alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
| Skip to Content*Release Date: December 8, 2011*Release dates |  Announcements |   Coded tables |  Historical dataCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB) |  Data Download Program (DDP)**F.126 Issuers of Asset-Backed Securities ABS** |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SAUL BARRIOS PEREZ, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

DILL, Assistant Warden; et al., 

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 16-15558 

D.C. No. 1:07-cv-01794-BAM 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Barbara McAuliffe, Magistrate Judge, Presiding**

Submitted May 8, 2017***

Before: REINHARDT, LEAVY, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Saul Barrios Perez appeals pro se from the district 

court’s judgment following a jury verdict in favor of defendants in his 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1983 action alleging conditions of confinement claims. We have jurisdiction 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The parties consented to proceed before a magistrate judge. See 28 

U.S.C. § 636(c).

*** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

MAY 17 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 16-15558 

under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review “independently and non-deferentially a 

challenge to the composition of grand and petit juries,” Thomas v. Borg, 159 F.3d 

1147, 1149 (9th Cir. 1998) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted), and for 

an abuse of discretion a district court’s sanctions under Federal Rule of Civil 

Procedure 16(f). We affirm.

Contrary to Perez’s arguments that the composition of his civil jury violated 

the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments, there is no evidence in the record showing 

that there was a discriminatory intent in composing the jury or that there was a 

distinctive group in the community that was systemically excluded from the jury 

process. See Thomas, 159 F.3d at 1149-50 (requirements for Sixth and Fourteenth 

Amendment challenges to a jury composition).

The district court did not plainly err in failing to deny sua sponte defendants’

peremptory challenges as improperly motivated by race because there were raceneutral reasons for the exclusion of those jurors. See United States v. ContrerasContreras, 83 F.3d 1103, 1104-06 (9th Cir. 1996) (standard of review and 

explanation of plain error standard).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in sanctioning Perez for failing 

to comply with its scheduling order because Perez failed to file his pretrial 

statement in a timely manner. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(f) (permitting court to sua 

sponte issue sanctions based on party’s failure to comply with pretrial order); see 
3 16-15558 

also Wong v. Regents of the Univ. of Cal., 410 F.3d 1052, 1060 (9th Cir. 2005) 

(standard of review).

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued 

in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on 

appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.
EX-4.1



 Exhibit 4.1 
  

 
 




 
 NUMBER ERC eclipse RESOURCES SHARES Eclipse Resources Corporation INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF
DELAWARE THIS CERTIFICATE IS TRANSFERABLE IN CANTON, MA, JERSEY CITY, NJ AND COLLEGE STATION, TX SEE REVERSE FOR CERTAIN DEFINITIONS CUSIP 27890G 10 0 THIS CERTIFIES THAT IS THE OWNER OF FULLY PAID AND NON-ASSESSABLE SHARES OF THE COMMON STOCK, PAR
VALUE OF $0.01 PER SHARE, OF ECLIPSE RESOURCES CORPORATION transferable only on the books of the Corporation by the holder hereof in person or by duly authorized attorney upon surrender of this Certificate properly endorsed. This Certificate is not
valid unless countersigned and registered by the Transfer Agent and Registrar. WITNESS the facsimile signatures of the Corporation’s duly authorized officers. Dated: COUNTERSIGNED AND REGISTERED: COMPUTERSHARE TRUST COMPANY, N A. Transfer Agent
and Registrar By Authorized Officer CHRISTOPHER K. HULBURT, SECRETARY BENJAMIN W. HULBURT, PRESIDENT AMERICAN BANK NOTE COMPANY 







 



 
 The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this Certificate, shall be construed as though they were
written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations: TEN COM—as tenants in common TEN ENT —as tenants by the entireties JT TEN —as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants in common UNIF GIFT MIN ACT
— .Custodian .(Cust) (Minor) under Uniform Gifts to Minors Act . (State) Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list. For value received, hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER
IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE (PLEASE PRINT OR TYPEWRITE NAME AND ADDRESS, INCLUDING ZIP CODE, OF ASSIGNEE) shares represented by the within Certificate, and does hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint , attorney to transfer the said shares on
the books of the within named Corporation with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated NOTICE: THE SIGNATURE TO THIS ASSIGNMENT MUST CORRESPOND WITH THE NAME AS WRITTEN UPON THE FACE OF THE CERTIFICATE IN EVERY PARTICULAR, WITHOUT
ALTERATION OR ENLARGEMENT OR ANY CHANGE WHATEVER. Signature(s) Guaranteed: THE SIGNATURE(S) MUST BE GUARANTEED BY AN ELIGIBLE GUARANTOR INSTITUTION (BANKS, STOCKBROKERS, SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS AND CREDIT UNIONS WITH MEMBERSHIP IN AN APPROVED
SIGNATURE GUARANTEE MEDALLION PROGRAM), PURSUANT TO S.E.C. RULE 17Ad-15.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen

Kurtis T. Wilder,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 September 12, 2017

d0906

Order 

Clerk

September 12, 2017

154684

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 154684

COA: 325806

Saginaw CC: 14-039758-FJ

KAREEM AMID SWILLEY, JR.,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

By order of May 31, 2017, the prosecuting attorney was directed to answer the 

application for leave to appeal the September 13, 2016 judgment of the Court of Appeals. 

