alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Schuyler McHenry, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Experian Information Solutions 

Incorporated, et al., 

Defendants.

No. CV-15-02356-PHX-JJT

ORDER 

A Notice of Settlement as to Defendant Equifax Information Services, LLC, Only 

(Doc. 21) having been filed, 

IT IS ORDERED that this matter will be dismissed with prejudice as to Equifax 

Information Services, LLC only, 60 days after the docketing of this order unless the 

Plaintiff or Defendant Equifax Information Services, LLC files a stipulation to dismiss 

prior to that date. The settlement constitutes an accord which has extinguished the 

underlying claim as to these two parties only. All pending hearings and motions relating 

to Plaintiff and Defendant Equifax Information Services, LLC are deemed moot. 

 Dated this 22nd day of December, 2015. 

 

 Honorable John J. Tuchi 

 United States District Judge 

Case 2:15-cv-02356-JJT Document 24 Filed 12/22/15 Page 1 of 1
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1233

KAKO K. RANKINE, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ANTHONY J. RANKINE, Defendant - Appellant, versus HICKORY PUBLIC SCHOOLS “SYSTEM”; DANIEL MASSEY; TIMOTHY SIMMS; D. STUART THOMPSON; CATHY ISENHOUR; MARILYN MAX; JEFFREY T. MACKIE; DOES 1-10, Third Party Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge. (CA-01-79-5-V) Submitted: July 18, 2002 Decided: July 23, 2002 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Anthony J. Rankine, Appellant Pro Se. Daniel Ray Green, Jr., Hickory, North Carolina; Jeffrey T. Mackie, SIGMON, CLARK & MACKIE, Hickory, North Carolina, for Appellees.2 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Anthony J. Rankine appeals the district court’s order: granting Kako Rankine and the Third Party Defendants’ motions to dismiss; granting the motions for sanctions but deferring a ruling on the amount of sanctions; dismissing Anthony Rankine’s complaint and amended complaint; deferring a ruling on the motion for costs and attorney’s fees; denying as moot Kako Rankine’s and the Third Party Defendants’ remaining motions; remanding the matter to the state court; and imposing an injunction on Anthony Rankine. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Rankine v. Rankine , No. CA-01-79-5-V (W.D.N.C. Feb. 12, 2002). We deny Rankine’s motion to stay. 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
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. 

Macario Amezcua-Molina,

Defendant.

No. CR-16-00037-01-PHX-SPL

DETENTION ORDER

On March 31, 2021, Defendant appeared before this Court on a petition for 

revocation of supervised release. The issue of detention was submitted to the Court. The 

Court considered the petition and file in determining whether Defendant should be released 

on conditions set by the Court.

The Court finds that Defendant, having previously been convicted and placed on 

supervised release, and having appeared before the Court in connection with a petition to

revoke his supervised release, has failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that 

he is not likely to flee or pose a danger to the safety of the community if released pursuant 

to Rule 46(d), and Rule 32.1(a)(6), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and 18 U.S.C. §

3143.

 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant be detained pending further 

proceedings. 

Dated this 31st day of March, 2021.

Honorable Eileen S. Willett

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 2:16-cr-00037-SPL Document 34 Filed 03/31/21 Page 1 of 1
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Rachael Whitefield","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/rachaellwhitefield-2-2-2\/","title":"Reid Wiseman","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"eYcGcj6di3\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/people\/reid-wiseman\/\">Reid Wiseman<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/people\/reid-wiseman\/embed\/#?secret=eYcGcj6di3\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Reid Wiseman” — NASA\" data-secret=\"eYcGcj6di3\" 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\/2016\/03\/jsc2015e075864.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":750}
V

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 809

For the relief of Frank J. Notrem.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 13, 1997

Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts introduced the following bill; which was

referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

For the relief of Frank J. Notrem.

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

3 SECTION 1. PAYMENT.

4 The Secretary of the Treasury shall make a lump

5 sum payment, out of amounts in the Treasury not other6 wise appropriated, of $8,242.40 to Frank J. Notrem (so7 cial security account number 021-09-2186).

8 SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON AGENT AND ATTORNEY FEES.

9 Not more than a total of 10 percent of the payment

10 authorized by section 1 shall be paid to or received by any

11 agent or attorney for services rendered in connection with
2

•HR 809 IH

1 obtaining such payment, any contract to the contrary not2 withstanding. Any person who violates this section shall

3 be fined not more than $1,000.

