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

for the Fifth Circuit ____________

No. 23-40447

Summary Calendar

____________

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Jorge Gomez Lopez,

Defendant—Appellant.

______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:20-CR-321-2

______________________________

Before King, Haynes, and Graves, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jorge Gomez 

Lopez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance 

with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 

F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Lopez has not filed a response. We have reviewed 

counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We 

_____________________

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

December 13, 2023

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 23-40447 Document: 00517000583 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/13/2023
No. 23-40447

2

concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous 

issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to 

withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities 

herein, and the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

Case: 23-40447 Document: 00517000583 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/13/2023
OFFlCE OFTHE ATTORNEY GENERAL OFTEXAS
**AUSTIN**

szana?eh10 Earal& 3QecraoLan h68istaotCXvll

Distrietnttonwy Eall CJf

Rooard8 Dalla8,%xaa
Dear sirs

letterof July 1010 5951,ROiaw withinwhioh a y publlowiy quality. In p"om latterand 8 l.n7v1784,

but 4lffsrantly Geaersl 2. F. LooBey-, Zune County ikttornay

0r 5?ravia **th8ZI** El Citizen**Of**

(1) Doea Ax-Mole

SOSl, Revised Statutes, authorize a oounty

am?k, beforehe raoeirea a oalanlssion

from the Sear&my of Statd~

for a pizrty

appalnted

notarypublia,to 'notify sal4 party to appear beforehim wIthin tea days, pay for his oomml~slon, and quality

acraardfng

to lm"? (2) IX It does mt, is said party entitledlm rsoeefte 8tmhmtfoed’te&la oaml8slanlma beenrewl~edbg the elermBon. XarolU ::cCraaken, Faga 2

(3) If be ia, may he then qualify at any time within ten daya frolz tho roaalptof crush notioe? .uld (4) If he my, are the sxaeptiom aontained in said artlalsavailable to him? ti -9 27, 1917, **AttOTJley %Xl8rS3**  **~OMY a~~I**  **’ O7Od**  **&UlfUl ’**  **0Zi00** O&loa No. 1777,in whloh the quo8tion8 subPELt?& by **Hr. Romrby**  **mre fully**  **amwW4d. (Reports**  **Of the**  **AttOl ’**  **B0y** General,1916-19l8, p* 422) The opinionquotesArt.10108 6015 and 6016,Revbed Statute8of 19ll. **These** art10108 vme brou@t forwardin the Rwised Statutesof 1926,withoutmtorlal #mnge8, a8 krtlole8 I5381 and SQSE feqmtimly, and they have not since been amended. Therefore, tf the uzmer8 found in OpinionZZo! 1777 ware aorrsot then, they am oorreat now. X0 belierathat o~l.ni.an orraotly

**OOmtTUw** the **statute8 involved**  and spgrova It. A oopy or whloh irr herowith

onoloaed. It ctnswera the tirst three of the qnestians nbove steted, It doe.0 not answerthe Sourth **qU08tbn, but**  **it is**  apparent that the exemptions

OQX apj-Ap

onlywhere the party Las beast legally notif 94 or hi6 sppaintment.Xe aannotbe lagally notified

by the albrk until that o:?ioer has in his possas$ion the paty*s cozzR3b3sion.

Wo armuw question.Bo. 1 ln the negative,

and eaah of the three e+mtn2u~ questionSin the affirui&lYe.

In this commotion, we call to your attQntlon for chtaver it my be xorth, the awe of Taablm v. ZWite, 104 Tsx. cri...

.iep. 70, xt s. x. 597. ~losso ccce;?t

our thanks for the vary able namer in ~:hi.ch

you !mvu stated the i'uots, the questions submitted ind Ubwzised the lsf;cl points involved.

Yoursv&y truly

AFPROVED .TuL

12, 1939

=.&
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                      5
<CIK>                          0000826345
<NAME>                         GEODYNE ENERGY INCOME LTD PSHP II-B

<S>                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                 JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                   JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                            514,081
<SECURITIES>                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                     699,806
<ALLOWANCES>                            0
<INVENTORY>                             0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                1,213,887
<PP&E>                         21,341,660
<DEPRECIATION>                 19,166,969
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  3,618,898
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>              87,392
<BONDS>                                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                   0
<PREFERRED>                             0
<COMMON>                                0
<OTHER-SE>                      3,433,977
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    3,618,898
<SALES>                         1,865,671
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                1,876,271
<CGS>                                   0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                     841,327
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                      0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 1,034,944
<INCOME-TAX>                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             1,034,944
<DISCONTINUED>                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                         0
<CHANGES>                               0
<NET-INCOME>                    1,034,944
<EPS-BASIC>                          2.70
<EPS-DILUTED>                           0



</TABLE>
#### Maninder Bhugra, Appellant, v Massachusetts Casualty Insurance Company et al., Respondents.