On order of the Court, the answer having been received, the application for leave to 

appeal is again considered and, it appearing to this Court that the case of People v 

Chatman (Docket No. 155184) is pending on appeal before this Court and that the 

decision in that case may resolve an issue raised in the present application for leave to 

appeal, we ORDER that the application be held in ABEYANCE pending the decision in 

that case.
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________ ________________ No. 13

- 10267

________________________ D.C. Docket No. 2:11

- cr - 00080

- JES

- SPC

- 1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff

- Appellee,

versus ALFREDO J. SARARO, III, Defendant

- Appellant.

__________ ______________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida

________________________ (September 23, 2014) Before HULL , MARCUS and HILL , Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: Alfredo J. Sararo, III appeals his convictions on five counts of wire frau d, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § § 1343 and 2 , and four counts of filing a false tax return, in

Case: 13-10267 Date Filed: 09/23/2014 Page: 1 of 32 violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7206(1) . Sararo was charged with making wire communications to execute a fraudulent real estate investment scheme and misrepresenting the income he derived from the fraud on his tax returns. After a
15

- day trial, a jury found Sararo guilty on five out of seven counts of wire fraud and all four counts of tax fraud

. The district court sentenced Sararo to 108 months’ imprisonment for the wire fraud counts and 36 months’ imprisonment for the tax fraud counts, to be served concurrently. 1 On appeal, Sararo raises five challenges to his convictions. First, Sararo argues that the prosecutor engaged in misconduct by (1) knowingly presenting
p erjured testimony, (2) commenting on Sararo’s right not to testify, and (3) attempting to shift the burden of proof on to Sararo . Second, Sararo argues that the district court erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal due to insufficient eviden ce that the alleged wire communications were part of the fraud or of an effort to lull his victims in to a false sense of security. Third, Sararo argues that the district court abused its discretion in excluding, as self

- serving hearsay, Sararo’s recorded statements to his tax preparer showing that he lacked the requisite intent to commit tax fraud. Fourth, Sararo argues that the district court abused its discretion in denying his motion for new trial based on a juror’s failure

1 Sararo does not appeal his sentences. Case: 13-10267 Date Filed: 09/23/2014 Page: 2 of 33 to disclose her prior employment in the real estate industry during voir dire . Fifth, Sararo argues that cumulative error deprived him of a fair trial. After review and oral argument, we conclude that all of Sararo’s arguments lack merit , and thus affirm Sararo’s conv ictions. AFFIRMED. Case: 13-10267 Date Filed: 09/23/2014 Page: 3 of 3
#### STATE v. MANNING

No. 439A00

Case below: 139 N.C. App. 454

Petition by defendant for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 and Appellate Rule 16(b) as to issües in addition to those presented as the basis for the dissenting opinion in the Court of Appeals denied 20 December 2000. Notice of appeal by defendant pursuant to G.S. 7A-30 (substantial constitutional question) dismissed 20 December 2000.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway,

 Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

May 27, 2009 

s0518 

Order 

 

May 27, 2009 

138397 

STUART CAUFF, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v SC: 138397 

 COA: 281442 

Oakland CC: 07-081140-CK 

FIEGER, FIEGER, KENNEY & JOHNSON, 

P.C. and GEOFFREY N. FIEGER, 

Defendants-Appellees. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 27, 2009 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
II 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2117 

To amend title 5, United States Code, to change the default investment 

fund under the Thrift Savings Plan, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 12, 2014 

Ms. WARREN (for herself and Mr. PORTMAN) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 5, United States Code, to change the default 

investment fund under the Thrift Savings Plan, and 

for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Smart Savings Act’’. 

5 SEC. 2. THRIFT SAVINGS PLAN DEFAULT INVESTMENT 

6 FUND. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 8438(c)(2) of title 5, 

8 United States Code, is amended to read as follows: 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2117 IS

1 ‘‘(2)(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), if 

2 an election has not been made with respect to any sums 

3 available for investment in the Thrift Savings Fund, the 

4 Executive Director shall invest such sums in an age-appro5 priate target date asset allocation portfolio of the funds 

6 described in subsection (b), as determined by the Execu7 tive Director. 