Æ
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-6597

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JAMIE M. HARGROVE,

 Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at 

Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:11-cr-00249-BO-1)

Submitted: February 27, 2024 Decided: March 1, 2024

Before WILKINSON, WYNN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jamie M. Hargrove, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6597 Doc: 10 Filed: 03/01/2024 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Jamie M. Hargrove appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for 

compassionate release. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. 

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. United States v. Hargrove, No. 

5:11-cr-00249-BO-1 (E.D.N.C. May 22, 2023); Muth v. United States, 1 F.3d 246, 250 (4th 

Cir. 1993) (holding that claims raised for the first time on appeal generally will not be 

considered, absent exceptional circumstances of plain error or fundamental miscarriage of 

justice). We deny Hargrove’s motion to appoint counsel. We dispense with oral argument 

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this 

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6597 Doc: 10 Filed: 03/01/2024 Pg: 2 of 2
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. 

Dean Brown, 

Defendant.

No. CR-16-0176-PHX-NVW

DETENTION ORDER 

 In accordance with the Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f), the issue of 

detention was addressed at a hearing on March 2, 2016. The Court was informed that the 

defendant is subject to other custody and is not eligible for release at this time. 

 The Court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant is subject to 

other custody and should be similarly detained in this case. If circumstances change such 

that defendant is no longer in custody in the other matter, defendant shall have leave to 

request that the matter of detention be reopened in this case. 

 IT IS ORDERED that the defendant be detained pending further proceedings. The 

defendant is committed to the custody of the Attorney General or his designated 

representative for confinement in a corrections facility separate, to the extent practicable, 

from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody pending appeal. The 

defendant shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity for private consultation with defense 

counsel. On order of the Court of the United States or on request of an attorney for the 

government, the person in charge of the corrections facility shall deliver the defendant to 

Case 2:16-cr-00176-NVW Document 9 Filed 03/03/16 Page 1 of 2
- 2 - 

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 

the United States Marshal for the purpose of an appearance in connection with a Court 

proceeding. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that should a motion for review/reconsideration of 

this detention order be filed, it is counsel's responsibility to deliver a copy of the motion 

for review/reconsideration to Pretrial Services at least one day prior to the hearing. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if a release to a third party is to be considered, it 

is counsel's responsibility to notify Pretrial Services sufficiently in advance of the hearing 

to allow Pretrial Services an opportunity to interview and investigate the potential third 

party custodian. 

 Dated this 3rd day of March, 2016. 

Case 2:16-cr-00176-NVW Document 9 Filed 03/03/16 Page 2 of 2
Affidavit of Christina Lorenzo on Behalf of Myesha McLemore for Sean Alexander

My name is Christina Lorenzo. I am the Intake Coordinator at the Chicago Community Bond 

Fund. On April 2, 2020, I spoke to Myesha McLemore, who provided me the following 

information about Sean Alexander, her boyfriend, who is a detainee in the Cook County Jail.

1. Mr. Alexander is 19 years old. He is currently in Division 11 of the Cook County Jail. He 

is incarcerated on a $70,000 D Bond that he cannot afford to pay.

2. Mr. Alexander has sickle cell anemia. He should be receiving medication for the disease 

but is not currently being medicated.

3. Prior to being transferred to Division 11, Mr. Alexander was living in Division 6 with a 

cellmate. For two days, up until March 6, he also lived in Division 2 in a dorm-style 

setting.

4. Mr. Alexander is currently housed in a two-person cell with a cellmate. Mr. Alexander 

sleeps on the upper bunk. The bunks are very close together. Mr. Alexander shares a sink 

and toilet with his cellmate. They have not been given cleaning products to clean their 

cell. Mr. Alexander and his cellmate clean as well as they can with what they can buy 

from the commissary.

5. Social distancing is not possible in the division. All residents are close together when in

the common area. All residents share the shower area.

6. Mr. Alexander stated to Ms. McLemore that the detainees in Division 11 are being given 

soap but not sanitizer. While jail staff have sprayed (disinfected) the common area, they 

have not disinfected the individual cells. 

7. Some—but not all—of the jail staff wear masks and gloves. Mr. Alexander does not have 

access to gloves or masks. Another resident in his division had started cutting up shirts to 

use as masks, but that resident then tested positive for COVID-19, and so the other 

residents stopped using those shirt masks.

8. Anyone with a temperature that was too high has been removed to quarantine, though Mr. 

Alexander does not know where that is. The person who tested positive was removed 

from the deck, and jail staff threw out his belongings and moved his cellmate into a 

different cell with another person. That other person is now coughing, and jail staff have 

told him not to touch the remotes and to keep in his cell.