Decided October 23, 2012

Appeal dismissed, without costs, by the Court of Appeals, sua sponte, upon the ground that the order appealed from does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution.
#### CALLEN v. PENNSYLVANIA R. CO.

Civ. A. No. 4763.

District Court, E. D. Pennsylvania.

Jan. 25, 1946.

B. N. Richter, of Philadelphia, Pa., for plaintiff.

Philip Price, of Philadelphia, Pa., for defendant.

BARD, District Judge.

This is a motion by plaintiff for the production of certain medical reports under Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c. The action was brought to recover damages for injuries to plaintiff allegedly caused by defendant’s negligence.

Plaintiff moved for the production of “copies of all hospital, doctor, clinical, and X-ray reports received by the defendant from any and all sources, including those received from physicians in Toledo, Ohio, pertaining to the plaintiff.”

Defendant objects to the motion on the ground, inter alia, that the motion fails to designate the documents sought with particularity and is otherwise vague and indefinite. I think defendant’s objection is well taken.

*84It is an essential element of a motion to produce documents that those documents which the moving party desires to be produced be designated with reasonable particularity. Peltz v. Carolina Bagging Co., D.C.S.D.N.Y., 1 F.R.D. 443; Vendola Corporation v. Hershey Chocolate Corporation, D.C.S.D.N.Y., 1 F.R.D. 359; United Mercantile Agencies v. Silver Fleet Motor Express, Inc., D.C.W.D.Ky., 1 F.R.D. 709. A' request for all documents in the possession of defendant relating to a particular matter is not sufficiently specific to come within the requirement. Vendóla Corporation v. Hershey Chocolate Corporation, suprá. Unless this requirement is satisfied, a judge granting the motion to produce and the.party against whom the order is directed will be unable to ascertain when the order has been fulfilled. Plaintiff is subjected to no undue hardship by this provision. Rules 26 and 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S. C.A. following sectipn 723c, provide means enabling plaintiff to obtain adequate information to identify the documents desired. Clark v. Chase Nat. Bank of City of New York, D.C.S.D.N.Y., 2 F.R.D. 94.

Plaintiff’s motion for production of documents is, denied.
#### In the Matter of Norse Energy Corp. USA, Appellant, v Town of Dryden et al., Respondents. Dryden Resources Awareness Coalition, Proposed Intervenor.

Submitted July 1, 2013;

decided August 29, 2013

Motion by the American Petroleum Institute et al. for leave to file a brief amici curiae on the motion for leave to appeal herein granted and the brief is accepted as filed.
EXHIBIT 23.2

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
Form S-3 (Nos. 33-13278, 33-27498, 33-45699, 33-58340, 33-50395, 33-51615,
33-65301, 333-08549, 333-15089, 333-15089-01 through -04 and 333-32909), Form
S-4 (Nos. 333-22733, 333-22733-01 and 333-31061) and Form S-8 (Nos. 2-67517,
2-97972, 33-20693, 33-21564, 33-41014, 33-52329, 33-54971, 333-12181, 333-19963,
333-34371, 333-31061, 333-43959 and 333-57427) and in the related Prospectuses
of Bankers Trust Corporation (formerly Bankers Trust New York Corporation) of
our report dated January 23, 1997, (except for Note 28, as to which the date is
March 6, 1997), with respect to the consolidated statements of income,
comprehensive income, changes in stockholders' equity, and cash flows of Bankers
Trust Corporation (formerly Bankers Trust New York Corporation) and Subsidiaries
for the year ended December 31, 1996, prior to their restatement for the 1997
pooling-of-interests with Alex. Brown Incorporated, included in this Annual
Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1998 filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission.


                                                /S/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP
                                                    -----------------------
                                                    Ernst & Young LLP

New York, New York
March 19, 1999


                             Bankers Trust Corporation and its Subsidiaries  127
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF

THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection
with the Quarterly Report of LifeCare Holdings, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, W. Earl Reed,
III, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 220, 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 position and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: June 21, 2006



/s/ W. EARL REED, IIIW. Earl Reed, IIIChief Executive Officer
#### In the Matter of Gabriel J. and Another, Children Alleged to be Neglected. O’Neill H. et al., Respondents; Dainee A., Appellant. (And Another Proceeding.)

