alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 01-30267

Conference Calendar

 

KENNETH STONE,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

BURL CAIN,

Respondent-Appellee.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 00-CV-1649-K

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

February 20, 2003

Before WIENER, EMILIO M. GARZA, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Kenneth Stone, Louisiana prisoner # 85667, appeals the

dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 application. Stone filed the

application to challenge his conviction on heroin possession and

distribution charges. The district court granted a certificate

of appealability (COA) as to whether Campbell v. Louisiana,

523 U.S. 392 (1998), applied retroactively to Stone’s claims. 

Stone argues that Campbell announced a new rule of law for

purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1)(C) and submits that the rule
No. 01-30267

-2-

of Campbell applies retroactively. He contends that his

application was timely under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1)(C) as it was

filed within one year of the date that the right was recognized

by the United States Supreme Court in Campbell. 

In Campbell the Supreme Court held, on direct review from a

criminal conviction, that a white defendant possessed standing to

object to discrimination against black people in the selection of

his grand jury. See Campbell, 523 U.S. at 400. After the grant

of COA, we held that Campbell does not apply retroactively to

cases on collateral review. See Peterson v. Cain, 302 F.3d 508,

512-15 (5th Cir. 2002), cert. denied, 123 S. Ct. 886 (2003). 

The holding of Peterson disposes of the issue on which COA was

granted. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is

AFFIRMED.
Continuing Education Units

VERIFICATION OF ATTENDANCE FORM

Certification Number: ________________

 attended the following professional educational activity. 

(NAME)

Title: The Impact of Generative Artificial Intelligence on Education and Workforce

Date(s): September 20, 2023 CEU Hours Earned: 1 hour 

Sponsor(s): National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) 

Explanation of Event: There is much in the news about the risks and benefits of artificial intelligence. There is 

much opportunity in generative artificial intelligence for enhancing the learning experience and to augment the 

workforce. New technologies such as machine learning and automated approaches can also help to increase 

connections and fit between employers and job seekers. This webinar will explore the promises and perils as AI 

factors more prominently into education, training, workforce development, and cybersecurity defenses. Webinar 

attendees will hear presentations from: 

• H. Chad Lane, Associate Professor of Educational Psychology & Computer Science Associate Chair, 

Department of Educational Psychology, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign

• Elyse Ashburn, Editor and Co-founder, Work Shift

• Katie Hall, Founder and CEO, Claira

Location: Virtual Webinar; https://www.nist.gov/news-events/events/2023/09/nice-webinar-impact-generative- 

 artificial-intelligence-education-and 

Name of Meeting Host: Michael Prebil, NICE Cybersecurity Workforce Analyst

 

Contact Information:

nist.gov/nice 

nice@nist.gov

The Continuing Education Units form is provided as a courtesy. It is the responsibility of the 

attendee to complete and submit with their certifying authority.
9921.

#### Western and Atlantic Railroad Company *v.*Gregg.

Decided January 15, 1919.

Action for damages; from Whitfield superior court—Judge Tarver. June 6, 1918.

*Tye, Peeples & Tye, Maddox, McCamy & Shumate,*for plaintiff in error.

*W. C. Martin, W. E. Mann, W. Gordon Mann,*contra.

Luke, J.

1. When read as a whole, the charge of the court complained of presented correctly the law of the case. While the evidence for the defendant was strongly opposed to the testimony of the plaintiff, yet the plaintiff swore to a state of facts which, if believed, proved her case as laid. The jury were authorized to believe her in preference to the greater number of witnesses. Since the trial judge, upon whom this court must, by law, depend so to do, has, in the exercise of his discretion, approved the verdict, which has some evidence to support it, and there being no error of law in the trial of the case, the judgment overruling the motion for a new trial is

*Affirmed.*

*Wade, C. J., and Jenkins, J., concur.*
#### Charles Webb *et al.,*plaintiffs, *vs.*Wallace P. Groom *et al.,*defendants.

1. Re-arguments of motions, upon the same facts, are only to be allowed where it appears that the justice, in disposing of the motion, has overlooked, mistaken or misapprehended some material fact; or has decided it upon some question of law not presented by counsel. They are not allowed merely for the purpose of introducing the consideration of facts not in existence at the time the motion was decided.

2. Thus where a motion to vacate an order of arrest and attachment was granted, upon affidavits disproving any fraudulent intent on the part of the party arrested, a re-argument of such motion will not be granted merely upon the ground that certain subsequent acts of the defendant tend to establish the alleged fraud,

(Before Monell, J., at Special Term,

November, 1866.)

Motion for leave to re-argue a motion.

*Mr. Dykers,*for motion.

*'Mr. Stafford,*opposed.

Monell, J.

