alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N
NO. 03-10-00270- CR
Mike P alacios, Appellan t

v. The State of Texas, App ellee
F ROM TH E DISTRI CT COURT O F TRAVIS CO UNTY, 147 TH JUDICI AL DISTRICT NO. D-1 -DC- 09- 2066 40, H ONO RAB LE WI LF ORD F LOW ERS, JUDGE P RESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O PI N I O N Appellant Mike Palac ios has filed a pr o se notice of appea l from his conviction for the offense of driving while i ntox icated. The dist rict court has certified that this is a plea-bar g ain
case , the defe ndant has no right of appea l, and the defe ndant has waived the right of appea l. See Tex. R. App. P . 25.2(a) (2), ( d). Ac cording ly , we dismiss the appea l.

__________________________________________ Bob Pembe rton, J ustice Be fore Chief Justice Jones, J ustices Pemberton a nd Waldrop Dismissed Filed: Jul y

9, 2010 Do Not Publish
Example rows: 
           
<pre class="prefontsize">
00000C818DD9203A38348D260CDB6D7D1A84326A   B3CAFC6AE323C837BFAB5C3B0E9B1C8FC3602581623C7AC4396DE740858608C2   listing53.html
00000E294B89F381C95890A54417CFC6296C15A5   7336B50E69C456EBA58B28912E49E3EFB9025F6393D501796EE1C37B4EDB961C   8c88fe9d-2d33-42af-9d4c-ed00a6e60901.jpg
00000FF9D0ED9A6B53BC6A9364C07074DE1565F3   19E88A5365D6A54E92446A9A12DB16510FF37376FCB25E034C505373B2015EE8   cmnres.pdb.dll
</pre>
EXHIBIT 32.1



QUAD M SOLUTIONS, INC.

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 Quad M Solutions, Inc. (the “Company”) for the year ended September 30, 2019 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, in the capacity and on the date indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to her knowledge:



|1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                              
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   |                                                                                                                                                    
|2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.



|Date:  | January 15, 2020                                      | 
|------ | ----------------------------------------------------- | 
|       |                                                       | 
|By:    | /s/ Pat Dileo                                         | 
|Name:  | Pat Dileo                                             | 
|Title: | Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) |
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19
- 6608

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. LEE GUY , Defendant

- Appellant

.

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

. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. ( 7:12

- cr
- 00134

- BO

- 1 )

Submitted : September 24, 2019 Decided: September 27, 2019

Before WYNN and HARRIS , Circuit Judges , and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Lee Guy , Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Lee Guy appeals the district court’s orde r denying relief on his motion for return of property, Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(g). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. Guy , No. 7:12

- cr
- 00134

- BO

- 1 (E.D.N.C., Feb. 26, 2019). 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
#### Commonwealth *v.*Isaac Colbert.

Elections — Indictment for Illegal Voting.

An indictment for illegal voting -which, charges the holding of an election, the 'precinct in which accused voted, the candidate for whom he voted and that accused was not a resident of the state, was held sufficient.

APPEAL PROM BOYD CIRCUIT COURT.

December 3, 1873.

*Jas. E. Stewart, Rodman, for appellant.*

-, *for appellee.*

Opinion by

Judge Pryor:

The demurrer to the indictment should have been- overruled. It is specific in the allegations made, and contains every essential requisite to make it a good indictment under the statute. ■

The holding of an election for representative is alleged, also the candidates before the people for that office, the district or voting precinct in which the accused voted, and the candidate he voted for. In addition it is charged that he was not a resident of the state of Kentucky, but resided in the state of Ohio. The statement that he was not a resident has reference to the time at which he voted, and no other meaning can well be given to the language used.

Judgment reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.
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.                  

