alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 contract proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the contract proposals, 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, Operation of a Facility to Study Influenza Viruses, Vaccines, and Antimicrobials.                    

*Date:*                         October 22, 2008.                    

*Time:*                         2:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate contract proposals.                    

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

*Contact Person:*                         Thames E. Pickett, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institutes of Health/NIAID, 6700B Rockledge Drive, MSC 7616, Bethesda, MD 20892-7616, 301-496-2550,                         *pickettte@niaid.nih.gov*.                    

This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

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

Dated: October 6, 2008.

Jennifer Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. E8-24211 Filed 10-9-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
Order entered September 12, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-13-00518-CR

RONNIE DECOURTLAND BASS, JR., Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 195th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F11-26843-N

ORDER

The Court ORDERS the trial court to make findings of fact regarding whether appellant 

has been deprived of the reporter’s record because of ineffective counsel, indigence, or for any 

other reason.

 The trial court shall first determine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal. If 

the trial court determines that appellant does not desire to prosecute the appeal, it shall 

make a finding to that effect.

 If the trial court determines that appellant desires to prosecute the appeal, it shall next 

determine whether appellant is indigent and entitled to proceed without payment of costs 

for the reporter’s record. If appellant is entitled to proceed without payment of costs, the 

trial court shall make a finding to that effect. Moreover, if appellant is indigent, the trial 

court is ORDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure effective 

representation, which may include appointment of new counsel. If the trial court finds 

appellant is not indigent, it shall determine whether retained counsel has abandoned the 

appeal.
 The trial court shall next determine: (1) the name and address of each court reporter who 

recorded the proceedings in this cause; (2) the court reporter’s explanation for the delay 

in filing the reporter’s record; and (3) the earliest date by which the reporter’s record can 

be filed. 

We ORDER the trial court to transmit a supplemental record, containing the written 

findings of fact, any supporting documentation, and any orders, to this Court within THIRTY 

DAYS of the date of this order.

The appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with this order. It shall be 

reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or when the supplemental record is received, 

whichever is earlier.

/s/ LANA MYERS 

JUSTICE
Exhibit 32.2

Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of  The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Dividend Capital Trust Inc., a Maryland corporation (the
"Company"), does hereby certify with respect to the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the "Report") that:



|Date: March 16, 2005 |  | /s/JAMES R. MULVIHILLJames R. Mulvihill Chief Financial Officer and
Treasurer
|-------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------



QuickLinks
| (1) | The      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as      applicable, 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 results of operations of the Company      at the dates and for the periodsindicated. |
|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:    May      15, 2009 | /s/      Shi Huashan                                                           |
|------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                           | Shi      HuashanChief      Executive Officer(Principal      Executive Officer) |

----
#### A. W. BYERS, Doing Business under the Trade Name of West Palm Beach Merchant Police, Appellant, v. SOUTHERN BELL TELEPHONE & TELEGRAPH COMPANY, a New York Corporation, Appellee.

Supreme Court of Florida. Special Division B.

June 22, 1954.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 18

- 30531

DEON TREMELL LEE , Plaintiff

- Appellant

v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT; UNITED STATES CONGRESS; STATE OF LOUISIANA , Defendant s
- Appellee s

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 2:18

- CV

- 182

Before JONES, ELROD, and ENGELHARDT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Deon Tremell Lee, Louisiana prisoner # 375231, moves for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) in this appeal of the sua sponte dismissal of his case . The motion is a challenge to the district court’s certifica tion that the appeal is not taken in good faith. See Baugh v. Taylor , 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997).

