alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### A. B. Patrick, etc., *v.*L. C. Bohannon, etc.

Vendor and Purchaser — Purchase Pendente Lite — Defense.

A purchaser pendente lite can avail himself of no defense other than could have been made by his vendor.

Judicial Sales — Confirmation of Report of Sale — Appeal from Order.

Where no appeal is tafeen from an order confirming a master commissioner’s report of sale, the Court of Appeals will not review the action of the lower court in that particular.

APPEAL FROM OWSLEY CIRCUIT COURT.

October 30, 1871.

*260
      *Lilly, Craddock, for appellants.*

*Rodman, for appellees.*

OpinxoN by

Judge Lindsay:

No objection was made in the court below to the prosecution of this action in the names of the heirs of Henry C. Bohannon, deceased, instead of his personal representatives, and it is admitted of record that said Henry C. Bohannon is dead, and that the plaintiffs are his heirs at law.

Patrick accepted the deed of his vendor, in which deed by operation of law a lien was retained on the land conveyed to secure the payment of the note sued on.

There is no evidence in the record that South sets up claim to any portion of the land for which the note was executed, as this was matter of defense, the duty was upon the appellants to es-. tablish the existence of such fact.

Hargis is a purchaser *pendente lite*and can avail himself of no defense other than could have been made by Patrick. No appeal is prosecuted from the order of the circuit court confirming the sale made by the commissioner in pursuance to the judgment in the cause, we therefore cannot review the action of said court in this particular.

The judgment appealed from is affirmed.
H. Res. 584

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

October 8, 1998.

Resolved, That during consideration of the bill (H.R.

4274) making appropriations for the Departments of Labor,

Health and Human Services, and Education, and related

agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1999, and

for other purposes, in the Committee of the Whole House on

the state of the Union pursuant to House Resolution 564—

(1) general debate shall not exceed one hour; and

(2) amendments numbered 2 and 3 in House Report 105–762 shall be in order before consideration of

any other amendment.

Attest:

Clerk.
Microscopic Dynamics of 

Liquid and Solid Hydrogen

Scott Hanna

Supervisors: Timothy Prisk, Richard Azuah
Why Hydrogen?

● Forms a quantum fluid and solid 

in nature

● Two nuclear spin isomers

● Large quantized rotational levels

● Can be modeled from first 

principles
● Diffusion of liquid normal hydrogen

● Molecular mean square displacement of solid para 

hydrogen

● Applications of research studies in an introductory 

physics classroom.

A presentation in three parts
Motivation for the study of liquid H2 diffusion

● Large zero-point 

energy contribution

● Theoretical 

calculations are not 

fully in agreement 

with experiment.

● Neutron scattering as 

a new experimental 

technique
Neutron Scattering and Diffusive Dynamics of Low 

temperature Hydrogen

Structure 

Factor:

● Why neutron scattering?
Resolution ~

Our instrument: The disk chopper spectrometer (DCS)

Diffusive time 

scales: ~ s
Sample Environment
● We collected data over a 5 temperatures between 15.4 K and 20.4 K.

● We also performed measurements of the empty can background, darkcounts, 

and vanadium resolution.
Modeling quasielastic 

broadening

n-H2, T=17.4K
Modeling Q 

dependence
Modeling Temperature Dependence and Conclusion

● Our results provide 

independent 

experimental confirmation

● Suggests the need for 

improved PIMD 

approximations.
Motivation for the study 

of dynamics of solid p-H2

● Experimental results show no 

qualitative temperature 

dependence

● Theory predicts T-dependence 

approaching melting temp.

● What is the contribution of zero- point vs. thermal energy to the 

vibration of solid H2? 
Mean Squared Displacement 

of solid p-H2

● Large zero-point contributions 

limit bragg peak diffraction 

techniques normally used to 

measure 

● The rotational line has a 

contribution from that we 

can utilize.
Scattering on the DCS

● Expected J0->1 

rotational line at 14.7 

meV

● Ortho to Para 

conversion

● Temperature range 

1.5 K to 13.7 K
Modeling Rotation Line Energy

p-H2, T = 7.4K
Modeling Q dependence
Conclusions

● Thermal contribution 

evident approaching 

melting point

● Disagreement with 

previous experiment

● Qualitative agreement 

with theoretical 

calculations.
What did I learn and experience?

● My first professional 

research experience

● Diversity of science

● “In what units?”

● Engineer speak

● Atmosphere of sharing
Integrating research knowledge into physics labs

Pose an inquiry question with possible 

hypothetical hypotheses.

