alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6335

CHEVY RAMAT SHIVAEE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus E. M. CUBE, M.D., Defendant - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CA-98-780-7) Submitted: July 20, 2000 Decided: August 1, 2000 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Chevy Ramat Shivaee, Appellant Pro Se. Peter Duane Vieth, WOOTEN & HART, P.C., Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Chevy Ramat Shivaee appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Shivaee’s motion for appointment of counsel and we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Shivaee v. Cube , No. CA-98-780-7 (W.D. Va. Feb. 24, 2000). 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
IV

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 597

Expressing the sense of the House with respect to the brutal killing of

Mr. Matthew Shepard.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 14, 1998

Mrs. CUBIN (for herself and Ms. DEGETTE) submitted the following

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the House with respect to the brutal

killing of Mr. Matthew Shepard.

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the House that—

2 (1) Mr. Matthew Shepard, a 21-year-old stu3 dent at the University of Wyoming in Laramie, Wy4 oming, was physically beaten and tortured, tied to a

5 wooden fence and left for dead;

6 (2) Mr. Matthew Shepard died as a result of his

7 injuries on October 12, 1998, in a Colorado hospital

8 surrounded by his loving family and friends; and

9 (3) the House—
2

•HRES 597 IH

1 (A) condemns the actions which occurred

2 in Laramie, Wyoming, as unacceptable and out3 rageous;

4 (B) urges each Member of Congress and

5 every citizen of the United States, in his or her

6 own way, through his or her church, synagogue,

7 mosque, workplace, or social organization, to

8 join in denouncing and encouraging others to

9 denounce this outrageous murder of another

10 human being;

11 (C) pledges to join in efforts to bring an

12 end to such crimes, and to encourage all Ameri13 cans to dedicate themselves to ending violence

14 in the United States; and

15 (D) pledges to do everything in its power

16 to fight the sort of prejudice and intolerance

17 that leads to the murder of innocent people.

Æ
Exhibit  32.2

                   CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) OR
                     RULE 15d-14(b) and 18 U.S.C. Sec.1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In  connection  with  the  annual  report of Petrosearch Energy Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the
Securities  and  Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, David
J.  Collins,  Chief  Financial  Officer  of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Sec.1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002,  that:

     (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.

Date: April 2, 2007                         By:   /s/ David J. Collins
                                                  --------------------
                                                  David J. Collins
                                                  Chief Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 216 (Friday, November 7, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66385-66386]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-26420]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of 
Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of a meeting of the 
Division of Intramural Research Board of Scientific Counselors, NIAID.
    The meeting will be closed to the public as indicated below in 
accordance with the provisions set forth in section 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended for the review, discussion, and evaluation of 
individual intramural programs and projects conducted by the NATIONAL 
INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES, including consideration 
of personnel qualifications and performance, and the competence of 
individual investigators, the disclosure of which would constitute a 
clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Division of Intramural Research Board of 
Scientific Counselors, NIAID.
    Date: December 8-10, 2014.
    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate personal qualifications and 
performance, and competence of individual investigators.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, Building 50, Conference 
Room 1227/1233, 50 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.
    Contact Person: Kathryn C. Zoon, Ph.D., Director, Division of 
Intramural Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious 
Diseases, NIH, Building 31, Room 4A30, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-
3006, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d1baabbebebf91bfb8b0b8b5ffbfb8b9ffb6bea7"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="543f2e3b3b3a143a3d353d307a3a3d3c7a333b22">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, 
Allergy, Immunology,

[[Page 66386]]

and Transplantation Research; 93.856, Microbiology and Infectious 
Diseases Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

     Dated: November 3, 2014.
David Clary,
 Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014-26420 Filed 11-6-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
J2VdS
J1dWvS