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED December 5, 2018 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 18-30531 Document: 00514749092 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/05/2018No. 18

- 30531

2 Lee fails to address the district court’s reasons for finding his case to be frivolous. Pro se briefs are afforded liberal construction. See Yohey v . Collins , 985 F.2d 222, 225 (5th Cir. 1993). Nevertheless, when an appellant fails to identify any error in the district court’s analysis, it is the same as if the appellant had not appealed the decision. Brinkmann v. Dallas Cty. Deputy Sheriff Abner , 8 13 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). Because Lee has failed to challenge any factual or legal aspect of the district court’s disposition of his claims or the certification that his appeal is not taken in good faith, he has abandoned the critical issue of his appeal. See id . Thus, the appeal lacks arguable merit. See Howard v. King , 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983). Accordingly, the motion for leave to proceed IFP is denied , and the appeal is dismissed as frivolous. See Baugh , 117 F.3d at 202 n.24; 5 TH C IR

. R . 42.2. The dismissal of the complaint by the district court and the dismissal of this appeal as frivolous constitute two strikes under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons , 103 F.3d 383, 387

- 88 (5th Cir. 1996) , abrogated in part on other grounds by Coleman v. Tollefson , 135 S. Ct. 1759, 1762

- 63 (2015)

. Lee is WARNED that accumulating a third strike will preclude him from proceeding IFP in any civil action or appeal while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under im minent danger of serious physical injury. See § 1915(g). IFP MOTION DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED Case: 18-30531 Document: 00514749092 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/05/2018
**Exhibit 23.1**

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

The Board of Directors 

DCT Industrial Trust Inc.: 

We consent to the incorporation by reference inregistration statement No. 333-137929 on Form S-8 of DCT Industrial Trust Inc. (formerly Dividend Capital Trust Inc.) of our reports dated March 14, 2007, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of DCT Industrial Trust Inc. andsubsidiaries as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity and comprehensive loss, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2006,and the related financial statements schedule, which reports appear in the December 31, 2006 annual report on Form 10-K of DCT Industrial Trust Inc. 

/s/ KPMG LLP 

KPMG LLP 

Denver, Colorado 

March 14, 2007
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02554-REB-MEH

RONALD M. COX,

Plaintiff,

v.

DOUG, Nurse of (DRDC) (CDOC),

ZAVISLAN, (DRDC) Warden (CDOC), and

REAUX (DRDC) Captain (CDOC),

Defendants.

MINUTE ORDER

Entered by Michael E. Hegarty, United States Magistrate Judge, on December 3, 2012.

Plaintiff’s Motion Requesting Assistance in Obtaining Medical Records and X-Rays [filed

December 3, 2012; docket #57] is denied. Discovery in this case is currently stayed pending

resolution of the motion to dismiss and, even if it were not, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(c), the

Court is required only to assist prisoners proceeding in forma pauperis with expenses related to

printing a record on appeal or printing a transcript of court proceedings under certain circumstances.

Case 1:11-cv-02554-RM-MEH Document 59 Filed 12/03/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 200 (Wednesday, October 15, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61035-61039]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-24400]



[[Page 61035]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

[Transmittal Nos. 08-47]


36(b)(1) Arms Sales Notification

AGENCY: Department of Defense, Defense Security Cooperation Agency.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text 
of a section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification. This is published to 
fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated 21 
July 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. B. English, DSCA/DBO/CFM, (703) 
601-3740.
    The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of 
Representatives, Transmittals 08-47 with attached transmittal, policy 
justification, and Sensitivity of Technology.

    Dated: October 7, 2008.
Patricia L. Toppings,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
BILLING CODE 5001-06-M

[[Page 61036]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15OC08.010


[[Page 61037]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15OC08.011


[[Page 61038]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15OC08.012


[[Page 61039]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15OC08.013

[FR Doc. E8-24400 Filed 10-14-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-C
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02717-PAB-MJW

JAMES L. NERO, individually and on behalf of a class of others similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

v.

AMERICAN FAMILY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendant.

MINUTE ORDER 

Entered by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe

It is hereby ORDERED that the Unopposed Motion to Partially Amend Filing of

Exhibit B to Plaintiffs [sic] Supplement to Motion to Compel Responsive Answers to

Plaintiff’s First Set of Interrogatories and for Sanctions (Docket No. 70) is GRANTED for

good cause shown. Attachment 2 (identified as Exhibit B) to Docket No. 69 shall be

restricted at Level 1.

Date: September 17, 2012

Case 1:11-cv-02717-PAB-MJW Document 78 Filed 09/17/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 1
<CIK>     0001025707
<NAME>                     LITIGATION ECONOMICS, INC.
       