I am providing this hearsay declaration because of restrictions on visitors and contact with 

detainees in the Cook County Jail. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true 

and correct.

April 2, 2020 ____s/ Christina Lorenzo___________________

Chicago, Illinois Christina Lorenzo

Case: 1:20-cv-02134 Document #: 1-12 Filed: 04/03/20 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:57
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Ana Guzman","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/ana-d-guzmannasa-gov\/","title":"NASA Announces Second Collaborations for Commercial Space Capabilities Opportunities","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"Cav34KOuxE\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/missions\/station\/nasa-announces-second-collaborations-for-commercial-space-capabilities-opportunities\/\">NASA Announces Second Collaborations for Commercial Space Capabilities Opportunities<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/missions\/station\/nasa-announces-second-collaborations-for-commercial-space-capabilities-opportunities\/embed\/#?secret=Cav34KOuxE\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“NASA Announces Second Collaborations for Commercial Space Capabilities Opportunities” — NASA\" data-secret=\"Cav34KOuxE\" 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\/03\/37912591295_7c30a77efd_o.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":600}
Exhibit 10.65



 




Exhibit 10.65


ADDENDUM TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


     This Addendum (the “Addendum”) is made effective as of the 12th day of
December, 2002 and is intended to amend a certain Employment Agreement (the
“Agreement”) by and between Erie Indemnity Company and Jan R. Van Gorder
effective as of December 16, 1997.


     WHEREAS, the Company has determined that it is in the best interest of the
Company and its Shareholders to secure the continued employment of the
Executive in accordance with the terms of the Agreement; and


     WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Company has previously considered
and agreed to extend the term of the Agreement from its original term; and


     WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Company at its meeting of December
10, 2002 has again agreed to extend the term of the Agreement for a period of
one (1) additional year as contained herein; and


     WHEREAS, the Executive is agreeable to the extension of the Agreement.


     NOW, THEREFORE, intending to be legally bound hereby, the parties agree as
follows:


     1.     Paragraph 1 of the Agreement with respect to the Term is hereby amended
by extending the Term to expire on December 15, 2004.


     2.     All other terms and conditions of the Agreement remain in full force
and effect.




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	ATTEST:	 	 	 	ERIE INDEMNITY COMPANY
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	/s/	 	
Jeffrey A. Ludrof

Jeffrey A. Ludrof

President & CEO
	 	By:
	 	/s/
	 	F. William Hirt

F. William Hirt

Chairman of the Board
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	WITNESS:	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	/s/	 	
Martina R. Gonzales

Martina R. Gonzales

Executive Secretary
	 	 	 	/s/
	 	Jan R. Van Gorder

Jan R. Van Gorder

6796 Manchester Beach Rd.

Fairview, PA 16415



77
DEREK LEON WALTERS , Appellant,

v.
STATE OF FLORIDA , Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 17

- 3209

_____ ________________________/ Opinion filed October 31, 2017. An appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County

. Mark J. Borello , Judge

. Derek Leon Walters, pro se , Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee , for Appellee.

PER CURI AM. Appellant filed a rule 3.800(a) motion raising several arguments challenging the legality of his sentences for possess ion of a firearm by a convicted felon and2 aggravated assault with possession and discharge of a firearm. We affirm the trial

court’ s conclusion that the sentences are legal , but write to note that the twenty

year sentence for the aggravated assault is legal because of the minimum

mandatory sentence provision of section 775.087(2)(a)2. , Florida Statutes (2010). The offense is not subj ect to reclassification pursuant to section 775.087(1) because a firearm is an essential element of aggravated assault

. See §
784.021(1)(a). See Patterson v. State , 693 So. 2d 74 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)

. AFFIRMED.
LEWIS, KELSEY, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., CONCU R.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-7527
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JUAN PABLO ALVARADO-ACOSTA, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Danville. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (4:04-cr-70059-jlk-1) Submitted: March 27, 2008 Decided: April 2, 2008 Before TRAXLER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Juan Pablo Alvarado-Acosta, Appellant Pro Se. Ronald Andrew Bassford, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Juan Pablo Alvarado-Acosta appeals the district court’s order denying his motion filed pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 36, which the court construed as a motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Alvarado-Acosta , No. 4:04-cr-70059-jlk-1 (W.D. Va. Sept. 28, 2007). 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
| 1. | I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Timberline Resources 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; and |
|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 3. | Based on my knowledge, the 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; |
|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             |
|---------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Date: March 3, 2016 | By:   /s/ Steven A. Osterberg              Steven A. Osterberg        President & Chief Executive OfficerPrincipal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer |
|                |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             |

----