###### Department of Justice

###### Foreign Claims Settlement Commission

          - [F.C.S.C. Meeting and Hearing Notice No. 11-14]

The Foreign Claims Settlement Commission, pursuant to its regulations (45 CFR part 503.25) and the Government in the Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b), hereby gives notice in regard to the scheduling of open meetings as follows:

Tuesday, December 16, 2014: 10:00 a.m.—Oral hearings on Objection to Commission's Proposed Decisions in Claim Nos. IRQ-I-023 and IRQ-I-024.

*Status:*                     Open.                

All meetings are held at the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission, 600 E Street NW., Washington, DC. Requests for information, or advance notices of intention to observe an open meeting, may be directed to: Patricia M. Hall, Foreign Claims Settlement Commission, 600 E Street NW., Suite 6002, Washington, DC 20579. Telephone: (202) 616-6975.

Brian M. Simkin,

Chief Counsel.

[FR Doc. 2014-28663 Filed 12-3-14; 11:15 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-BA-P
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Larry A. HOLLIS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 01-1043.

United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.

Submitted March 20, 2001.

Decided June 4, 2001.

Before Honorable COFFEY, Honorable RIPPLE, and Honorable ILANA DIAMOND ROVNER, Circuit Judges.

*ORDER*

Larry Hollis pled guilty to two counts of affecting interstate commerce by extortion. The district court sentenced him to 24 months of imprisonment, three years of supervised release, and a $20,000 fine. In his first appeal, he challenged the district court’s refusal to grant him a two-point reduction under the Sentencing Guidelines for acceptance of responsibility. We found that the district court erred in sentencing Hollis by applying an outdated provision of the Guidelines. *See United States v. Hollis,*230 F.3d 955, 956 (7th Cir.2000). Because we could not be certain that the error was harmless, we vacated and remanded for resentencing. *Hollis,*230 F.3d at 958-59. On December 13, 2000, the district court re-sentenced Hollis, this time granting the two-point reduction for acceptance of responsibility. The court reduced Hollis’ sentence to 18 months of imprisonment, and maintained the original provisions for three years of supervised release, and a $20,000 fine.

Hollis, who has now completed his full term of imprisonment and is serving his supervised release term, indicated to his attorney that he wishes to challenge the district court’s ground for an appeal, and has moved to withdraw as counsel pursuant to *Anders v. California,*was granted until April 19, 2001 to file a response, but did not do so. We therefore confine our review to the potential issue identified in counsel’s brief. *See United States v. Tabb,*125 F.3d 583, 584 (7th Cir.1997). Because we agree that the only potential issue identified is frivolous, we grant counsel’s motion and dismiss the appeal.

After Hollis pled guilty to the indictment, the United States Probation Officer prepared a Presentence Investigation Report that concluded, among other things, that Hollis did not have the ability to pay a fine. Notwithstanding that conclusion, at *381the first sentencing hearing, the district court found that Hollis was able to pay a fine of $20,000 in $500 installments. Hollis did not object to this finding and did not appeal that part of his sentence. After we remanded for reconsideration of the acceptance of responsibility issue, the district court re-imposed the $20,000 fine, again without any objection from Hollis. Hollis now wishes to appeal the imprisonment of that fine on the ground that he is unable to pay. However, the time for appealing the fine has now passed. “Only an issue arising out of the correction of the sentence ordered by this court could be raised in a subsequent appeal. Any issue not arising out of that correction could have been raised there.” *United States v. Parker,*101 F.3d 527, 528 (7th Cir.1996). Because Hollis waived his only issue on appeal, the *Anders*motion is GRANTED and the appeal is DISMISSED.
No. 15,802.

#### The Board of Commissioners of Vigo County *v.*Daily.

*County.*— Liability *for Negligence of its Officers.*— In an action for damages alleged to have been occasioned by the negligence and carelessness of the county commissioners in the care and control of a court-house, the county is not liable. It can not be held liable for the negligence of its agents or officers, nnless made so by statute.

From the Parke Circuit Court.

*I. N. Pierce, G. W. Faris*and *S. R. Hamill,*for appellant.

