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

 FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO 

Criminal Case No. 11-cr-00428-WYD 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

1. BIVIAN VILLALOBOS-MADRID, 

Defendant. 

MINUTE ORDER 

ORDER ENTERED BY CHIEF JUDGE WILEY Y. DANIEL 

A Change of Plea hearing is set for Wednesday, January 25, 2012 at 10:00 a.m.

Counsel for the parties shall deliver all change of plea documents separately to 

Judge Daniel=s chambers AND to the Probation Department not later than 72 

HOURS before the hearing date. If the documents are not timely submitted, the 

hearing will be VACATED. There will be no exceptions to this policy, and sanctions 

may be imposed for failure to comply.

December 9, 2011
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                     6-MOS                    
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             JAN-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                  JUL-31-1997
<CASH>                                            5,896
<SECURITIES>                                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   145,587
<ALLOWANCES>                                     26,854
<INVENTORY>                                           0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                157,565
<PP&E>                                           25,771
<DEPRECIATION>                                   10,907
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                1,303,035
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           529,542
<BONDS>                                               0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            11,780
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<COMMON>                                              0
<OTHER-SE>                                      186,888
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  1,303,035
<SALES>                                          84,914
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                509,092
<CGS>                                                 0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   475,447
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  1,291
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                1,291
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  32,354
<INCOME-TAX>                                          0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              32,354
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                     32,354
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         0
                                              
                                              

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1



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





In connection with the Annual Report of Conscious Intention, Inc. (the "Company"), on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report"), I, Sylva Leduc, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as added by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



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



2.       To my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for the period covered by the Report.









/s/ Sylva Leduc

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

Sylva Leduc

Chief Executive Officer

Duly Authorized Officer and Principal

Financial and Accounting Officer





Date: April 7, 2005
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-8000

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

DERRICK LEVON PLATT,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Florence. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. 

(4:09-cr-01146-RBH-1; 4:13-cv-02937-RBH)

Submitted: February 20, 2014 Decided: February 26, 2014

Before DUNCAN, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Derrick Levon Platt, Appellant Pro Se. Alfred William Walker 

Bethea, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South 

Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Derrick Levon Platt seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order denying as successive his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) 

motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or 

judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not 

issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a 

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the 

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies 

this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would 

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional 

claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 

484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 

(2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural 

grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive 

procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a 

debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 

529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude 

that Platt has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we 

deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in 

forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 
3

presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

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

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Natrol, Inc. (the “Company”)for the period ended September 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, in thecapacity and on the date listed below, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, that:

 

(1)                                  The Report fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

ThisCertification is provided solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, andItem 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933,as amended, and shall not be deemed part of the Report or “filed” for anypurpose whatsoever, nor shall it be deemed incorporated by reference into anyfiling under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

 

 
| Date:  November 15, 2004 |                                                |
|--------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------|
|                     |  /s/  Dennis R. Jolicoeur                      |
|                     |  Dennis  R. Jolicoeur                          |
|                     |  Chief  Financial Officer and Executive        |
|                     |  Vice  President (Principal Financial Officer) |

----

----
**Exhibit31(b)**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO SECTION 302**

**OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, David A. Christensen, certify that:

 

1.                    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form10-Q of Hickory Tech Corporation;

 

2.                    Based on my knowledge, this report does notcontain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3.                    Based on my knowledge, the financialstatements and other financial information included in this report fairlypresent in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;

 

4.                    The registrant’s other certifying officer(s)and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have:

 

a)                   designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

 

b)                  evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the endof the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

 

c)                   disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarterin the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and

 

5.                    The registrant’s other certifying officer(s)and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controlover financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committeeof registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

 

a)                   all significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

 

b)                  any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 
| Date: November 4, 2004   |
|--------------------------|
|                     |
|                     |
| /s/ David A. Christensen |   |
| David A. Christensen     |
| Chief Financial Officer  |

 

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-1842

SHARON L. SAUNDERS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

ILA LOCAL 1970,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District

Judge. (CA-02-795-2)

Submitted: January 30, 2004 Decided: February 13, 2004

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

David Raymond Simonsen, Jr., Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant.