Students formulate their own experimental 

methodology

● Choose independent variable and controls

● Choose materials and measuring devices

Experimental uncertainties

Presentation of results and inferences.
Thanks to...

Experiment Supervisors: Timothy Prisk and Richard Azuah

Yamali Hernandez, Dan Neumann

Juscelino Leao, Yegor Vekhov, Tanya Dax, Thomas Johnston, 

Yiming Qiu

Nick Butch, Wei Zhou, Craig Brown

Questions?
As of: 9/16/21 11:28 AM 

Received: September 15, 2021 PUBLIC SUBMISSION Status: Pending_Post 

Tracking No. ktl-z69v-q43j 

Comments Due: September 15, 2021 

Submission Type: Web 

Docket: NIST-2021-0004 

Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework 

Comment On: NIST-2021-0004-0001 

Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework 

Document: NIST-2021-0004-DRAFT-0102 

Comment on FR Doc # 2021-1617 6 

Submitter Information 

Name: Anonymous Anonymous 

Email: 

General Comment 

NIST-2021-0004 National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) AI Risk Management 

Framework 

I thank the NIST on the development of an AI risk management framework and the opportunity to 

provide input. 

ENCOURAGE MODERN INNOVATION 

Creating boundaries is a great way to spur true innovation. In an environment with little regulation or 

oversight, the market - in particular - will take the path of least resistance to reach their primary 

objective(s) which are generally: capturing market share, being the first to market, and maximizing 

shareholder value. Rules of the road will challenge the AI ecosystem to also take into consideration 

external factors such as societal and ethical impacts that should be a prerequisite for modem innovation. 

PRESERVE EXISTING CONSUMER PROTECTIONS 

Quickly evolving AI makes regulation a challenge. However, the AI ecosystem should still abide by 

existing consumer protection laws that address traditional human activity, particularly in aspects where 

augmented by automated-decision-making technology. 

ACCOUNTABILITY ALONG THE VALUE CHAIN 

With an ever-growing market for white-label products, considerations should be taken in providing 

guidance for white-label AI providers, including prevention of unauthorized use and accountability along 

the value chain. Because product liability laws are sparse in this area, guidance should be welcomed. 

ENCOURAGE INDEPENDENT V ERIFICATION 

As a code of ethics and self-regulation will not be enough, the AI ecosystem should be open to 

independent testing and verification. Right now, the AI industry is rife with overpromising or misrepresenting capabilities. There should be a mechanism to verify claims of AI capabilities and limitations.
----

----

| 1. | the annual report on Form 20-F of the Company for the year ended April 30, 2010 (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/ Adam Kniec              |
|   | Adam KniecChief Financial Officer |

----

----
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 99.2

<PAGE>

                                EQUITY ONE, INC.

                              Officer's Certificate

                          Annual Statement of Servicer

     Equity One ABS, Inc. Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2004-2

        Pursuant to the provisions of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement for
the above captioned series (the "Agreement"), the undersigned hereby certifies
that he is an officer of Equity One, Inc. (the "Servicer"), and does hereby
further certify that:

        1. A review of the activities of the Servicer during the fiscal year
ended November 30, 2004 and of its performance under the Agreement has been made
under his supervision; and

        2. To the best of his knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has
fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement throughout such fiscal
year.

        IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Officer's
Certificate on behalf of the Servicer as of this 17th day of February, 2005.

                                             EQUITY ONE, INC.

                                             By: /s/ Dennis J. Lauris
                                             -------------------------
                                             Dennis J. Lauria,
                                             Senior Vice President
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 540 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                    September 16, 1998.
    Resolved, That the following named Member be, and is hereby, elected to the 
following standing committee of the House of Representatives:
    Committee on Science: Mr. Sherman.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with this annual report on Form 10-K of Atlantic Broadband Finance, LLC (the Company) for the
year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, David J. Keefe, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|(i) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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

Date: March 26, 2008



/s/ David J. KeefeDavid J. KeefeChief Executive Officer and Director(Principal Executive Officer)


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not
being filed as part of this Report.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

Commodity Futures Trading Commission, )

)

Plaintiff, )

) Case No. 20-3758

vs. )

) Hon. Thomas A. Durkin

)

Long Leaf Trading Group, Inc. et al. )

)

Defendants. )

NOTICE OF APPEAL

Notice is hereby given that Defendant James A. Donelson appeals to the United States Court 

of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit this Court’s March 29, 2023, Final Judgment and all other 

Orders and Opinions which have become final as a result of the March 29, 2023, Final Judgment, 

including, but not limited to, the Opinion and Orders entered in this action on July 27, 2022, and 

December 6, 2022, respectively, granting Plaintiff’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and 

Plaintiff’s Motion for Supplemental Relief. Defendant appeals the Court’s ruling only as to 

Defendant James A. Donelson.