*J. E. Lamb, C. McNutt*and *J. G. McNutt,*for appellee.

*74Filed June 7, 1892.

Millek, J.

— The appellee brought this action against the appellant to recover damages for a personal 'injury occasioned by the alleged negligence and carelessness of appellants, in the care and control of the court house of Yigo county.

Several errors have been assigned, and are discussed by counsel, but we regard the question of law presented by the ruling upon the demurrer to the complaint as decisive of the action.

It is now well settled that counties are involuntary corporations, organized as political subdivisions of the State for governmental purposes, and not liable, any more than the State would be liable, for the negligence of its agents or officers unless made liable by statute. *White*v. *Board,*etc., 129 Ind. 396; *Smith*v. *Board, etc.,*131 Ind. 116; *Morris*v. Board, *etc.,*131 Ind. 285; *Abbett*v. *Board, etc.,*114 Ind. 61; *Board, etc.,*v. *Boswell,*4 Ind. App. 133; *Shepard*v. *Pulaski Co.*(Ky.), 18 S. *W.*R. 15; *Downing*v. *Mason Co.,*87 Ky. 208; *Hite*v. *Whitley*Co., 15 S. *W.*R. 57; Elliott Roads and Streets, 323.

There may be little distinction between the duties imposed upon boards of commissioners in the care and management of bridges,and of public buildings; but, while we regard the liability of counties for negligence in failing to keep bridges-in repair as well settled, we recognize the fact that the weight of authority is the other way *(Board, etc.,*v. *Chipps,*131 Ind. 156; Elliott Roads and Streets, *supra),*and are not disposed to extend the rule so as to embrace other cases. *Smith*v. *Board, supra; Green*v. *Harrison Co.,*61 Iowa, 311.

In our opinion the court erred in overruling the demurrer to the complaint.

The judgment is reversed, with instructions to sustain the demurrer to the complaint.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4862 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4862

                     For the relief of Majan Jean.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 19, 2004

 Mr. Simmons introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                     For the relief of Majan Jean.

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR MAJAN JEAN.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b) of section 
201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, Majan Jean shall be 
eligible for issuance of an immigrant visa or for adjustment of status 
to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence upon 
filing an application for issuance of an immigrant visa under section 
204 of such Act or for adjustment of status to lawful permanent 
resident.
    (b) Adjustment of Status.--If Majan Jean enters the United States 
before the filing deadline specified in subsection (c), she shall be 
considered to have entered and remained lawfully and shall, if 
otherwise eligible, be eligible for adjustment of status under section 
245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act as of the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
    (c) Deadline for Application and Payment of Fees.--Subsections (a) 
and (b) shall apply only if the application for issuance of an 
immigrant visa or the application for adjustment of status is filed 
with appropriate fees within 2 years after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
    (d) Reduction of Immigrant Visa Number.--Upon the granting of an 
immigrant visa or permanent residence to Majan Jean, the Secretary of 
State shall instruct the proper officer to reduce by 1, during the 
current or next following fiscal year, the total number of immigrant 
visas that are made available to natives of the country of the alien's 
birth under section 203(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act or, 
if applicable, the total number of immigrant visas that are made 
available to natives of the country of the alien's birth under section 
202(e) of such Act.
    (e) Denial of Preferential Immigration Treatment for Certain 
Relatives.--The natural parents, brothers, and sisters of Majan Jean 
shall not, by virtue of such relationship, be accorded any right, 
privilege, or status under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### Ira A. Kelsey et al. v. Lyman Chamberlain.

*Promissory note—Construction—Parol evidence.*

Suit by tbe heirs of tbe payee against the maker upon tbe following paper: “February 18, 1873. For money received I promise to pay Alma A. Chamberlain four hundred and thirty-five dollars out of my estate, if she should outlive me, but if not, to her beirs as she shall direct, without use. [Signed] Lyman Chamberlain.” *Held,,*that in no event was this note payable except after tbe death of the maker and from bis estate.