The defendants were arrested and held to bail, for an alleged fraudulent disposition or intended disposition of their property. An attachment for the same cause was also granted. A motion to vacate the order of arrest and attachment was granted upon affidavits disproving any fraudulent intent. A motion for a re-argument of that motion is now made, upon the allegation that certain acts of the defendants, since done, tend to establish the alleged fraud.

Re-arguments of motions are only allowed, where it appears that the justice deciding the motion has overlooked, mistaken or misapprehended some material fact; or has decided upon some question of law, not raised or argued by counsel. I am not aware that they have ever been allowed to let in facts *not in existence*at the time the motion was decided. In the analogous case of motions for new trials *533on account of newly discovered evidence, the evidence must have existed at the time of the trial, hut its existence was unknown to the party, and could not with reasonable diligence have been discovered.

In this case, the acts now sought to be made available were done long after the motions had been decided, and of course could not have had any influence whatever upon the decision ; and it would be opposed by the uniform practice of the court, as well as unsupported by any principle, to open a case already decided' to let in such new facts.

The only remedy under the circumstances, is to make a fresh application for the provisional remedies founded upon the new facts.

The motion must be denied, with $10 costs.
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

JOHN M. MARSZALEK, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v. 

BRENDAN KELLY, et al.,

Defendants,

BRUCE DAVIDSON, et al.

Plaintiff-Intervenors,

v. 

BRENDAN KELLY, et al.,

Defendants in Intervention. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. 20-cv-4270

Hon. Mary M. Rowland

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS INTERVENOR-PLAINTIFFS’ 

AMENDED COMPLAINT IN INTERVENTION

Defendants, Brendan F. Kelly, individually acting under color of state law as Director of 

the Illinois State Police (“ISP”) and Jessica Trame1, individually, acting under color of state law 

as Bureau Chief of the Illinois State Police Firearms Services Bureau, through Kwame Raoul, 

Attorney General of Illinois, hereby move to dismiss Intervenor-Plaintiffs Bruce Davidson and 

1

Jessica Trame has not been the Bureau Chief of the Illinois State Police Firearms Services Bureau since 

January of 2020.

Case: 1:20-cv-04270 Document #: 98 Filed: 07/16/21 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:571
2

Sarah Davidson’s Amended Complaint in Intervention pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) and in support thereof state as follows:

1. Intervenor-Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint in Intervention does not state viable individual 

capacity claims against Defendants Kelly or Trame.

2. Moreover, Intervenor-Plaintiffs’ Second or Fourteenth Amendment rights were not 

violated and, therefore, they would not be entitled to damages even if they stated a viable claim.

WHEREFORE, Defendants respectfully request that this Court grant their motion to 

dismiss Intervenor-Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint in Intervention. 

July 16, 2021 Respectfully submitted,

KWAME RAOUL

Attorney General of Illinois

/s/ Mary A. Johnston 

Mary A. Johnston

Office of the Illinois Attorney General

100 West Randolph Street

Chicago, Illinois 60601

(312) 814-3737

Mary.Johnston@illinois.gov

Counsel for Defendants

Case: 1:20-cv-04270 Document #: 98 Filed: 07/16/21 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:572
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of American Power ConversionCorporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 26,2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), I, Richard J. Thompson, Senior Vice President, Finance, andChief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350,as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)                          TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

 
| /s/ Richard J.  Thompson                                     |   |
|--------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                                         |
| Richard J.  Thompson                                         |
| Senior Vice  President, Finance, and Chief Financial Officer |
|                                                         |
| August 5,  2005                                         |

 

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350,chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed as part of aseparate disclosure document.

 

1

----
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### National Science Foundation

In accordance with Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the following meeting:

*Name:*                     Business and Operations Advisory Committee (9556).                

*Date/Time:*                     December 11, 2014; 1:00 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. (EST), December 12, 2014; 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. (EST).                

*Place:*                     National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230; Stafford I, Room 1235.                

*Type of Meeting:*                     Open.                

*Contact Person:*                     Joan Miller, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230 (703) 292-8200.                

*Purpose of Meeting:*                     To provide advice concerning issues related to the oversight, integrity, development and enhancement of NSF's business operations.                

Agenda:

## December 11, 2014

Welcome/Introductions; BFA/OIRM Updates; iTRAK Update; NSF Relocation Update; Succession Planning; Managing Change at NSF; Strategic Review Process.

## December 12, 2014

Risk-Based Management; Prepare for Discussion with Dr. Córdova; Discussion with Dr. Córdova; Meeting Wrap-Up.

Dated: November 13, 2014.