Submitted December 24, 2012;

decided January 10, 2013

Motion for leave to appeal from the November 2012 Appellate Division order denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                                   6
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        5,735
<ALLOWANCES>                                            75
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     5,717
<PP&E>                                                 421
<DEPRECIATION>                                         158
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       8,532
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                5,238
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                               425
<OTHER-SE>                                             355
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         8,532
<SALES>                                             34,283
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    34,363
<CGS>                                               30,212
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       32,277
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                     197
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                        889
<INCOME-TAX>                                           (51)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                    940
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                           940
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         0.22
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         0.19
                                              
                                             

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 119 (Tuesday, June 23, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 29719]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-14724]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration


Importer of Controlled Substances; Notice of Application

    Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 958(i), the Attorney General shall, prior to 
issuing a registration under this Section to a bulk manufacturer of a 
controlled substance in schedule I or II and prior to issuing a 
regulation under 21 U.S.C. 952(a)(2) authorizing the importation of 
such substances, provide manufacturers holding registrations for the 
bulk manufacture of the substance an opportunity for a hearing.
    Therefore, in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a), this is notice 
that on May 28, 2009, Aptuit (Allendale) Inc., 75 Commerce Drive, 
Allendale, New Jersey 07401, made application by renewal to the Drug 
Enforcement Administration (DEA) for registration as an importer of the 
basic classes of controlled substances listed in schedule II.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Drug                               Schedule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lisdexamfetamine (1205).....................  II
Noroxymorphone (9668).......................  II
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The company plans to import the basic classes of controlled 
substances for clinical trials and research.
    Any bulk manufacturer who is presently, or is applying to be, 
registered with DEA to manufacture such basic classes of controlled 
substances may file comments or objections to the issuance of the 
proposed registration and may, at the same time, file a written request 
for a hearing on such application pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.43 and in 
such form as prescribed by 21 CFR 1316.47.
    Any such comments or objections should be addressed, in 
quintuplicate, to the Drug Enforcement Administration, Office of 
Diversion Control, Federal Register Representative (ODL), 8701 
Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152; and must be filed no 
later than July 23, 2009.
    This procedure is to be conducted simultaneously with and 
independent of, the procedures described in 21 CFR 
1301.34(b),(c),(d),(e) and (f). As noted in a previous notice published 
in the Federal Register on September 23, 1975, (40 FR 43745-46), all 
applicants for registration to import the basic classes of any 
controlled substances in schedule I or II are, and will continue to be, 
required to demonstrate to the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office 
of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration, that the 
requirements for such registration pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 958(a); 21 
U.S.C. 823(a); and 21 CFR 1301.34(b), (c), (d), (e), and (f) are 
satisfied.

    Dated: June 15, 2009.
Joseph T. Rannazzisi,
Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug 
Enforcement Administration.
[FR Doc. E9-14724 Filed 6-22-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
J-A21024-14

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION – SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P 65.37

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

PENNSYLVANIA

Appellant

v.

LISA KIM K. YOUNG,

Appellee No. 942 EDA 2013

Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence February 1, 2013

In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County

Criminal Division at No(s): CP-51-CR-0003732-2011

BEFORE: BOWES J., OTT, J. and STRASSBURGER,*J.

CONCURRING STATEMENT BY STRASSBURGER, J.:FILED OCTOBER 16, 2014

To the extent that such a light sentence for an assault resulting in a 

horrific injury encourages vigilantism, this case troubles me. However, the 

Majority correctly analyzed the trial court’s decision under our standard of 

review and concluded that there was no abuse of discretion or misapplication 

of the law. Therefore, I join the Majority Memorandum. 

____________________________________________

*

 Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 228 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 228

   Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Financial 
            Services in the One Hundred Sixteenth Congress.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 13, 2019

 Ms. Waters submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
                 the Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
   Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Financial 
            Services in the One Hundred Sixteenth Congress.

    Resolved,

SECTION 1. AMOUNTS FOR COMMITTEE EXPENSES.

    For the expenses of the Committee on Financial Services (hereafter 
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 $17,410,010.00 for the One Hundred 
Sixteenth Congress.

SEC. 2. SESSION LIMITATIONS.

    Of the amount specified in section 1--
            (1) not more than $8,705,005.00 shall be available for 
        expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
        January 3, 2019, and ending immediately before noon on January 
        3, 2020; and
            (2) not more than $8,705,005.00 shall be available for 
        expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
        January 3, 2020, and ending immediately before noon on January 
        3, 2021.

SEC. 3. VOUCHERS.

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

SEC. 4. REGULATIONS.

    Amounts made available under this resolution shall be expended in 
accordance with regulations prescribed by the Committee on House 
Administration.
                                 <all>
```
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Daniel Floyd, Appellant.

Submitted September 4, 2012;

decided September 13, 2012

Motion for assignment of counsel granted and Lynn WL. Fa-hey, Esq., Appellate Advocates, 2 Rector Street, 10th Floor, New *1019York, NY 10006 assigned as counsel to the appellant on the appeal herein.
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORT PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002,18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350





The undersigned hereby certifies that he is the duly appointed and acting Chief Executive Officer of Neoprobe Corporation (the Company) and hereby further certifies as follows:





(1)           The periodic report containing financial statements to which this certificate is an exhibitfully 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 periodic report to which this certificate is an exhibitfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





In witness whereof, the undersigned has executed and delivered this certificate as of the date set forth opposite his signature below.





March 16, 2011
/s/ David C. BuppDavid C. BuppPresident and Chief Executive Officer