alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

IN THE MATTER OF A MEMBER §
OF THE BAR OF THE SUPREME § No. 339, 2015
COURT OF THE STATE OF
DELAWARE:

ERIC C. HOWARD,
Petitioner.

IN THE MATTER OF A MEMBER
OF THE BAR OF THE SUPREME
COURT OF THE STATE OF
DELAWARE:

No. 344, 2015

Or Or CO? COR Or OO? 02 60? 4D?

§ Board Case Nos. 111681-B
ERIC C. HOWARD, § and 112269-B
Respondent. §

Submitted: July 10, 2015
Decided: July 22, 2015

Before HOLLAND, VALIHURA, and VAUGHN, Justices.
ORDER

This 22TM day of July 2015, it appears to the Court that:

(1) | The Court has two related matters pending before it. The first is a
petition filed by Eric Howard, Esquire requesting the Court to transfer his Bar
membership from active status to disability inactive status. He also requests a
stay of any pending disciplinary proceedings, except the matter that is currently
pending before the Court. According to the petition, Howard currently is

suffering mental or physical incapacity which prevents him from both the


practice of law and the ability to assist in his defense of any pending disciplinary
matters. The Office of Disciplinary Counsel (“ODC”) does not oppose
Howard’s petition.

(2) | The second matter is a lawyer disciplinary proceeding. On July 2,
2015, the Board on Professional Responsibility filed a report with this Court
dated June 26, 2015. The Board’s report recommends, among other things, that
Howard be publicly reprimanded and serve an eighteen month period of
probation with several conditions, including payment of costs to the ODC. A
copy of the Board’s report is attached to this order. Neither the ODC nor
Howard has filed any objections to the Board’s report.

(3) | The Court has considered these matters carefully. With respect to
the disciplinary proceeding, we find the Board’s recommendation of a public
reprimand to be appropriate. We, therefore, accept the Board’s findings and
recommendation for discipline and incorporate the Board’s findings and
recommendation by reference. With the exception of the condition requiring
Howard to pay costs to the ODC, we conclude that the eighteen month period of
probation with conditions is unnecessary in light of our decision to grant

Howard’s petition to transfer to disability inactive status. If and when Howard

i)


petitions the Court to return to active status, the need for probation with
conditions can be addressed at that time.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the Board’s findings and
recommendation of a public reprimand are hereby ACCEPTED. Howard shall
pay the costs of that proceeding to the ODC. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that
Howard shall immediately be transferred to disability inactive status under Rule
19(b) of the Rules of Disciplinary Procedure. Any other pending disciplinary
matters are stayed. The ODC shall disseminate this Order in accordance with
Rule 14 of the Delaware Lawyers’ Rules of Disciplinary Procedure.

BY THE COURT:

(ee Cd La
CU Justice C
R

y | _ WR $3, 401-1

x
(Reshy Xo ender Rom Nohoo te Lave’ )

Ceahflate N Seence

7 ais"

LT Geran Doushs Will to hacby SMAR Shai « true

And cornered Copy or ns docunent ‘Reply ts Order Roo

Moktow to Leave? has Seen gent to Chns Dame -Waenrs

County Disterek Cheek - Respuadent woe Feankla Rowsts

Texas P0vHR 7/18/'5 by phony such document wo U.S.

mm\ 7/9 [is -

signed Smo a. HD a fio /is

Kean d- Will ¥ 108 10F

Els Und
ywan Fer 780
Huntsville, \eaas 92393

3.0 3


Z 3 mys
\o Clerk £ Cond © Cerenun\ pore

ECENED IN

GOURT OF CRRINAL APPEALS
JUL 23 28

Enclosed. ajpel Acosta Clerk

\ @ Reply ‘ |
Rea\ to Me order om Nehow te Lowe’

& 84 NO} - ‘O} Ron &
fo be Med, ROR Beane Toushs Heil

~Vhank you!

