-25377 on Form S- 3,
          and No.
          333-124512 on Form S- 1, of our
          reports dated October 12, 2005 relating
          to the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule of The Dress Barn,
          Inc .
          ( which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph for the
          restatement described
          in Note 3 ) and
          management' s
          report
          on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting dated
          October 12, 2005 (which report expresses an unqualified opinion on management’s
          assessment and an adverse opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal
          control over financial reporting because of a material weakness), appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of The Dress Barn, Inc. and
          subsidiaries for
          the
          year ended July 30, 2005.
 /s/
        Deloitte & Touche LLP
 
 DELOITTE
        & TOUCHE LLP
 New
        York,
        New York
 October
        12, 2005
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

ON MOTION F OR RECONSIDERATION EN B ANC

NO. 03-06-00600- CV

Williamson County, Hon orable Dan A. G attis, Honorable Su zanne Brooks, Honorable Ti m Wright, Honorable Donald Higgin botham, and H onorable Willi am Thomas Eastes, in their offi cial capacities, Appellants

v. Ke rry He ckm an, Monica Maisenbacher, Sylvia Pe ter son, Tamm y Newberry, Elveda Vieira, and Jessica Stem pko, on behalf of them selves and al l other per sons si m ilarly situated, App ellees

F ROM TH E DISTRI CT COURT O F WI LLIAM SO N COUNTY , 277 TH JUDICI AL DISTRICT

NO. 06- 453- C277, HO NORAB LE JO SEP H H. H ART, JUDGE P RESIDING

D I S S E N T I N G O P I N I O N

I withdraw my prior concur ring opinion and s u b s t i tute this opinion respe ctfully dissenting. I n light of (i) appellants’ motion to dismiss and supplemental briefing citing “interve ning developments,” which are recited and re cog nized by the m ajority and are relevant to whether the 1

Among other developments, appellants rec ite that “Willi amson County has adopted a new 1 policy for dealing with court appointed counsel, has added an additional mag istrate lawyer, and has hired an i n d i gen t defe nse coordinator t o ensure that ever y one who is entitled to a court appointed attorney and reque sts a court ap p o i nted attorney will g et one” thus supplanting the plan in eff ect during events in this ca

use; the Texas L eg islature passed House Bill 1178 which beca me eff ective September 1, 2007, adding “additional require ments for appointing counsel to indige nt defe ndants;” and, in 2009 the Court of Appea ls for the Fifth Circuit decide d the case of Davis v. Tarrant County, T ex . , 565 F.3d 214, 228 (5th Cir. 2009), in which the court rec og nized a party had standing t oclaims rema in live and appellee s have standing , and (ii) the passag e of time since the appea l in this

case was filed i n 2 0 0 6 , I would rema nd to the district court for a hear ing to deter mine if chang ed circ umstances have rende red ap p el l ee s’ claims moot since the district court denied in 2006 appellants’ ple a to the jurisdiction in its entirety

.

__________________________________________ J an P. Patterson, J ustice
Be fore J ustices Patterson, Pember ton and Waldrop Filed: Jul y

16, 2010

challeng e the establishment and implementation of a county policy for the appointment of counsel to repre sent indige nt defe ndants. 2
| Period | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Total |
|--------|----|----|----|----|-------|
| 1981   | 1  | 0  | 0  | 0  | 1     |
| 1982   | 2  | 3  | 3  | 3  | 11    |
| 1983   | 1  | 1  | 2  | 3  | 7     |
| 1984   | 3  | 7  | 10 | 12 | 32    |
| 1985   | 12 | 21 | 17 | 18 | 68    |
| 1986   | 14 | 14 | 21 | 16 | 65    |
| 1987   | 22 | 19 | 12 | 16 | 69    |
| 1988   | 11 | 6  | 12 | 7  | 36    |
| 1989   | 5  | 7  | 5  | 5  | 22    |
| 1990   | 3  | 5  | 6  | 3  | 17    |
| 1991   | 2  | 2  | 3  | 1  | 8     |
| 1992   | 1  | 1  | 1  | 4  | 7     |
| 1993   | 1  | 2  | 2  | 0  | 5     |
| 1994   | 0  | 0  | 0  | 0  | 0     |
| 1995   | 0  | 0  | 0  | 0  | 0     |
| 1996   | 0  | 2  | 0  | 0  | 2     |
| 1997   | 0  | 0  | 0  | 1  | 1     |
| 1998   | 0  | 0  | 1  | 0  | 1     |
| 1999   | 0  | 1  | 0  | 0  | 1     |
| 2000   | 0  | 0  | 0  | 0  | 0     |
| 2001   | 0  | 0  | 0  | 0  | 0     |
| 2002   | 1  | 0  | 0  | 1  | 2     |
| 2003   | 0  | 1  | 0  | 0  | 1     |
| 2004   | 0  | .  | .  | .  | .     |
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

RAYMOND LINDOR,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D21-2603

[June 30, 2022]

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

the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Susan Alspector, 

Judge; L.T. Case No. 14-012558CF10A.

Robert David Malove of the Law Office of Robert David Malove, P.A., 

Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

No appearance for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

GROSS, MAY and CIKLIN, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Kenneth Altizio

v. Civil No. 1: 07-cv-325-JL

Marriott International Inc.

O R D E R

Counsel's notice is improper. When a case has been set for trial, a motion (as opposed) to

a notice is required. Counsel's motion should comply with Local Rule 83.6(b) and all other

Local Rules governing motions, including those applicable to notice to clients and parties and the

client's last known address.

SO ORDERED.

February 1, 2008 /s/ Joseph N. LaPlante

Joseph N. Laplante

United States District Judge

cc: Edward Lawrence Ford, Esq.

Christopher A. Callanan, Esq.

James M. Campbell, Esq.

Case 1:07-cv-00325-JL Document 15 Filed 02/01/08 Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

LEWIS T. BABCOCK, JUDGE

Civil Case No. 11-cv-02241-LTB

LUCIA VASCONCELLOS,

Plaintiff,

v.

HARTFORD LIFE AND ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY, a Connecticut Insurance

Company, and

GROUP LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN FOR EMPLOYEES OF JPMORGAN CHASE BANK,

an ERISA Welfare Benefit Plan, 

Defendants.

___________________________________________________________________________

MINUTE ORDER

___________________________________________________________________________

BY ORDER OF JUDGE LEWIS T. BABCOCK

Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion to Extend Deadline for Opening Brief (Doc 32 - filed August

13, 2012) is GRANTED. All briefing deadlines are extended 21 days in the event the

settlement cannot be reduced to writing and finalized by the parties.

Dated: August 14, 2012

___________________________________________________________________________

Case 1:11-cv-02241-LTB-CBS Document 33 Filed 08/14/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1