Dated: April 27, 2023 

Case: 1:20-cv-03758 Document #: 126 Filed: 04/27/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:2919
Respectfully submitted, 

Defendant James A. Donelson

BY: /s/ Charles E. McElvenny

Charles McElvenny, JD, MSA

Law Office of Charles E. McElvenny

1509 Waukegan Road

Suite 1133

Glenview, IL 60025

312-291-8330

charlie@cemlawfirm.com

Case: 1:20-cv-03758 Document #: 126 Filed: 04/27/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:2920
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas**
MEMORANDUM OPINION
N o. 04

- 24

- 00514

- CR
Juan Santos HUERTA , Appellant

v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 175th Judicial District Court , Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2022CR3450 Honorable Catherine Torres

- Stahl , Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM Sitting: Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice Irene Rios Justice Beth Watkins , Justice Delivered and Filed: September 11, 2024
DISMISSED On July 18, 2024, appellant Juan Santos Huerta filed a pro se notice of appeal seeking to appeal his conviction for serious bodily injury to an elderly person. After Huerta filed his notice of appeal, the trial court clerk filed a copy of the clerk ’ s record showing Huerta entered into a written plea bargain agreement with the State pursuant to which he pled nolo contendere. The clerk ’ s record further shows the trial court imposed its sentence in accordance with the agreement and signed a certification sta ting this “is a plea

- bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.” See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 25.2(a)(2).04

- 24

- 00514

- C R

- 2

- “In a plea bargain case . . . a defendant may appeal only: (A) those matters that were raised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial, (B) after getting the trial court ’ s permission to appeal , or (C) where the specific appeal is expressly authorized by statute.” Id . We must dismiss an appeal “if a certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the record.” Id . R. 25.2(d). Here, the clerk ’ s record establishes the punishment assessed by the trial court does not exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by Huerta . It also does not include a written motion filed and ruled upon before trial; nor does it indicate the trial court gave
Huerta permission to appeal. Thus, the trial court ’ s certification appears to accurately reflect this is a plea

- bargain case , and Huerta does not have a right to appeal. See id . R. 25.2; Dears v. State , 154 S.W.3d 610 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (holding court of appeals should review clerk ’ s record to determine whether trial court ’ s certification is accurate). On August 2 9, 2024 , we ordered Huerta to file a response by September 30, 2024 establishing an amended certification showing he has the right to appeal has been made part of the appellate record. We cautioned Huerta failure to satisfactorily respond to this order within the time provided would result in the dismissal of this appeal. On August 30, 2024, Huerta ’ s counsel filed a response confirming this is a plea

- bargain case , and Huerta does not have a right to appeal

. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 25.2(d).
PER CURIAM Do Not Publish
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS OF CEO AND CFO PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

I, Don Early, Chief Executive Officer of QC
Holdings, Inc. (the Company), hereby certify pursuant to Section 1350, of chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code, and Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge, (1) the annual
report on Form 10-K of the Company to which this Exhibit is attached (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) 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/ Don Early        
|Don Early            
|                     
|Dated: March 14, 2006

I, Douglas E. Nickerson, Chief Financial Officer of QC Holdings, Inc. (the Company), hereby certify
pursuant to Section 1350, of chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code, and Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge, (1) the annual report on Form 10-K of the Company to which this Exhibit is
attached (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) 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 E. Nickerson
|Douglas E. Nickerson    
|                        
|Dated: March 14, 2006
#### STATE v. BRUNSON

No. 86P97

Case below: 120 N.C.App. 571

Petition by defendant for writ of certiorari to review the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 8 May 97.
#### Buntin and Another, *v.*Duchane.

*•A.*having recovered in ejectment against B., sued him for mesne profits and obtained judgment on demurrer. While that suit was pending, *B.*brought an ejectment against *A.*for the premises, and recovered. On *Ads*executing his writ of inquiry, *B.*offered his judgment in evidence in mitigation of damages; but the record not showing the date of the demise, and that *Bds*title had commenced before *Ads*cause of action, it was considered inadmissible.

ERROR to the *Knox*Circuit Court. — Vide a statement of ‘the proceedings in this case, previous to the execution of the writ of inquiry, ante, p. *56.*

Tabbs, for the plaintiffs.