NEUTRON
BEAM

0S |

0S

DB 66.6

SAMPLE
SPACE
FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTH CI RCUI T FEB RUARY 18, 2009 THOMAS K. KAH

N CL ERK [DO N OT PUBLISH]
IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 0 7- 14 86 5 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D. C. Dock etNo. 0 6- 00 21 2- CR-OR L-31 -KRS UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A,
Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee,
ve rs us ALEEM HUSSAIN, Defen da nt -Ap pe ll an t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Mi dd le Dis tri ctof F lo rid a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ (Feb ru ary 18 , 20 09 ) Befo re CARNES, WILSON andKRAVITCH, Cir cu itJu dg es . PER CURI AM: Ell is Rex woo d C urry , IV, app oi nt edco un se l fo r Ale em Hus sa in inth isdi rectcri m in al an d s en te nc in g app eal , has m ov edto wit hd raw fro m fur th er rep res en ta ti on of t he ap pe ll an t an d fi le d abri ef p ur su an t t o An de rs v. Ca li fo rn ia , 38 6 U.S. 7 38 , 87 S.Ct . 13 96 , 18 L.Ed.2d49 3 (1 96 7) . Becau se in de pe nd en t
ex am in at io n o f th e en ti re re co rdrev eal s n o a rg uabl e is su es of m eri t, co un se l’s
m ot io n t o wi th dr aw is GRANTED , andHus sa in ’s con vi ct io n a ndsen te nc e are AFFIRMED.

2
No. D-705.

#### In re Disbarment of Seaman.

It is ordered that Roger George Seaman, of Chicago, 111., be suspended from the practice of law in this Court and that a rule issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.
Adding 3D Fingerprints 

Standard

William F. Long, PhD

COO, TBS North America

December 6, 2005
Disclaimer

This presentation is based on nproprietary data. It reflects the author. Neither TBS North Ameany other party has necessarily these views.
The Promise of 3

• Elimination of Distortions Caus

Elasticity and Pressure

– Level 3

• Ridge Path • Ridge Width• Ridge Shape• Incipient Ridges• Sweat Pore Existence
The Promise of 3D

Levels 4 and 5

• Steve Meagher’s small comme

possibility of Levels 4 & 5, whamean?

– Ridge Slope?

• LumenIQ technology• TBS technology

– Sweat Pore Shape?– Sweat Pore Activity?
The Promise of 3D

Ridge Shape

• What is there?

– Full 256 grey scale, rather than 2 

some fuzziness at the edges

– Results of possible texture variat

valley, slope

– Results of illumination

• Intensity• Direction• Color
The Promise of 3D

Sweat Pore Shap
The Promise of 3D

Sweat Pore Activit
The Promise of 3D

Resolution Issues

• Slides 5 & 6

– Extracted from a video with effec

resolution of about 8000 ppi

– 11 second run– 95 MB

• Any hope for 3D images taken 

reasonable resolution?
The Promise of 3D

1000 ppi Images (
The Promise of 3D

1000 ppi Images (

• What is in the image? Note: no

touchless flat, close to 3D

– From TBS– Sweat Pores

• Different stages in the sweating cyc

– Closed (not visible?)– Opening– Sweating– Closing

– Sweat Droplets?

• Maybe, but might be dirt. We are w
The Promise of 3D

1000 ppi Images (

• Simple observations on livesca

scientific yet)

– Pore sweats, droplet fills in pore, 

shows complete contact: no pore

– Pore is on the side, or maybe ev

valley, no contact with platen: no 

– Pore is closed, so orifice is smal

pore
The Uses of 3D

• Forensics, Especially Latent Ex

– See ‘Fingerprint 3rd Level Detail– More data rather than less

• Liveness Testing

– Dynamic Photography Possibiliti

• Slide 7

– Static Photography Possibilities

• Slide 9
Market Presentatio

of 3D Images

• LumenIQ – clever work with 2D • TBS

– Surround Imager

• A few months to first distribution of 

of devices

– Touchless Sweep Sensor

• NIJ Fast Capture Rolled Equivalent 

• Carnegie Mellon & University o

• NIJ Fast Capture Rolled Equivalent 
Data to Report (1

• Standard descriptive material• Images

– 3D. Use OpenGL to describe the 

Place in dedicated field.

– 2D

• Rolled equivalent. Separate field fo• Flat equivalent.

– Might just use crop of rolled equivalen– Might need in addition to rolled equiva
Data to Report (2

• Consistency with MedX3D?

– Finger as a body part– Skin as an organ– Epidermis, dermis – more fields?– Sub-dermal – more fields?

• Vein pattern• Sub-dermal structure beyond veins
Data to Report (3

• Models to use

– Appendix N– Other Type 14 implementations f

fingerprints

– A totally new type – possibly

• Signal that this is a new and differe

type

• More work, but more definitive infor

dependent on end user understand
Recommendation

• Adopt 3D reporting• Charge ad hoc committee with 

specific Type details

– Short time frame– All relevant parties, invited to par

• Developers• Users

– Coordinate with MedX3D
#### Harold HUGGINS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jacqueline HYNES; et al., Defendants—Appellees.