8 ‘‘(B) If an election has not been made by a member 

9 (as defined in section 211 of title 37) contributing to the 

10 Thrift Savings Fund under section 8440e with respect to 

11 any sums available for investment in such member’s Thrift 

12 Savings Fund account, the Executive Director shall invest 

13 such sums in the Government Securities Investment 

14 Fund.’’. 

15 (b) ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RISK.—Section 8439(d) 

16 of title 5, United States Code, is amended— 

17 (1) by inserting ‘‘(1)’’ before ‘‘Each employee’’; 

18 and 

19 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

20 ‘‘(2) Before the date on which an individual covered 

21 under section 8438(c)(2)(A) begins contributing to the 

22 Thrift Savings Fund, the individual shall sign a risk ac23 knowledgment described under paragraph (1).’’. 

24 (c) TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENT.— 

25 Section 8472(g)(2) of title 5, United States Code, is 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 2117 IS

1 amended by striking ‘‘required by section 8438 of this title 

2 to be invested in securities of the Government’’ and insert3 ing ‘‘under section 8438(c)(2)(B)’’. 

4 (d) GUIDANCE.—Not later than 9 months after the 

5 date of enactment of this Act, the Executive Director (as 

6 that term is defined under section 8401(13) of title 5, 

7 United States Code) shall develop and issue guidance im8 plementing the amendments made by this section. 

9 (e) EFFECTIVE DATE AND APPLICATION.—The 

10 amendments made by this section shall— 

11 (1) take effect on the date on which the Execu12 tive Director issues guidance under subsection (d); 

13 and 

14 (2) apply to individuals contributing to the 

15 Thrift Savings Fund on or after such date. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS**

 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement on Form S-8 of First Reliance Bancshares, Inc. of ourreport dated February 19, 2004, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of First Reliance Bancshares, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2003 and 2002, and the related consolidated statements of income, comprehensive income,shareholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the two-year period ended December 31, 2003, which report appears in the December 31, 2003, annual report on Form 10-KSB of First Reliance Bancshares, Inc. 

 

/s/ ELLIOTT DAVIS, LLC 

 

Columbia, South Carolina 

March 26, 2004
#### Sulkin *v.*The State of Ohio.

(No. 25605

Decided October 23, 1935.)

*Mr. Cornell Schreiber*and *Mr. Paul J. Bagan,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. Frazier Beams,*prosecuting attorney, *Mr. Harry Friberg*and *Mr. Joel 8. Bhinefort,*for defendant in error.

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

*Petition in error*dismissed."

Weygandt, C. J., Stephenson, Williams, Jones, Matthias and Zimmerman, JJ., concur.
| 1. | I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 of Bluegate Corporation; |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does 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, the consolidated financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 4. | The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have: |
|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 5. | The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date: April 23, 2010                                    |   |
|---------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                                    |   |
|                                                    |   |
| /s/ Charles E. Leibold                                  |   |
| Charles E. Leibold                                      |   |
| Chief Financial Officer andPrincipal Accounting Officer |   |
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7231

JAMES ALFRED BROWN, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus WARDEN, Wallens Ridge State Prison, Respondent - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (CA-00-792-7) Submitted: November 8, 2001 Decided: November 16, 2001 Before WILKINS, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Alfred Brown, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Robert H. Anderson, III, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: James Alfred Brown, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 2001). We have reviewed the record and thedistrict court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny acertificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Brown v. Warden , No. CA-00-792-7 (W.D. Va. filed July 3, 2001; entered July 5, 2001). We dispense withoral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
II 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2276 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to improve access to mental health 

services under the TRICARE program. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 1, 2014 

Mr. BLUNT (for himself, Ms. STABENOW, Mr. MORAN, and Mr. FRANKEN) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to improve access 

to mental health services under the TRICARE program. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Caring for America’s 

5 Heroes Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. IMPROVEMENT OF ACCESS TO MENTAL HEALTH 

7 SERVICES UNDER THE TRICARE PROGRAM. 

8 (a) ELIMINATION OF LIMIT ON DAYS OF INPATIENT

9 SERVICES.—Section 1079 of title 10, United States Code, 

10 is amended— 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2276 IS

1 (1) in subsection (a), by striking paragraph (6); 

2 and 

3 (2) by striking subsection (i). 

4 (b) REPEAL OF REQUIREMENT FOR NONAVAIL5 ABILITY STATEMENT OR PREAUTHORIZATION.—Section 

6 721(a) of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Author7 ization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (10 U.S.C. 1073 note) 

8 is amended by striking ‘‘(other than mental health serv9 ices)’’. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 167 (Monday, August 30, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 52935]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-21713]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Notice

AGENCY: U.S. Election Assistance Commission.

ACTION: Notice of closed meeting agenda.

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

Date and Time: Wednesday, September 1, 2010; 9:30 a.m.-12 p.m. EDT.

Place: U.S. Election Assistance Commission, 1201 New York Ave., NW., 
Washington, DC 20005.

Agenda: Commissioners will hold a closed session discussion regarding a 
personnel matter on the appointment of an EAC general counsel.
    * View EAC Regulations Implementing Government in the Sunshine Act. 
This meeting will be closed to the public.

Person to Contact for Information: Bryan Whitener, Telephone: (202) 
566-3100.

Alice Miller,
Chief Operating Officer, U.S. Election Assistance Commission.
[FR Doc. 2010-21713 Filed 8-26-10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6820-KF-P
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. VITO POLISENO.

September 5, 1985.

Petition for certification denied.