alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### William Mayfield *v.*F. M. Crawford.

Instructions — Libel and Slander — Actionable Words.

In an action for slander, where the words alleged to have been spoken, were proved by some of the witnesses, the court did not en-, in instructing the jury that if they believed from the evidence that appellant spoke the words charged in the petition of and concerning appellee, they must find for him.

Same.

And an instruction asked by appellee was properly refused, that sought to withdraw from the consideration of the jury the testimony of witnesses who proved the speaking of the words, and which directed the attention of the jury to the witnesses who heard the words spoken with accompanying explanations.

APPEAL FROM LEWIS CIRCUIT COURT.

February 17, 1869.

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Peters:

The particular words contained in the first instruction given on motion of appellee were alleged in the petition to have been spoken by appellant of and concerning him, they imputed an act of a criminal nature, and were, therefore, actionable, and they were proved by some of the witnesses as alleged, without any qualifying, or explanatory words accompanying them, the circuit court did not, therefore, err in giving the first instruction as asked by appellee. It was nothing more than to tell the jury if they believed from the evidence that appellant spoke the words charged in the petition of and concerning appellee they must find for him.

Nor did the court below err in refusing to give instructions 1 and 5, asked by appellant, these instructions ignored, or withdrew from the consideration of the jury the testimony of the witnesses who proved the speaking of the words as said, without the explanatory, and exculpatory words proved by other witnesses, and directed the attention of the jury exclusively to the testimony of the witnesses who heard the words spoken with the accompanying-explanation, which the law would not authorize. They were asked *441with a view to exonerate appellant wholly from all responsibility for speaking the words, and not to mitigate the offense of speaking them, and diminishing the damages. The third instruction given at the instance of appellant authorized the jury to consider all the mitigating facts, and circumstances proved to lessen the degree of responsibility and control the verdict.

Throop, *for appellant.*

*Phister,*Thomas, *for appellee.*

After a careful consideration of the case we have been unable to find any available error 'for a reversal. Wherefore, the judgment is *affirmed.*
Dismissed and Opinion Filed August 15, 2016 

# S

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-15-00970-CV ADAM G. ARREDONDO, M.D., Appellant V. TEXAS HEALTH VENTURE ENNIS, LLC, Appellee On Appeal from the 134th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-14-03652 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Wright, Justi ce Lang-Miers, and Justice Stoddart Opinion by Chief Justice Wright Appellant’s brief in this case is overdue. By order da ted January 13, 2016 granting appellant’s unopposed third motion for an extension of time to file a brief, we directed appellant to file his brief by January 25, 2016. After appellant did not file his brief by that date, we notified appellant by postcard that the time for filing his brief had expired. We directed appellant to file both his brief and an extension motion within ten da ys. We cautioned appellant that failure to file his brief and an extension motion would result in the dismissal of this appeal without further notice. To date, appellant has not filed his brief or otherwise corresponded with the Court regarding the status of his brief.–2– Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal. See T EX
. R. A PP . P. 38.8(a)(1); 42.3(b), (c).

150970F.P05 /Carolyn Wright/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE–3– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT
ADAM G. ARREDONDO, M.D., Appellant
No. 05-15-00970-CV V. TEXAS HEALTH VENTURE ENNIS, LLC, Appellee On Appeal from the 134th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-14-03652. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright. Justices Lang-Miers and Stoddart participating. In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED

. It is ORDERED that appellee TEXAS HEALTH VENTURE ENNIS, LLC recover its costs of this appeal from appe llant ADAM G. ARREDONDO, M.D..
Judgment entered August 15, 2016.
423 A.2d 1309

#### Lightholder et al. v. Ewing, Appellant.

Argued June 18, 1979.

George E. Ewing, for appellant; James H. McCune, for appellee.

Before HESTER, HOFFMAN and CATANIA, JJ.*

*

 President Judge Francis J. Catania of the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County, Pennsylvania, is sitting by designation.

Order affirmed.
# United States Court of Appeals **For the First Circuit**

No. 99-8015 WASTE MANAGEMENT HOLDINGS, INC., Petitioner,
v. ROBERT MOWBRAY, ON HIS OWN BEHALF AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED,

Respondent.
ERRATA SHEET The opinion of this Court issued on March 31, 2000 is corrected as follows: On page 20, lines 1-3, delete the sentence that begins " Eisen may place . . ." On page 20, line 3, delete "Nor does" and insert "does not" after "fairly read," and before "foreclose". On page 20, line 6, insert "the Court's subsequent opinion in" before " General Telephone ".
#### James H. LUONGO, Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Respondent.

No. 04-3289.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

March 10, 2005.

Before MICHEL, Chief Judge, RADER and SCHALL, Circuit Judges.

Judgment

PER CURIAM.

This CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

*AFFIRMED. See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Heather Deiss","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/heather-s-deissnasa-gov\/","title":"NASA Space Radiation Lab","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"rpG5UeILEJ\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/mission\/nasa-space-radiation-lab\/\">NASA Space Radiation Lab<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/mission\/nasa-space-radiation-lab\/embed\/#?secret=rpG5UeILEJ\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“NASA Space Radiation Lab” — NASA\" data-secret=\"rpG5UeILEJ\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/ems-introduction_0.jpeg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":391}
#### N. G. Thomas, &c. *v.*M. P. Thomas Admrx.

Contracts — The Hirer of a Slave Substituted to Right of Owner for the Time.

The hirer of a slave for a specific time is substituted to the right of the owner for that time, and takes upon himself the risk of the loss of service by his death or other cause not provided against in the contract.

APPEAL FROM OWEN CIRCUIT COURT.

June 30, 1869.

*Major &*Montgomery, *for appellants.*

Lillard, *for appellee.*

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Hardin:

The only question presented, in this case for our determination is, whether the court erred in sustaining the demurrer of the plaintiff to the 3rd paragraph of the answer.

The answer exhibits no written contract between the parties, nor does it allege that in the hiring of the slave, any reservation or promise was made, exempting the defendant from the responsibility imported by their note, in the then apparent contingency that part, at least, of the service of the slave would be *lost*by the adoption of the constitutional amendment. And the contract as alleged, substantially avers alike a sale of the use of the mill and of the owner’s title to the services of the slave, for the term expiring on the 25th of December, 1865. And we perceive no sufficient reason for making this case an exception to the general rule, long recognized, and recently re-affirmed in the case of *Hughes v.*Todd, *2 Duvall*188, that generally the hiring of a slave for a specified time, was substituted to the right of the owner for that time, and took upon himself the risk of the loss of service by the escape of the slave, or his death or other cause, not provided against in the contract.

Wherefore the judgment is *affirmed.*
II 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2442

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

475 Kell Farm Drive in Cape Girardeau, Missouri, as the ‘‘Richard 

G. Wilson Processing and Distribution Facility’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 19, 2004

Mr. BOND (for himself and Mr. TALENT) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs 

A BILL

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 475 Kell Farm Drive in Cape Girardeau, 

Missouri, as the ‘‘Richard G. Wilson Processing and 

Distribution Facility’’.

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

3 SECTION 1. RICHARD G. WILSON PROCESSING AND DIS4 TRIBUTION FACILITY. 

5 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

6 Postal Service located at 475 Kell Farm Drive in Cape 

7 Girardeau, Missouri, shall be known and designated as the 

8 ‘‘Richard G. Wilson Processing and Distribution Facility’’. 
2

•S 2442 IS 

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg2 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

3 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

4 be deemed to be a reference to the Richard G. Wilson 

5 Processing and Distribution Facility.

Æ
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Dacia Massengill","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/daciamassengill-2\/","title":"Associate Administrator Jim Free meets with Mongolian Minister of Digital Development and Communications Nyam-Osor Uchral","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"bJSFxoNNT6\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/53488899746-d84f23114e-k\/\">Associate Administrator Jim Free meets with Mongolian Minister of Digital Development and Communications Nyam-Osor Uchral<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/53488899746-d84f23114e-k\/embed\/#?secret=bJSFxoNNT6\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Associate Administrator Jim Free meets with Mongolian Minister of Digital Development and Communications Nyam-Osor Uchral” — NASA\" data-secret=\"bJSFxoNNT6\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/53488899746-d84f23114e-k.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":466}
Exhibit 32



Certification of CEO and CFO 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 on Form 10-Q of Harris & Harris Group, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarter ended June 30, 2014,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Douglas W. Jamison, as Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, and Patricia N. Egan, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his/her knowledge:



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



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











|/s/ Douglas W. Jamison |                        
|---------------------- | -----------------------
|Name:                  | Douglas W. Jamison     
|Title:                 | Chief Executive Officer
|Date:                  | August 8, 2014         
|                       |                        
|/s/ Patricia N. Egan   |                        
|Name:                  | Patricia N. Egan       
|Title:                 | Chief Financial Officer
|Date:                  | August 8, 2014
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Hillary Smith","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/hsmith10\/","title":"NASA Partners With Airlines to Save Fuel, Reduce Flight Delays","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"xvtSop7lPv\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-article\/nasa-partners-with-airlines-to-save-fuel-reduce-flight-delays\/\">NASA Partners With Airlines to Save Fuel, Reduce Flight Delays<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-article\/nasa-partners-with-airlines-to-save-fuel-reduce-flight-delays\/embed\/#?secret=xvtSop7lPv\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“NASA Partners With Airlines to Save Fuel, Reduce Flight Delays” — NASA\" data-secret=\"xvtSop7lPv\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/acd22-0090-005.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":400}
#### NEW BRUNSWICK SCIENTIFIC CO., INC., ET AL. v. THOMAS BOWER, ET AL.

September 6, 1989.