Charles S. Montagna, MONTAGNA, BREIT, KLEIN & CAMDEN, L.L.P.,

Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Sharon L. Saunders appeals the district court’s orders

granting summary judgment to Defendant in this Title VII action and

denying Saunders’ motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the

record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for

the reasons stated by the district court. See Saunders v. ILA

Local 1970, No. CA-02-795-2 (E.D. Va. filed June 5, 2003; entered

June 6, 2003). We dispense with oral argument because the facts

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
"Page: 0  March 10, 2005"
""
"L.228 Proprietors Equity in Noncorporate Business"
"Billions of dollars; amounts outstanding end of period, not seasonally adjusted                                                                                                                                                   "
""
"","2000","2001","2002","2003","2003","2003","2003","2004","2004","2004","2004","",
"Description","","","","Q1","Q2","Q3","Q4","Q1","Q2","Q3","Q4","",
" 1  152090205","    4834.2","    4949.2","    5139.7","    5202.2","    5269.8","    5368.3","    5495.8","    5581.2","    5683.1","    5828.2","    5929.9","    1",
" 2  112090205","    3837.6","    3921.3","    4057.9","    4105.9","    4165.0","    4240.1","    4354.0","    4403.8","    4498.5","    4650.3","    4729.8","    2",
"Farm business net worth (market value) asset","     985.0","    1021.7","    1076.9","    1091.3","    1099.3","    1122.1","    1135.9","    1171.6","    1178.9","    1171.7","    1194.3","    3",
"Security brokers and dealers net worth (market value) asset","      11.7","       6.2","       5.0","       5.1","       5.5","       6.1","       6.0","       5.8","       5.7","       6.2","       5.8","    4",
#### The Ohio Water Service Co. *v.*City of Washington, Fayette County.

(No. 25311

Decided May 1, 1935.)

*Messrs. Miller, Thompson & Dunbar, Mr. Troy T. Junk*and *Mr. Henry J. Linton,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. Maxwell O. Dice,*city solicitor, for defendant in error.

It is ordered and adjudged that said petition in error he, and the same is hereby, dismissed for the reason no debatable constitutional question is involved in said cause.

*Petition in error dismissed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Stephenson, Williams, Matthias, Day and Zimmerman,'JJ., .concur.

Jones, J., not participating.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000             DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-2000             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000             JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                       3,940,840                       0
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,940,840                       0
<PP&E>                                     247,066,951                       0
<DEPRECIATION>                              20,977,105                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             230,030,686                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,940,840                       0
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                             0                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                 226,089,846                       0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               230,030,686                       0
<SALES>                                     11,288,646              22,270,326
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            11,312,167              22,315,753
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                47,687                 111,993
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             11,264,480              22,203,760
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         11,264,480              22,203,760
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                11,264,480              22,203,760
<EPS-BASIC>                                      0.282                   0.555
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0.282                   0.555


</TABLE>
1

 In criminal cases originating from the Grand Junction or Durango Jury Divisions of this Court, counsel

shall be prepared to advise the Court at the time of the change of plea hearing whether a written request to have the

sentencing hearing conducted at the courthouse in either Grand Junction or Durango will be filed. See

Administrative Order 2007-8.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Honorable Marcia S. Krieger

Criminal Action No. 11-cr-00397-MSK

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

1. Ignacio Alberto HERNANDEZ-LOPEZ,

 a/k/a Ignacio HERNANDEZ,

Defendant.

 

ORDER AND NOTICE OF CHANGE OF PLEA AND SENTENCING HEARINGS

 

THIS MATTER comes before the Court following the filing of a Notice of Disposition 

(#12) on November 8, 2011, by Defendant. The Court construes this Notice as a motion to

change his plea and to have the Court consider the terms of the parties’ plea agreement.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:

1. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(1)(F) and (I), the speedy trial clock is tolled

pending determination of those matters. 

2. A Change of Plea hearing is set for December 14, 2011, at 9:00 a.m. and a

Sentencing hearing is set for March 19, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. in the United States

District Court for the District of Colorado, Courtroom A901, Alfred A. Arraj U.S.

Courthouse, 901 19th Street, Denver, Colorado.1
3. The final trial preparation conference set for December 9, 2011, and the

December 19, 2011, trial date are VACATED.