No. 03-55446.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Nov. 15, 2004.*

Decided Nov. 30, 2004.

*518Harold Huggins, Cerritos, CA, pro se.

Keri Lynn Bush, Esq., Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP, Costa Mesa, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.

Before: LEAVY, BERZON, and BEA, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Harold Huggins, a former student at the University of California at Santa Barbara, appeals pro se the district court’s orders: (1) finding him to be a vexatious litigant; (2) denying his motion to amend a complaint; and (3) denying his motion for a discovery order. These orders all relate to a lawsuit stemming from Huggins’s allegations that university officials graded him based on race and worked to force him out of the engineering department. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for abuse of discretion a vexatious litigant order, *De Long v. Hennessey,*912 F.2d 1144, 1146 (9th Cir.1990), denial of leave to amend a complaint, *Johnson v. Buckley,*356 F.3d 1067, 1077 (9th Cir. 2004), and denial of a discovery order, *United States v. Hoffman,*794 F.2d 1429, 1431 (9th Cir.1986). We review de novo Huggins’s claim that the vexatious litigant order violates his due process rights. *United States v. Clifford Matley Family Trust,*354 F.3d 1154, 1161 n. 6 (9th Cir. 2004) We affirm.

Huggins’s motion to file a substitute second opening brief is granted. The clerk shall file the “Second Opening Brief’ lodged August 26, 2004.

The court has considered the three errata received by the court on September 24, 2004. The clerk shall file each of these errata.

The district court properly exercised its discretion to find Huggins a vexatious litigant because the court: (1) gave Huggins notice and allowed him an opportunity to oppose the order; (2) provided an adequate record to review; (3) found that Huggins abused the courts by repeatedly relitigating the same controversy and repeatedly filing frivolous motions and pleadings, *see*Cal.Civ.Proc.Code § 391(b)(2)-(b)(3); and (4) tailored the order to impose a barrier only with respect to litigation against specified defendants. *See De Long,*912 F.2d at 1147-48. The order did not violate due process because Huggins had notice of the proposed order and opportunity to oppose it. *See id.*at 1147.

The district court properly denied Huggins leave to amend because his proposed amendment was futile due to res judicata. *See Johnson,*356 F.3d at 1077.

The district court properly denied Huggins’s request for a discovery order as moot.

Huggins’s remaining contentions lack merit.

Huggins’s motion for an order to show cause filed September 21, 2004, is denied.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9 th Circuit Rule 36-3.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

June 23, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
136188 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 136188 COA: 283391 Ingham CC: 05-001368-FH ABRAHAM SEMAILA KAMARA, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 4, 2008 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

l0616 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

June 23, 2008

Clerk
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                              5
<LEGEND>
(Replace this text with the legend)
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                                  0001049480
<NAME>                                 DOUBLECLICK INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                           1,000
<CURRENCY>                             USD

<S>                                    <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                      DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                         JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                           JUN-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                  1
<CASH>                                     164,089
<SECURITIES>                               717,893
<RECEIVABLES>                              124,351
<ALLOWANCES>                                25,517
<INVENTORY>                                      0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           659,058
<PP&E>                                     126,261
<DEPRECIATION>                                   0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           1,368,265
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      173,843
<BONDS>                                    250,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<COMMON>                                       123
<OTHER-SE>                                 936,103
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             1,368,265
<SALES>                                    238,143
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           238,143
<CGS>                                      112,016
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              299,820
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               513
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           5,972
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (38,874)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,632
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (40,506)
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                               (40,506)
<EPS-BASIC>                                (0.34)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                (0.34)





</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 214 (Wednesday, November 5, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 65659]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-26255]



[[Page 65659]]

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

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Notice of Agreement Filed

    The Commission hereby gives notice of the filing of the following 
agreement under the Shipping Act of 1984. Interested parties may submit 
comments on the agreement to the Secretary, Federal Maritime 
Commission, Washington, DC 20573, within twelve days of the date this 
notice appears in the Federal Register. A copy of the agreement is 
available through the Commission's Web site (www.fmc.gov) or by 
contacting the Office of Agreements at (202) 523-5793 or 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#710503101514101f101d0802180231171c125f161e07"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="8bfff9eaefeeeae5eae7f2f8e2f8cbede6e8a5ece4fd">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Agreement No.: 012072-002.
    Title: NYK/Yang Ming Americas Express North-South Service Slot 
Charter Agreement.
    Parties: Nippon Yusen Kaisha; and Yang Ming (America) Corp.
    Filing Party: Eric C. Jeffrey, Esq.; Nixon Peabody LLP; 401 9th 
Street NW., Suite 900; Washington, DC 20004.
    Synopsis: The amendment changes the name of the agreement, revises 
the geographic scope to broaden the port ranges in the U.S. and South 
America, clarifies the amount of space provided to Yang Ming, updates 
the termination provisions, and makes miscellaneous clarifying changes.