*Dewey,*for the defends»!.

Holman, J.

Trespass for mesne profits by *Duchane*against *Buntin*and *Dubois.*The action was commenced in *April,*1819. A writ of inquiry -was awarded, on the execution of which the ’defendants offered in evidence, in mitigation of damages, the record of a judgment entered at *May*term, 1820, in an action of ejectment, wherein the defendants recovered the same premises of the plaintiff. The Circuit Court rejected the testimony, and the plaintiff had judgment. This j udgment must be affirmed. The record offered in evidence does not show when the demise was laid, nor from What time the defendants claimed the premises. From all that appears, their title may have commenced subsequently to the present cause of action; therefore, their recovery cannot affect *Ducharnos*claim to. damages, either in law or equity. *Benson et al.*v. *Matsdorf,*2 Johns. R. 369, would support a much weaker case than this. The evidence was properly rejected.

*Per Curiam.*

The judgment is affirmed, with 1 *per cent,*damages and costs.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.35

January 30, 2004

Stephen C. Farrell
8 Minute Man Lane
Lexington, MA 02421

                      Re: Amendment to Employment Agreement

Dear Steve,

This letter agreement serves to further amend the Employment Agreement dated as
of September 1, 2000, by and between you and PolyMedica Corporation (the
"Company"), as amended by certain letter agreements dated as of April 16, 2001;
September 24, 2001; October 12, 2001; May 31, 2002; July 15, 2002; February 5,
2003; August 29, 2003 and November 3, 2003 (together, the "Employment
Agreement").

      Salary. The Base Salary, as defined in Section 3.1. of the Employment
      Agreement, shall be increased to $325,000 effective January 13, 2003.

If the foregoing is acceptable to you, please indicate your agreement by signing
a copy of this letter agreement and returning it to the undersigned.

                                           Very truly yours,

                                           /s/ Samuel L. Shanaman
                                           ------------------------------------
                                           Samuel L. Shanaman
                                           Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

ACCEPTED AND AGREED TO:

/s/ Stephen C. Farrell
----------------------
Stephen C. Farrell
U.S. District Court for the Northern District Of Illinois

Attorney Appearance Form

Case Title: Case Number: 

An appearance is hereby filed by the undersigned as attorney for:

Attorney name (type or print): 

Firm: 

Street address: 

City/State/Zip: 

Bar ID Number: Telephone Number: 

 Yes No

 Yes No

 Yes No

 Yes No

(See item 3 in instructions)

Email Address:

Are you acting as lead counsel in this case?

Are you acting as local counsel in this case?

Are you a member of the court’s trial bar?

If this case reaches trial, will you act as the trial attorney? 

If this is a criminal case, check your status. Retained Counsel

Appointed Counsel 

If appointed counsel are you 

a Federal Defender

 CJA Panel Attorney

______________________________________________________________________

In order to appear before this &ourt an attorney must either be a member in good standing of this &ourt’s 

general bar or be granted leave to appear pro hac vice as provided for by local rules 83.12 through 83.14. 

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Under 28 8.6.&§1746, this 

statement under perjury has the same force and effect as a sworn statement made under oath.

Executed on 

Attorney signature: S/

(Use electronic signature if the appearance form is filed electronically.)

Revised 8/1/2015

DION GAINES v. SHERIFF OF 

COOK COUNTY THOMAS J. 

DART, et al.

20-cv-3487

Sheriff of Cook County Thomas J. Dart

Ethan E. White

Emery Law, Ltd.

2021 Midwest Road, Suite 200

Oak Brook, IL 60523

6297938 630-984-0339

ewhite@emerylawltd.com

September 11, 2020

✔

✔

✔

✔

Ethan E. White

Case: 1:20-cv-03487 Document #: 8 Filed: 09/11/20 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:37
CFTC Ex. 149

Case: 1:20-cv-03758 Document #: 76-16 Filed: 11/04/21 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:704
Case: 1:20-cv-03758 Document #: 76-16 Filed: 11/04/21 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:705
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 6.3.3

Eastern Division

Illinois State Rifle Association, et al.

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:20−cv−04270

Honorable Mary M. Rowland

Brendan F. Kelly, et al.

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Monday, May 24, 2021:

 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Mary M. Rowland: Plaintiff's motion to

withdraw counsel [83] is granted. Attorney Martha Astor's appearance is terminated.

Mailed notice. (dm, )

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:20-cv-04270 Document #: 84 Filed: 05/24/21 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:490