DATED this 14th day of November, 2011.

BY THE COURT:

Marcia S. Krieger

United States District Judge
1Archer named the Snow Flake Inn as a defendant. The

defendants refer to the inn as the “Snowflake Inn.”

2Archer mistakenly relies on Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure 13(h), which applies to counterclaims and crossclaims. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Darcy Archer

v. Civil No. 09-cv-85-JD

Sue Methot, et al.

O R D E R

Darcy Archer brought claims of copyright and trademark

infringement, breach of contract, and unfair trade practices

against Sue and Gary Methot and the “Snow Flake Inn.”1 In their

answer, the defendants disclosed that the Inn is owned by Noel

Renee, Inc., d/b/a the Snowflake Inn. Archer moves to join Noel

Rene [sic], Inc. as a defendant.2 The defendants filed a limited

objection, noting the misspelling of “Renee” and submitting that

Noel Renee, Inc. should be substituted as a defendant for the

Snowflake Inn.

Given the general agreement of the parties concerning these

minor matters, they should have been resolved between counsel

without filing a motion. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). It is a

Case 1:09-cv-00085-JD Document 27 Filed 09/03/09 Page 1 of 2
2

waste of the court’s time and resources to address an unnecessary

motion. See LR 7.1(c).

Conclusion

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

(document no. 21) is denied without prejudice.

Counsel shall discuss and attempt to resolve the issue of

the proposed additional defendant. If successful, the plaintiff

shall file an assented-to motion to amend her complaint to add

the appropriate defendant or substitute a defendant for the

Snowflake Inn on or before September 25, 2009. If counsel are

unable to agree, they shall file a joint notice on or before

September 25, 2009, in which they give detailed reasons for their

disagreement, and the court will schedule a hearing to address

the issue.

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

United States District Judge

September 3, 2009

cc: Charles G. Holoubek, Esquire

Donald L. Smith, Esquire

Case 1:09-cv-00085-JD Document 27 Filed 09/03/09 Page 2 of 2
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

JUDGE R. BROOKE JACKSON

_____________________________________________________________________

Date: December 9, 2011

Courtroom Deputy: Laura Galera

Court Reporter: Kara Spitler

Interpreter: Yuliya Fedasenka-Cloud

_____________________________________________________________________

Civil Case No. 11-cr-00429-RBJ

Parties

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 

Plaintiff,

v.

JOHN DOE, also known as

FARKHAD K. Sharipov,

Defendant.

Counsel:

John Canedy

Gregory D. Rawlings

COURTROOM MINUTES

TRIAL PREPARATION CONFERENCE

9:01 a.m. Court in Session.

Appearances of counsel. Defendant appears in custody.

Interpreter sworn.

Opening remarks by the Court.

Statements by defense counsel and the government regarding the Motion to Continue Trial Doc.

# [20].

Defendant has discussed and understands his speedy trial rights and waives them.

Case 1:11-cr-00429-RBJ Document 22 Filed 12/09/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
2

Court finds the ends of justice would be served by GRANTING the Motion to Continue Trial

Doc. # [20]. The Court finds that defense counsel has been diligent in attempting to prepare for

trial, but has not had much time to investigate and develop the facts. Therefore, the Court finds

that a continuance of 120 days is sufficient to accomplish additional, necessary investigation and

preparation. The Court further finds there is no inconvenience to the opposing party, the United

States has stipulated to the continuance, and that if defendant were forced to proceed to trial on

December 19, 2012, he could possibly suffer from an inadequately prepared defense.

ORDERED: Jury Trial set December 19, 2011 is VACATED and RESET to March 26, 2012

at 9:00 a.m.

ORDERED: A Trial Preparation Conference is set March 9, 2012 at 10:00 a.m.

9:08 a.m. Court in Recess.

Hearing concluded.

Total time: 00:07

Case 1:11-cr-00429-RBJ Document 22 Filed 12/09/11 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
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 Cosmo Communications Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Peter Horak, 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, that:





(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.





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





:
/S/ Peter HorakPeter Horak

Chief Executive Officer

(Principal Executive Officer)Date: June 28, 2011