alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### March 9, 2012 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT

CLARENCE BALDWIN, Plaintiff - Appellant, No. 11-1457 (D.C. No. 1:11-CV-01647-LTB) (D. Colorado) v. CSPO OFFICER O’CONNOR, #2057; D.D.A. GAIL S. WARKENTIN, #23429; JUDGE BARNEY IUPPA, #002799, Defendants - Appellees.

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

Before KELLY , HARTZ , and HOLMES , Circuit Judges.
Clarence Baldwin is a prisoner in the custody of the Colorado Department of Corrections. He filed a claim in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of his constitutional rights by the police officer who arrested him, the deputy district

*After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. SeeFed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.attorney who prosecuted him, and the district-court judge who presided in his case. His claims included illegal search and seizure, violations of due process, subjection to double jeopardy, and prosecutorial misconduct. The only relief he sought was damages. The district court dismissed his claims without prejudice under Heck v. Humphrey , 512 U.S. 477 (1994). Mr. Baldwin appeals. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm. The district court’s opinion properly applied Heck. It recognized that Heck bars any claim for damages if the claim’s success “would necessarily imply the invalidity of [the] conviction or sentence.” 512 U.S. at 487. It also noted that the success of a search-and-seizure claim “would not necessarily imply that the plaintiff’s conviction was unlawful,” id. n.7, but that Mr. Baldwin could recover damages only if he could “prove not only that the search was unlawful, but that it caused him actual, compensable injury, . . . which . . . does not encompass the ‘injury’ of being convicted and imprisoned.” Id. Discerning that Mr. Baldwin did not allege any injury other than his conviction, the court concluded that Heck required the dismissal of all claims. On appeal Mr. Baldwin does not challenge the district court’s characterization of his allegations. He merely reiterates that his current incarceration is unlawful. We therefore hold that the dismissal below was proper.

-2-We AFFIRM the judgment of the district court. Mr. Baldwin’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED. Mr. Baldwin shall pay the entire filing fee for this appeal forthwith. ENTERED FOR THE COURT

Harris L Hartz Circuit Judge

-3-
#### In re: GTI CAPITAL HOLDINGS, LLC, an Arizona limited liability company, DBA Rockland Materials, Debtor, Triad Commercial Captive Co.; et al., Appellants, v. Comerica Bank; et al., Appellees.

No. 09-60039.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Oct. 6, 2010.*

Filed Oct. 8, 2010.

Grant H. Goodman, Esquire, Grant H. Goodman, PLLC, Phoenix, AZ, for Appellants.

Todd A. Burgess, Gallagher *&*Kennedy, PA, Michael Warren Carmel, Michael W. Carmel, Ltd., Richard Aaron Edens, Burch & Cracchiolo, PA Phoenix, AZ, for Appellees.

Before: THOMPSON, FERNANDEZ and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Appellants challenge the bankruptcy court’s imposition of sanctions, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(a)(5)(B), following the denial of them Rule 37 motion to compel depositions. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 158(d)(1) and 1291. We affirm.

First, the bankruptcy court had jurisdiction to impose the sanctions, despite previously granting Appellants’ request to voluntarily withdraw their complaints. “It is well established that a federal court may consider collateral issues after an action is no longer pending.” *Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp.,*496 U.S. 384, 395, 110 S.Ct. 2447, 110 L.Ed.2d 359 (1990). Rule 37(a)(5)(B) sanctions are collateral because they aim to deter abuse of the judicial process and have no bearing, and therefore no res judicata effect, on the case’s underlying merits. *Id.*at 396, 110 S.Ct. 2447; *see also Willy v. Coastal Corp.,*503 U.S. 131, 139, 112 S.Ct. 1076, 117 L.Ed.2d 280 (1992).

Second, the bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in imposing sanctions under Rule 37(a)(5)(B). Appellants have failed at all levels to demonstrate that their motion to compel was “substantially justified,” i.e., that “reasonable people could differ as to whether the party requested must comply” with their motion to compel. *See Reygo Pac. Corp. v. Johnston Pump Co.,*680 F.2d 647, 649 (9th Cir.1982).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2221 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2221

   To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Related 
 Agencies, John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, Operations 
                 and Maintenance for fiscal year 2024.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 29, 2023

Mr. Biggs (for himself, Mr. Rosendale, Mr. Gaetz, Mr. Good of Virginia, 
   Mr. Roy, and Mr. Crane) introduced the following bill; which was 
     referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Related 
 Agencies, John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, Operations 
                 and Maintenance for fiscal year 2024.