Petition for certification denied.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Lori Fisher,

Plaintiff,

v.

Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. and C. R. 

Bard, Inc., et al.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

MDL Case No. 2:15-md-02641-DGC

Civil Action No. CV-17-03604-PHX-DGC

APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL

To: The clerk of court and all parties of record

I am admitted or otherwise authorized to practice in this court, and I appear in this case as counsel for:

Defendants C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc.

Date: November 27, 2017 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr.

Attorney's signature

Richard B. North, Jr. (Ga. Bar No. 545599)

Printed name and bar number

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP

201 17th St., NW, Suite 1700, Atlantic Station, Atlanta, GA 30363

Address

richard.north@nelsonmullins.com

E-mail Address

(404) 322-6000

Telephone number

(404 322-6050

FAX number

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 9152 Filed 12/06/17 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

John D. Gonzales,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

MDL Case No. 2:15-md-02641-DGC

Civil Action No. CV-17-04632-PHX-DGC

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS

To: DeGaris & Rogers, LLC

(Name of plaintiff’s attorney or unrepresented plaintiff)

I have received your request to waive service of a summons in this action along with a copy of the complaint, two 

copies of this waiver form, and a prepaid means of returning one signed copy of the form to you.

I, or the entity I represent, agree to save the expense of serving a summons and complaint in this case.

I understand that I, or the entity I represent, will keep all defenses or objections to the lawsuit, the court’s 

jurisdiction, and the venue of the action, but that I waive any objections to the absence of a summons or of service.

I also understand that I, or the entity I represent, must file and serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 within 

60 days from 12/28/2017, the date when this request was sent (or 90 days if it was sent outside the United States). If I fail 

to do so, a default judgment will be entered against me or the entity I represent.

Date: January 5, 2018 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr.

Signature of the attorney or unrepresented party

C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral

Vascular, Inc.

Printed name of parties waiving service of 

summons

Richard B. North, Jr. (Ga. Bar No. 545599)

Printed Name

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP

201 17th St., NW, Suite 1700, Atlantic Station, Atlanta, GA 30363

Address

richard.north@nelsonmullins.com

E-mail Address

(404) 322-6155

Telephone number

Duty to Avoid Unnecessary Expenses of Serving a Summons

Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires certain defendants to cooperate in saving unnecessary expenses of serving a 

summons and complaint. A defendant who is located in the United States and who fails to return a signed waiver of service requested by a plaintiff 

located in the United States will be required to pay the expenses of service, unless the defendant shows good cause for the failure. 

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 9573 Filed 01/10/18 Page 1 of 2
2

“Good cause” does not include a belief that the lawsuit is groundless, or that it has been brought in an improper venue, or that the court has 

no jurisdiction over this matter or over the defendant or the defendant’s property. 

If the waiver is signed and returned, you can still make these and all other defenses and objections, but you cannot object to the absence of 

a summons or of service. 

If you waive service, then you must, within the time specified on the waiver form, serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 on the 

plaintiff and file a copy with the court. By signing and returning the waiver form, you are allowed more time to respond than if a summons had been 

served.

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 9573 Filed 01/10/18 Page 2 of 2
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 23


                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


The Board of Directors
American Homestar Corporation:


      We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement
(No. 333-2037) on Form S-8 of American Homestar Corporation and subsidiaries of
our report dated August 14, 2000, except as to Notes 1 and 8 which are as of
October 11, 2000 relating to the consolidated balance sheets of American
Homestar Corporation and subsidiaries as of May 31, 1999 and June 30, 2000, and
the related consolidated statements of operations, shareholders' equity and cash
flows for each of the years ended May 31, 1998, May 31, 1999, June 30, 2000 and
the one month ended June 30, 1999, and the related schedule, which report
appears in the June 30, 2000 annual report on Form 10-K of American Homestar
Corporation.


                                          /s/ KPMG LLP





Houston, Texas
October 11, 2000
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

WO 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

United States of America, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Juan Martin Vasquez-Altamirano, 

Defendant. 

No. CR-15-01218-01-PHX-JJT 

 

ORDER OF DETENTION 

 

A detention hearing and a preliminary revocation hearing on the Petition on 

Supervised Release were held on August 29, 2018. 

The Court Finds that the Defendant has knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily 

waived his right to a detention hearing and a preliminary revocation hearing and has 

consented to the issue of detention being made based upon the allegations in the Petition. 

 The Court Further Finds that the Defendant has failed to sustain his burden of 

proof by clear and convincing evidence pursuant to Rule 32.1(a)(6), FED.R.CRIM.P., 

that he is not a serious flight risk. United States v. Loya, 23 F.3d 1529 (9th Cir. 1994). 

IT IS ORDERED that the Defendant shall be detained pending further order of the 

court. 

 Dated this 30th day of August, 2018. 

Honorable John Z. Boyle 

United States Magistrate Judge