Suzanne Plimpton,

Acting, Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 2014-27233 Filed 11-17-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
EXHIBIT 32.1CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, the undersigned officer of BioMed Realty Trust, Inc. (the “Company”) hereby certifies, tosuch officer’s knowledge, that: (i) the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December31, 2006 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and  (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.        Dated: February 28, 2007 /s/ ALAN D. GOLD   Alan D. Gold   Chief Executive Officer        The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company,whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language insuch filing. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been providedto the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, the undersigned officer of BioMed Realty Trust, Inc. (the “Company”) hereby certifies, tosuch officer’s knowledge, that: (i) the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December31, 2006 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and  (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.        Dated: February 28, 2007 /s/ KENT GRIFFIN   Kent Griffin   Chief Financial Officer        The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company,whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language insuch filing. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been providedto the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 21.1

SUBSIDIARIES OF W&T OFFSHORE, INC.

The subsidiaries of W&T Offshore, Inc. are listed below.



|                                          |  |                      |  |              |  
|----------------------------------------- |  | -------------------- |  | ------------ | -
|Name                                      |  | State ofOrganization |  | PercentOwned |  
|                                          |  |                     
|Gulf of Mexico Oil and Gas Properties LLC |  | Delaware             |  | 100.0        | %
|                                          |  |                     
|N.O. Properties LLC                       |  | Delaware             |  | 100.0        | %
|                                          |  |                     
|Offshore Energy I LLC                     |  | Delaware             |  | 100.0        | %
|                                          |  |                     
|Offshore Energy II LLC                    |  | Delaware             |  | 100.0        | %
|                                          |  |                     
|Offshore Energy III LLC                   |  | Delaware             |  | 100.0        | %
|                                          |  |                     
|Offshore Shelf LLC                        |  | Delaware             |  | 100.0        | %
|                                          |  |                     
|W&T Energy VI, LLC                        |  | Delaware             |  | 100.0        | %
|                                          |  |                     
|W&T Energy VII, LLC                       |  | Delaware             |  | 100.0        | %
|                                          |  |                     
|White Shoal Pipeline Corporation          |  | Delaware             |  | 64.5         | %
[ DO NOT PUBLISH] 

## In the 

# United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________ No. 23

- 10259 Non

- Argument Calendar

____________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff

- Appellee,

versus MICHAEL LUMPKIN, a.k.a. Jamari,

Defendant

- Appellant.

____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 8:21

- cr
- 00216

- KKM

- JSS

- 1 USCA11 Case: 23-10259 Document: 30-1 Date Filed: 01/18/2024 Page: 1 of 22 Opinion of the Court 23

- 10259

____________________ Before R OSENBAUM , N EWSOM , and A NDERSON , Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Melissa Fussell, appointed counsel for Michael Lumpkin inthis direct criminal appeal, has filed a motion to withdraw on appeal, supported by a brief prepared under Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Our indep endent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal iscorrect. Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED , and Lum pkin’s convictions and sentences are AFFIRMED

. USCA11 Case: 23-10259 Document: 30-1 Date Filed: 01/18/2024 Page: 2 of 2
Exhibit 32.2






CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350




In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report On Form 10-Q of Laxai Pharma, Ltd. (the "Company") for the quarter ending September 30, 2010, I, J. Ram Ajjarapu, Chief Financial 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, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:




1.           Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending September 30, 2010, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending September 30, 2010, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




Dated:  November 19, 2010
LAXAI PHARMA, LTD.By:
/s/ J. Ram AjjarapuJ. Ram Ajjarapu
Exhibit 32.2

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, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Patrick Bratton, Chief Financial
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 24, 2010



/s/ Patrick BrattonPatrick BrattonChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial 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.
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 74 Introduced in House (IH)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 74

Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Commerce in the 
                      One Hundred Fifth Congress.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 25, 1997

 Mr. Bliley submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
                    the Committee on House Oversight

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Commerce in the 
                      One Hundred Fifth Congress.

    Resolved,

SECTION 1. AMOUNTS FOR COMMITTEE EXPENSES.

    For the expenses of the Committee on Commerce (hereinafter in this 
resolution referred to as the ``Committee''), including the expenses of 
all staff salaries, there shall be paid, out of the applicable accounts 
of the House of Representatives for committee salaries and expenses, 
not more than $14,671,538 for the One Hundred Fifth Congress.

SEC. 2. SESSION LIMITATIONS.

    Of the amount specified in section 1--
            (1) not more than $7,179,440 shall be available for 
        expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
        January 3, 1997, and ending immediately before noon on January 
        3, 1998; and
            (2) not more than $7,492,098 shall be available for 
        expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
        January 3, 1998, and ending immediately before noon on January 
        3, 1999.

SEC. 3. VOUCHERS.

    Payments under this resolution shall be made on vouchers authorized 
by the Committee, signed by the Chairman of the Committee, and approved 
in the manner directed by the Committee on House Oversight.

SEC. 4. REGULATIONS.

    Amounts made available under this resolution shall be expended in 
accordance with regulations prescribed by the Committee on House 
Oversight.
                                 <all>
```