Gran DS. Wi) ® vesr0%

Fluy ‘Unik

49 UAT ¥m 4F0
Huntsvie y \eKns 27g43, |



A Qo " WR Fp AoV-ov
Max D.AAL Helbeor y Tn dhe Yeyas Couey
ws! » °C ;
Coris Dame - Hares County C Rama) Ae os
P

Distarcd Ci ew

4

In Neply ko Me ORDER Nom Motion to
Lowe by Pre Covel ry MatheR F3AG\-O1

— Tame matter between Baan D. Wall aelator and

Cc) ,
Chays Damed- Haas County Distack Caan ane Cours hed
op WS Aeciston Cogder Chas Damed Lespendaenk to etree

marl WAYS VON Record, submy Adve Copy oN’ A ‘ney Red
OWMER hak Aesigvarted issues to be iMoeshgMed on State Relic
has noi Meda 104 wert Apprcxtron wh Ways Coury.

salt Requests 9 Reply to Ahe courts order thar he: be provides
ease A copy oP Al Kes ponden’ s Teplys fw wy Answer to she
Conk s oRdeR and also Request} War iP ae WR of Weeou 8 .
COLEUS ApPhoriion amdad \AST8AIA Lt supplement and & Mem ocandun)
be forunraded to She Covek of Criminal Apps WA be andes)
ae BH the sppettunrly te Aloud The 20st casterc}- court to |
AS A TASONAIR And timely Rndirg OG eAS ANA CoNUSOVS *
of \Adsnd Hill be Swen a Copy A\ Lal such Radigs and
coadusioas 58 Aha he TAY hye iP necesSARY acess
Jo Tend Gules 8 Caromua) Froceduee W.07 and WeHad Vules oP Appellile
(rocedune 13.49 73.4.5. VN riochally Med has 1.07 werk
ADSTIRIA 5/31/13 NA AN BAeRWade- orreqwa] desiquadrow oPisey

WAS Pale Sraned east by Judge Devde Colhad Tune 4,203 and Red
@ &3 ;



WR-3S4O1: Ol
x

x
Legy xo Vhe Onder WH Micha te Lewes

Jone A ) AOD by Wake County Drstarcd Crevk, Gian

Hi laler marled an Supplerrend AGEIEANLON, dy werk 12388274
ConS1S'ino) oP YyAaddhtrownl EQORS of neMechue agsrsl ance
of counsel on 9 fae fia Aowr Reo reaept Kesas stakras

ik WAS Reaatued by Hares County Diotach Cdeak Chars Dyare)
on 4 29 [ty ceefed mar) vor Retven recrepl wea PUMICE? LS

as (hors. ayia nO S06, OaQh soa

Recyevea by D howow

emorAadun &

Lil's supplement ex2oas Also consisted On ee en
g-exdrts.. Ell ask that fadivm his supplement ennoes
be Heard Nesh by: bovhenunks disterct coved Ard Cour oP

ad
ALY FG F89
Wontav Ve, Texas

7393

pane son & Sey TOA WR MAA, Gy

CeabMeare o& Seeyire

Wext PASS
2 >
Order entered July 21, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-01028-CR

ADOLPH JUNIOR MENJIVAR, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 291st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F-1357185-U

ORDER

Appellant’s Motion for Extension of Time to File Reply Brief is GRANTED.

Appellant’s time to file a Reply Brief is extended to August 20, 2015.

/s/ BILL WHITEHILL

JUSTICE
@article{1210061,
  author = {Jennifer Berry and Mary Gregg and Amanda Koepke and Reta Newman and Kavita Jeerage},
  title = {Concentration of Ignitable Liquid Residue from Simulated Fire Debris by Dynamic Vapor Microextraction: Sensitivity to Instrument Settings and Debris Characteristics},
  year = {2023},
  number = {35},
  month = {2023-07-06 04:07:00},
  publisher = {Forensic Chemistry},
  url = {https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=934657},
  doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forc.2023.100511},
  language = {en},
}
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 Middle Kingdom Alliance Corp. (the Company) on Form 10Q, for the three
month period ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Bernard J. Tanenbaum 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 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 for the period certified.



|                            
|----------------------------
|/s/ Bernard J. Tanenbaum III
|Bernard J. Tanenbaum III    
|Chief Executive Officer     

May 14, 2007
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14**  **- 4246** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. FAYSURI VILLAMIL , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh
. Terrence W. Boyle , District Judge. ( 5:13

- cr - 00277

- BO

- 1 )

Submitted : November 21, 2014 Decided: November 26, 2014

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and WYNN , Circuit Judges.