    Dated: October 31, 2014.

    By Order of the Federal Maritime Commission.
Rachel E. Dickon,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-26255 Filed 11-4-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
ILND 450 (Rev. 10/13) Judgment in a Civil Action

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

Washington, et al.,

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

City of Chicago, et al., 

Defendants. 

Case No. 20-cv-00442 

Judge Manish Shah 

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE

Judgment is hereby entered (check appropriate box):

in favor of plaintiff(s) 

and against defendant(s)

in the amount of $ , 

which includes pre–judgment interest. 

 does not include pre–judgment interest.

Post-judgment interest accrues on that amount at the rate provided by law from the date of this judgment. 

Plaintiff(s) shall recover costs from defendant(s).

in favor of defendants City of Chicago, Vincent Alonzo, Adrian Garcia, and Demosthenes 

Balodimas, 

and against plaintiffs Tabatha Washington and Donte Howard. 

Defendants shall recover costs from plaintiffs. 

other: 

This action was (check one): 

 tried by a jury with Judge Manish Shah presiding, and the jury has rendered a verdict. 

 tried by Judge Manish Shah without a jury and the above decision was reached. 

 decided by Judge Manish Shah on a motion. 

Date: 7/22/2022 Thomas G. Bruton, Clerk of Court 

/Susan McClintic , Deputy Clerk 

Case: 1:20-cv-00442 Document #: 127 Filed: 07/22/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:3885
#### Wright Justice *v.*Elizaberh Martin.

APPEAL FROM FLOYD CIRCUIT COURT.

March 7, 1872.

Vendor and Purchaser — Deed may be Construed to be a Mortgage — Consideration — Weight with Chancellor.

The inadequacy of the purchase price should have a controlling influence on the Chancellor in determining whether a deed, absolute on its face, was not intended by the parties to be a mortgage.

Opinion or the Court by

Judge Pryor:

The charge of fraud in the procurement of the deed from the appellant by the decedent Martin of the land in controversy is not sustained by the proof, nor can this court, looking to all the testimony in the cause, adjudge that the deed to Martin, although absolute on its face, was intended to operate as a mortgage. There is the evidence of two or three witnesses, if not in conflict with all the other testimony in the case, that might conduce to- show that the appellant had the right to redeem this land upon the payment of the consideration expressed in the deed to Martin. These witnesses state that the land at the time of the conveyance was worth two thousand or twenty-five hundred dollars, and if so, it would have a controlling influence with the chancellor in the rendition of his judgment, but witness *61after witness introduced by the appellees, where intelligence connected with their knowledge of the value of this land entitles the judgment of each to great weight, state that the consideration paid was the full value of the land at the date of the deed. These witnesses are seven or eight in number, and some of them detail statements and conversations held with appellant in which he especially recognized the decedent Martin as the owner of the land. The fact of the appellant having retained the possession of a part of the land .looking to the whole proof, instead of evidencing the title in him, was the result of the liberal and kind feeling of Martin toward him.

*Jno. W. Hazelrigg, for appellant.*

*Brown, Apperson*& *Reid, Martin, for appellees.*

The fact that the deed recites upon its face the amount of the debts assumed and paid by Martin for the appellant is not a circumstance even indicating that it was intended as a mortgage. These debts constituted the real consideration for the land, and if it was intended as a mortgage it was certainly necessary that a claim should be inserted in the deed by which the appellant, at a particular time, should surrender possession of the premises.

The details of conversations held with parties, and particularly after they are dead, are very often easily established, but giving all testimony of the appellant its full weight, still the evidence of the appellees .so greatly preponderates that there is but one conclusion to be arrived at from the facts proven, and that is that the conveyance to Martin was absolute and unconditional upon its face and was so intended by the parties at the time of its execution.

The judgment of the court below is, therefore, *affirmed.*