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

SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR RELATED AGENCIES, 
              JOHN F. KENNEDY CENTER FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS, 
              OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, amounts authorized 
to be appropriated or otherwise available for Related Agencies, John F. 
Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, Operations and Maintenance for 
fiscal year 2024 may not exceed $24,490,000.
                                 <all>
```
**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
      condition with the Amendment No. 1 to Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Polydex
      Pharmaceuticals Limited (the “Company”) for the fiscal quarter ended October 31,
      2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
      (the “Report”), I, Sharon L. Wardlaw, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
      certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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 result of operations of the Company.








By /s/
      Sharon L. Wardlaw


Sharon
      L.
      Wardlaw,


Chief
      Financial Officer


March 21,
      2006





This
      certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for
      purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the
      “Exchange Act”). This certification shall not be deemed to be incorporated by
      reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or
      the
      Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates
      it
      by reference.





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by section 906 has been provided
      to
      the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
      and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2224 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2224

   To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Related 
 Agencies, National Endowment for the Humanities for fiscal year 2024.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 29, 2023

Mr. Biggs (for himself, Mr. Rosendale, Mr. Gaetz, Mr. Good of Virginia, 
   Mr. Roy, and Mr. Crane) introduced the following bill; which was 
        referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Related 
 Agencies, National Endowment for the Humanities for fiscal year 2024.

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

SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR RELATED AGENCIES, 
              NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE HUMANITIES FOR FISCAL YEAR 
              2024.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, amounts authorized 
to be appropriated or otherwise available for Related Agencies, 
National Endowment for the Humanities for fiscal year 2024 may not 
exceed $0.
                                 <all>
```
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2255 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for US Department 

of Agriculture, Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs, 

APHIS, Salaries and Expenses for fiscal year 2024. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 29, 2023 

Mr. BIGGS (for himself, Mr. ROSENDALE, Mr. GAETZ, Mr. GOOD of Virginia, 

Mr. ROY, and Mr. CRANE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Agriculture 

A BILL 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for US 

Department of Agriculture, Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs, APHIS, Salaries and 

Expenses for fiscal year 2024. 

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


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2255 IH

1 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR 

2 US DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, UNDER 

3 SECRETARY FOR MARKETING AND REGU4 LATORY PROGRAMS, APHIS, SALARIES AND 

5 EXPENSES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024. 

6 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

7 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise avail8 able for US Department of Agriculture, Under Secretary 

9 for Marketing and Regulatory Programs, APHIS, Salaries 

10 and Expenses for fiscal year 2024 may not exceed 

11 $1,011,136,000. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2260 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for US Department 

of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service, Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety for fiscal year 2024. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 29, 2023 

Mr. BIGGS (for himself, Mr. ROSENDALE, Mr. GAETZ, Mr. GOOD of Virginia, 

Mr. ROY, and Mr. CRANE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Agriculture 

A BILL 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for US 

Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service, Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety for 

fiscal year 2024. 

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


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2260 IH

1 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR 

2 US DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, AGRI3 CULTURAL MARKETING SERVICE, OFFICE OF 

4 THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR FOOD SAFETY 

5 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024. 

6 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

7 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise avail8 able for US Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Mar9 keting Service, Office of the Under Secretary for Food 

10 Safety for fiscal year 2024 may not exceed $800,000. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 4.6


 


CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION OF THE


CERTIFICATE OF DESIGNATION OF


SERIES A-2 CONVERTIBLE PARTICIPATING PREFERRED STOCK


OF


HC2 HOLDINGS, INC.


 


It is hereby certified that:







1.            The name of the corporation is HC2 Holdings, Inc. (the “Corporation”).







2.            The Certificate of Designation of Series A-2 Convertible Participating Preferred Stock of the Corporation, which was filed with the Secretary of State of Delaware on January 5, 2015 (the “Certificate of Designation”), is hereby corrected.







3.            The inaccuracy to be corrected in the Certificate of Designation is as follows:







Certain provisions contained in Section 9(a) and Section 10(rr) of the Certificate of Designation erroneously failed to include a reference to the Corporation or to utilize defined terms.







4.            The portion of the instrument in corrected form is as follows:







Clause (B) of the proviso of Section 9(a) of the Certificate of Designation is hereby corrected in its entirety to read as follows:







(B) 100% of the Indebtedness of the Company, the Company’s wholly-owned and, after taking into account the Company’s ownership percentage therein, Non-Wholly Owned Subsidiaries (as well as the liquidation preference of any preferred security ranking senior to the Company’s investment in such entities) shall be taken into account for purposes of determining Indebtedness but not taken into account (i.e., added back) for purposes of determining Net Asset Value, and







The provisos of Section 10(rr) of the Certificate of Designation are hereby corrected in their entirety to read as follows:







provided that for such purposes, (i) the derivative attributable to the conversion feature in any series of preferred stock will not be considered a liability and (ii) the Accrued Value (as well as any accrued Dividends not yet added to the Accrued Value) of the Preferred Shares and the preference amount (including the accrued value and all accrued but unpaid dividends thereon not included in the accrued value) of any other Senior Securities or Parity Securities will be considered Indebtedness of the Company; provided, further that, solely for purposes of determining the Debt/NAV Ratio, the Indebtedness of the Company, the Company’s wholly-owned and, after taking into account the Company’s ownership percentage therein, Non-Wholly Owned Subsidiaries (as well as the liquidation preference of any preferred security ranking senior to the Company’s investment) shall be taken into account for purposes of determining “Debt” (i.e., the numerator) but not taken into account (i.e., added back) for purposes of determining Net Asset Value (i.e., the denominator).







[Remainder of page intentionally left blank.]


 












	
Dated:

	
August 5

	
, 2015










	 	
HC2 HOLDINGS, INC.