Vacated and remand ed by un published per curiam opinion
. Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Stephen C. Gordon, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. Thomas G. Walker, United States Attorney, Jennifer P. May

- Parker, Yvonne V. Watford

- McKinney, Ass istant United States Attorney s , Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Faysuri Villamil pled guilty to wire fraud , in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343 (2012). The district court

s entenced her to a Guidelines sentence of thirty months’ imprisonment. Villamil appeal s , claiming that the district court failed to adequately explain its reasons for denying her request for a downward variance. We vacate and remand for further proceeding s consistent with this opinion
. In explaining a sentence, the district court is not required to “robotically tick through
. . . every subsection [of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) (2012)] , particularly when imposing a within

- Guide lines sentence.” United States v. Powell , 650 F.3d 388, 395 (4th Cir. 2011) (internal quotation marks omitted). However, the court “must place on the record an ‘ individualized
assessment ’ based on the particular facts of the case before it . . . [that] provide [s] a rationale tailored to t he particular case at hand and adequate to permit ‘ meaningful appellate review. ’ ” United States v. Carter , 564 F.3d 325, 330 (4th Cir. 2009) (quoting Gall v. United States , 552 U.S. 38, 5 0 (2007)) (internal citation and footnote omitted). Villamil argued at sentencing that a downward variance was warranted because her conviction subjected her to deportation, which would result in great hardship to her , and because she had a good work history and no criminal record.3 Although the district court mentioned so me of these issues during its questioning of Villamil , the court gave no indication why it rejected her arguments for a downward variance and selected the sentence it did , other than the statement that the chosen sentence was within the Guidelines range. This statement is insufficient to provide an individualized explanation of the chosen sentence. Accordingly, we vacate Villamil’s sentence and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. We express no opinion about the merits of Villamil’s request for a variance
. 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 . VACATED AND REMAND ED
@article{107641,
  author = {Cher Davis and L Mathias and Jeffrey Gilman and D Schiraldi and Paul Trulove and T Suttos and H DeLong},
  title = {Effects of Melt-Processing Conditions on the Quality of Poly(ethylene terephthalate) Montmorillonite Clay Nanocomposites},
  year = {2002},
  number = {40 No. 23},
  month = {2002-12-01},
  publisher = {Journal Of Polymer Science},
  language = {en},
}
97-741.

#### State ex rel. Hall v. Ross Correctional Inst.

In Mandamus. This cause originated in this court on the filing of a complaint for a writ of mandamus or, in the alternative, for writ of prohibition and was considered in a manner prescribed by law. Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that this cause be, and hereby is, dismissed.
Exhibit
      23.1 Consent of Independent Registered Public Accountant






SHATSWELL,
      MacLEOD & COMPANY, P.C.


CERTIFIED
      PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS







To
      the
      Board of Directors


Northeast
      Bancorp


Lewiston,
      Maine





CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





We
      consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
      Form
      S-8 (No. 333-85206), (No. 33-32095),  (No. 33-58538), (No. 33-32096),
      (No. 33-87976) and (No. 333-135452) of Northeast Bancorp of our report dated
      September 6, 2007, related to our audit of the consolidated financial statements
      of Northeast Bancorp and Subsidiary included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K
      for the year ended June 30, 2007.