Parol evidence cannot be received to vary tbe construction of such an instrument. It must be its own interpreter.

Error to Barry.

Submitted Oct. 20.

Decided Oct. 27.

Assumpsit. Plaintiffs bring error.

Affirmed.

*J. A. <& W. B. 8weezey*for plaintiffs in error.

*0. Gr. HoTbroolc*for defendant in error.

Cooley, J.

The plaintiffs, who are heirs-at-law of Alma A. Chamberlain, deceased, bring suit upon the following *242instrument, which, was given by defendant to said Alma, and by her indorsed in blank, and as they alleged, delivered to them:

“ February 18, 1873. For money received I promise to pay Alma A. Chamberlain four hundred and thirty-five dollars out of my estate, if she should outlive me; but if not, to her heirs as she shall direct without use.

Lyman Chamberlain.”

The only question made by the record is whether this note was due when the suit was instituted. The defendant insisted that it was only payable out of his estate and after his death; while the plaintiffs claimed that the payment was to be made out of the estate only in case the’payee was the survivor, and that if the payee died first, the note was payable immediately to her heirs, as she should direct. The circuit court agreed in the view urged by the defendant; and in this we think no error was committed. The note in any contingency was to be paid out of defendant’s estate ; but whether to the payee herself or to her heirs would ■depend upon which of the two was survivor.

The circuit court disposed of the case on demurrer to fhe declaration. The plaintiffs claim that this was erroneous, since if the case had gone to trial they might have shown the surrounding circumstances to throw light upon the construction of the instrument. But no such evidence would have been admissible. The note is complete in itself, and must be interpreted on inspection. *Sutherland v. Crane*Wal. Ch. 523; *Jones v. Phelps*5 Mich. 218.

The judgment must be affirmed with costs.

The other Justices concurred.
<PAGE>   1

EXHIBIT 23


CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement of
The Monarch Machine Tool Company and Subsidiaries on Form S-8 (File No. 2-92311)
of our report dated February 11, 1997, except for the last paragraph of Note 9
as to which the date is March 19, 1997, on our audits of the consolidated
financial statements and financial statement schedule of The Monarch Machine
Tool Company and Subsidiaries as of December 31, 1996 and 1995, and for the
years ended December 31, 1996, 1995, and 1994, which report is included in this
Annual Report on Form 10-K.




COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.


Dayton, Ohio
March 27, 1997
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 237 (Wednesday, December 10, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 73290]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-28864]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission


Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural 
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP15-237-000.
    Applicants: MarkWest Pioneer, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) rate filing per 154.403(d)(2): MarkWest 
Pioneer Quarterly FRP Filing to be effective 1/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 12/2/14.
    Accession Number: 20141202-5054.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/15/14.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above 
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the 
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be 
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the 
proceeding.

Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP14-1275-001.
    Applicants: Mojave Pipeline Company, L.L.C.
    Description: Compliance filing per 154.203: Tariff Compliance 
Filing to be effective 1/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 12/2/14.
    Accession Number: 20141202-5082.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/15/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-173-001.
    Applicants: Empire Pipeline, Inc.
    Description: Tariff Amendment per 154.205(b): Correction to 
Effective Date in RP15-173 to be effective 12/14/2014.
    Filed Date: 12/2/14.
    Accession Number: 20141202-5145.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/15/14.

    Any person desiring to protest in any of the above proceedings must 
file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18 
CFR 385.211) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified 
comment date.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by 
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing 
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying 
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 
(toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: December 3, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-28864 Filed 12-9-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CAPITAL
GROWTH, INC. SEPTEMBER 30, 1996 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL INFORMATION
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                             856
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   856
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     856
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           27,576
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        44,500
<OTHER-SE>                                    (71,220)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       856
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    3,665
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,665)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,665)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3,665)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.00)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.00)
        

</TABLE>