	 	 	 
	 	
By:

	
/s/ Keith Hladek


	 		
Name: Keith Hladek


		 	
Title:   Chief Operating Officer






 



[Signature Page to Series A-2 Certificate of Correction]
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

November 21, 2011 

t1114 

Order 

 

November 21, 2011 

143616 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 143616 

 COA: 296060 

Wayne CC: 09-013562-FC 

GEORGE MICHAEL COBREA, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 19, 2011 

judgment 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.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

GUSTAVO McKENZIE,

 Petitioner - Appellant,

 v.

EDMUND G. BROWN, Jr., Warden,

 Respondent - Appellee.

No. 07-56135

D.C. No. CV-05-02404-CJC

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Cormac J. Carney, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted April 5, 2010** 

Before: RYMER, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Gustavo McKenzie appeals from the district court’s

order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.

FILED

APR 16 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 07-56135

McKenzie contends that his right to a fair and impartial jury was violated

when the prosecutor exercised a peremptory challenge to excuse an

African-American juror. We review McKenzie’s claim under Batson v. Kentucky,

467 U.S. 79 (1986), de novo because the state court’s use of the standard laid out

in People v. Wheeler, 22 Cal. 3d 258, 280 (1978), does not satisfy constitutional

requirements. See Wade v. Terhune, 202 F.3d 1190, 1192 (9th Cir. 2000). 

McKenzie has failed to establish that the totality of relevant facts “gives rise to an

inference” of purposeful discrimination by the prosecutor. See Johnson v.

California, 545 U.S. 162, 168 (2005).

AFFIRMED.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2126 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Independent Agencies, 

Morris K Udall and Stewart L Udall Foundation, Trust Fund for fiscal 

year 2024. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 29, 2023 

Mr. BIGGS (for himself, Mr. ROSENDALE, Mr. GAETZ, Mr. GOOD of Virginia, 

Mr. ROY, and Mr. CRANE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, and in addition 

to the Committee on Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently 

determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Independent Agencies, Morris K Udall and Stewart L Udall 

Foundation, Trust Fund for fiscal year 2024. 

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


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 2126 IH

1 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR 

2 INDEPENDENT AGENCIES, MORRIS K UDALL 

3 AND STEWART L UDALL FOUNDATION, TRUST 

4 FUND FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024. 

5 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

6 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise avail7 able for Independent Agencies, Morris K Udall and Stew8 art L Udall Foundation, Trust Fund for fiscal year 2024 

9 may not exceed $1,800,000. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2169 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for U.S. Department 

of Interior, National Park Service, Land Acquisition and State Assistance 

for fiscal year 2024. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 29, 2023 

Mr. BIGGS (for himself, Mr. ROSENDALE, Mr. GAETZ, Mr. GOOD of Virginia, 

Mr. ROY, and Mr. CRANE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for U.S. 

Department of Interior, National Park Service, Land 

Acquisition and State Assistance for fiscal year 2024. 

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

3 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR 

4 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR, NATIONAL 

5 PARK SERVICE, LAND ACQUISITION AND 

6 STATE ASSISTANCE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024. 

7 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

8 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise avail9 able for U.S. Department of Interior, National Park ServVerDate Sep 11 2014 01:15 Apr 19, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H2169.IH H2169

pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 2169 IH

1 ice, Land Acquisition and State Assistance for fiscal year 

2 2024 may not exceed $0. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
nrom_ex1010.htm


 


 




  





1











  






 


 




  





2











  






 


 




  





3











  






 


 




  





4











  






 


 




  





5











  






 


 




  





6











  






 


 




  





7











  






 


 



8
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

October 25, 2018

No. 04

- 18

- 00721

- CV

HARVEY V. RISIEN, LLC and Harvey V. Risien

,

Appellants

v.

MISSARK INVESTMENTS GP, LLC , Missark Investments LP, J H Design LP, and GM GP Management, LLC, Appellees

From the 225th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018CI15535 Honorable Karen H. Pozza, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

A filing fee of $205 was due when this appeal was filed, but it was not paid. See Tex. Sup. Ct., Fees Charged in the Supreme Court, In Civil Cases in the Courts of Appeals, and

Before the Judicial Panel on Multi

- District Litigation , Docket No. 15

- 9158 (Aug. 28, 2015). The fee remains unp aid, and appellants have not filed a sworn statement of inability to afford payment of court costs.

We therefore order appellants, by November 5, 2018

, to either: (1) pay the filing fee; or (2) provide written proof to this court that appellants are indigent or otherwise excused by statute or the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure from prepaying fees and costs. See T EX

. R. A PP . P. 20.1 (providing that indigent party who complies with provisions of that rule may proceed without advance payment of costs ).

If appellants fail to respond satisfactorily within the time ordered, this appeal may be

dismissed without further notice. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 5 (providing appellate courts may enforce rule requiring payment of costs “by any order that is just”), 42. 3(c) (permitting appellate courts to dismiss an appeal when appellant fails to comply with a court order).

_________________________________ Luz Elena D. Chapa, JusticeIN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 25th day of October, 2018

.

___________________________________ KEITH E. HOTTLE

, Clerk of Court