West
                Peabody, Massachusetts
            /s/
                SHATSWELL, MacLEOD & COMPANY, P.C.September
                26, 2007
            SHATSWELL,
                MacLEOD & COMPANY,
                P.C.
@article{1212346,
  author = {Orion Kafka and Jake Benzing and Nicholas Derimow and Philipp Schumacher and Lucas Koepke and Chad Beamer and Donald Godfrey and Nik Hrabe},
  title = {Effects of as-built surface with varying number of contour passes on high-cycle fatigue behavior of additively manufactured nickel alloy 718},
  year = {2023},
  month = {2023-08-05 04:08:00},
  publisher = {International Journal of Fatigue},
  url = {https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=936456},
  doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2023.107872},
  language = {en},
}
31338 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 30, 2009 / Notices 

and equipment. Issued in Romulus, Michigan 

on May 29, 2009. 

Matthew J. Thys, 

Manager, Detroit Airports District Office FAA, 

Great Lakes Region. 

[FR Doc. E9–15319 Filed 6–29–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Internal Revenue Service 

Renewable Charter and Filing Letters; 

Correction 

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS); 

Tax Exempt and Government Entities 

Division. 

ACTION: Correction to a notice of 

Renewal Charter and Filing Letters. 

SUMMARY: This document contains a 

correction to a notice of renewal charter 

and filing letters, which was filed and 

available for public inspection with the 

Office of the Federal Register on June 

24, 2009 and published on June 25, 

2009. The renewal charter was filed on 

June 16, 2009, with the Committee on 

Finance of the United States Senate, the 

Committee on Ways and Means of the 

U.S. House of Representatives, and the 

Library of Congress. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Need for Correction 

As submitted to the Federal Register, 

the renewal charter is missing as well as 

the previously mentioned filing letters. 

Correction of Filing 

Accordingly, the filing of the renewal 

charter is corrected by including the 

charter and the charter’s filing letters. 

Dated: June 24, 2009. 

Steven J. Pyrek, 

Designated Federal Official, Tax Exempt and 

Government Entities Division, Internal 

Revenue Service. 

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES6
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 30, 2009 / Notices 31339 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES6EN30JN09.000</GPH>
31340 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 30, 2009 / Notices 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES6EN30JN09.001</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 30, 2009 / Notices 31341 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES6EN30JN09.002</GPH>
31342 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 30, 2009 / Notices 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES6EN30JN09.003</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 30, 2009 / Notices 31343 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES6EN30JN09.004</GPH>
31344 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 30, 2009 / Notices 

[FR Doc. E9–15428 Filed 6–25–09; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 4830–01–C 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES6EN30JN09.005</GPH>
STATE OF MINNESOTA 

IN SUPREME COURT 

A14-0750 

State of Minnesota, 

Respondent, 

vs. 

Martin David Hutchins, Jr., 

Appellant. 

ORDER 

OFFICE OF 

APPELLATE COURTS 

JUL 2 0 2015 

FILED 

It now appearing that the petition for further review of the decision of the Court of 

Appeals in this matter was improvidently granted by this court, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the order of this court filed December 30, 2014, 

granting review of the October 20,2014, decision of the Court of Appeals be, and the same 

is, vacated and the appeal is dismissed. 

Dated: July 20, 2015 BY THE COURT: 

Lorie S. Gildea 

Chief Justice
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-1683

STEPHEN G. STERNER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

WOODFOREST NATIONAL BANK; BRYAN ABRAHAM, Woodforest National 

Bank Representative; LISA COTTON, Woodforest National Bank 

Ex. Vice President,

Defendants - Appellees.

No. 14-1684

STEPHEN GEORGE STERNER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

WOODFOREST NATIONAL BANK; WOODFOREST BANK,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Martin K. Reidinger, 

District Judge. (1:13-cv-00229-MR-DLH; 1:14-cv-00092-MR-DLH)

Submitted: October 21, 2014 Decided: October 23, 2014

Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
2

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Stephen G. Sterner, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3

PER CURIAM:

In these consolidated appeals, Stephen G. Sterner 

challenges the district court’s orders denying his motion to 

amend his complaint in the action underlying Appeal No. 14-1684, 

and denying his motion for reconsideration of the district 

court’s orders: (1) dismissing the actions underlying both 

appeals; and (2) denying his motion to amend. We have reviewed 

the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm 

for the reasons stated by the district court. See Sterner v. 