<S>                                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                  DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                       JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                     565
<SECURITIES>                                 0
<RECEIVABLES>                                0
<ALLOWANCES>                                 0
<INVENTORY>                                  0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           565
<PP&E>                                       0
<DEPRECIATION>                               0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             565 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                   15,866
<BONDS>                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        0
<PREFERRED>                                  0
<COMMON>                                 1,500
<OTHER-SE>                             (32,100)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               565
<SALES>                                      0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             0
<CGS>                                        0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                            5,509
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                         (5,509)
<NET-INCOME>                            (5,509)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                0
        

</TABLE>
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

ZACHARY LEE JOHNSTON,

Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee.

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-20-00014-CR

Appeal from the

168th District Court

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC# 20170D03893)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was no error in the 

judgment. We therefore affirm the judgment of the court below. This decision shall be certified 

below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 22ND DAY OF JUNE, 2022.

GINA M. PALAFOX, Justice

Before Rodriguez, C.J., Palafox, and Alley, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                              26
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     4098
<ALLOWANCES>                                       850
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   773
<PP&E>                                            6732
<DEPRECIATION>                                    4062
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    6265
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             1952
<BONDS>                                           3734
<COMMON>                                          2515
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                      (2573)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      6265
<SALES>                                            690
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  1215
<CGS>                                              337
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      643
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   236
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    55
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 155
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    126
<INCOME-TAX>                                         2
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                124
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       124
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .04
        

</TABLE>
** **

**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Mark L. Freitas, Chief Financial Officer of Lancer Corporation,certify that:

 

1.             I have reviewedthis quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2004 ofLancer Corporation;

 

2.             Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.             Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.             The registrant’sother certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

a.             Designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared;

 

b.            Evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

c.               Disclosed inthis report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

5.             The registrant’sother certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (orpersons performing the equivalent functions):

 

a.             All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

 

b.            Any fraud,whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

Date:  November 12, 2004

 

 
| /s/ MARK L. FREITAS                      |
|------------------------------------------|
| Mark L. Freitas, Chief Financial Officer |

 

 

----
#### The Hocking Valley Mining Co. *v.*Hunter.

(No. 25450

Decided December 26, 1935.)

*Messrs. Jones, Jones & Erskine*and *Mr. H. G. All-read,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. M. D. Hughes*and *Messrs. Woolley & Rowland,*for defendant in error.

The original action was an appeal from an order of the Industrial Commission denying a death award.

The Court of Common Pleas overruled defendant’s motions for a directed verdict and defendant’s motion for final judgment,- hut, after a verdict was returned for plaintiff, sustained a motion by defendant for new trial.

The defendant prosecuted error to the Court of Appeals, which court sustained a motion to dismiss the petition in error upon the ground that no final order was entered in the Common Pleas Court from which error proceedings could be prosecuted.

On consideration whereof it is ordered and adjudged by this court that the judgment of the Court of Appeals be, and the same hereby is, reversed for error in sustaining the motion to dismiss the petition in error *(Davis*v. *Turner,*69 Ohio Si, 101, 68 N. E., 819, and *Jacob Laub Baking Co.*v. *Middleton,*118 Ohio St., 106, 160 N. E., 629), and this cause is remanded to the Court of Appeals to determine whether the original defendant was entitled to a directed ver*334diet upon a consideration of the evidence submitted in the Common Pleas Court.

*Judgment reversed and cause remanded.*

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

Williams, J., dissents.
#### FRIEDMAN’S ESTATE v. ROBERSON.

No. 6755.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Second Circuit.

June 30, 1944.

John G. Gibbs, of Natchitoches, for appellant.

J. D. Rusca, of Natchitoches, for appel-lee.

HARDY, Judge.

By virtue of a joint motion to dismiss the appeal in this case filed herein by coun sel for both appellant and appellee, accordingly, it is ordered that the appeal be dismissed at appellant’s cost.
| Skip to Content*Release Date: June 11, 2009*Release dates |  Coded tables |  Historical dataCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB)**L.221 Farm Mortgages1** |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|