Woodforest Nat’l Bank, Nos. 1:13-cv-00229-MR-DLH, 1:14-cv-00092-

MR-DLH (W.D.N.C. June 17, 2014; July 3, 2014). 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
# table103_q12.4_naics
Cause No. 01-15-00246-CR

DORSEY NATHANIEL CARR, III * IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

APPELLANT *

*

V. * FIRST DISTRICT

*

THE STATE OF TEXAS, *

APPELLEE * HOUSTON, TEXAS

MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE APPELLANT'S BRIEF

Comes now DORSEY NATHANIEL CARR, III, through his

attorney of record John J. Davis, and files this Motion For

An Extension of Time in which to file Appellant's Brief

pursuant to Rules 10.5(b) and 38.6(d) of the Texas Rules of

Appellate Procedure. In support of this Motion, Appellant

shows the Court the following:

I.

TRIAL COURT: 239th District Court of Brazoria County, Texas,

Judge Patrick Sebesta, presiding.

CAUSE NUMBER: 74,219

STYLE: The State of Texas vs. Dorsey Nathaniel Carr, III

DATE OF JUDGMENT: February 20, 2015

CONVICTION (OFFENSE): Felony DWI Enhanced

SENTENCE: Ten (10) years TDCJ-ID.

DEADLINE FOR FILING APPELLANT'S BRIEF: July 22, 2015

LENGTH OF TIME REQUESTED FOR EXTENSION: August 21, 2015

(30 days)

NUMBER OF PREVIOUS EXTENSIONS GRANTED: None

ACCEPTED

01-15-00246-CR

FIRST COURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS

7/21/2015 1:40:02 PM

CHRISTOPHER PRINE

CLERK

 FILED IN 1st COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 7/21/2015 1:40:02 PM CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE Clerk
II.

REASONS FOR EXTENSION

Appellant's request for an extension is based upon the

following facts:

Counsel is the defense counsel for the Brazoria County

Drug Court which meets every week and requires additional

time for client conferences. Counsel is also the appointed

defense counsel at probation reviews in the 149th and 239th

District Courts as well as the appointed defense counsel for

the jail dockets in County Court at Law Number 1 of Brazoria

County. Counsel's case load and the settings and requirements

of the drug court and the review and jail dockets coupled

with the need of a sole practitioner to meet with clients and

maintain some semblance of a cash flow have resulted in

Counsel being unable to finish the brief by the stated

deadline.

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Appellant prays the

Court grant this MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE

APPELLANT'S BRIEF and extend the time for filing the Brief

until August 21, 2015.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ John J. Davis

John J. Davis

P.O. Box 787

2 05 N. Chenango

Angleton, Texas 77516-0787

SBN 05515500

Telephone: (979) 849-4362

d.attorne@sbcglobal.net

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

This is to certify that a true and correct copy of the

above MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE APPELLANT'S BRIEF

was served to:

Jeri Yenne

Criminal District Attorney

Brazoria County Courthouse

111 East Locust, Suite 408A

Angleton, Texas 77515

ATTENTION: David Bosserman

VIA FACSIMILE (979) 864-1525

on the 21st day of July, 2015

/s/ John J. Davis

John J. Davis

Attorney for Appellant
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JAN-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 FEB-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   JAN-31-2000
<CASH>                                          55,457
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,716
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (834)
<INVENTORY>                                     39,652
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               113,564
<PP&E>                                          70,538
<DEPRECIATION>                                  46,577
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 142,119
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           58,920
<BONDS>                                          2,366
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           120
<OTHER-SE>                                      77,003
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   142,119
<SALES>                                        329,384
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               293,011
<CGS>                                          143,682
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  279,369
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    58
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                (603)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 15,541
<INCOME-TAX>                                     6,216
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              9,325
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     9,325
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.89
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.82



</TABLE>