alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
FILED

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUL 21 2015
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy
Courts for the District of Columbia
Sigfredo Miranda,
Plaintifl Case: 1:15-cv-01163
V Assigned To : Unassigned

Assign. Date : 7/21/2015

iption: Pro Se Gen. Civil (F
U.S. Government, Description (F)

Defendant.

wee yee eS SH SL

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter is before the Court on review of the plaintiff's pro se complaint and
application to proceed in forma pauperis. The application will be granted and the case will be
dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), which requires the Court to dismiss a complaint upon
a determination that it, among other grounds, is frivolous.

Plaintiff, a resident of the District of Columbia, alleges only that the United States “put
my birth certificate in the stock change an[d} made million[s] of dollar[s] in there.” This
allegation is the type warranting dismissal of the case under § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) as frivolous.
Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). See Best v. Kelly, 39 F.3d 328, 330-31 (D.C. Cir.
1994) (a court may dismiss claims that are “essentially fictitious”-- for example, where they
suggest “bizarre conspiracy theories . . . [or] fantastic government manipulations of their will or
mind”) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted); Crisafi v. Holland, 655 F.2d 1305,
1307-08 (D.C. Cir. 1981) (“A court may dismiss as frivolous complaints . . . postulating events
and circumstances of a wholly fanciful kind.”). A separate order of dismissal accompanies this

Memorandum Opinion.

Date: July (4 , 2015
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 Sentry Petroleum Ltd. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q/A for the period ended August 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "report"), I, Raj Rajeswaran, 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated this 3rd day of March, 2009.

| |     |                                                           
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------
| | BY: | RAJ RAJESWARANRaj Rajeswaran, 
Principal Executive Officer
Prepared by MERRILL CORPORATION




QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

 
 

Exhibit 10.21.1    
  


 
 

AMENDED
  EXHIBIT "A"
  
    To The
  
    GAS PURCHASE CONTRACT
  
    As Of: October 1, 1994
  
    Between
  
    CASCADE NATURAL GAS CORPORATION ("BUYER")
  
    and
  

   IGI RESOURCES, INC. ("SELLER")    
  



Effective
Date of this Exhibit "A":  October 1, 2001 


Ending
Date of this Exhibit "A":  March 31, 2002 



	DELIVERY POINT	 	As defined in Section 1.01(g) of the Contract noted above
	 	 	 
	MAXIMUM DAILY CONTRACT QUANTITY(MMBtu)	 	7,446
	 	 	 
	DELIVERY POINT SELLING PRICE	 	1/







	1.
	The
Delivery Point Selling Price shall be equal to four dollars and sixty eight cents [*]U.S. dry) per MMBtu at AECO-C Hub plus the actual cost
of firm NOVA re-delivery service and firm ANG receipt and re-delivery service plus any applicable allowance for fuel-in-kind associated with such
services. 




[*] = Confidential Information




	 	 	"BUYER"

CASCADE NATURAL GAS CORPORATION
	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	By:	 	/s/ King Oberg

	 	 	Name:	 	King Oberg

	 	 	Title:	 	Vice President, Gas Supply

	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	"SELLER"

IGI RESOURCES, INC.
	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	By:	 	/s/ Randy Schultz

	 	 	Name:	 	Randy Schultz

	 	 	Title:	 	President












QuickLinks



Exhibit 10.21.1


AMENDED EXHIBIT "A" To The GAS PURCHASE CONTRACT As Of: October 1, 1994 Between CASCADE NATURAL GAS CORPORATION ("BUYER") and IGI RESOURCES, INC. ("SELLER")
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF SETECH, INC. FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1998
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                             796
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   11,013
<ALLOWANCES>                                       157
<INVENTORY>                                     26,079
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                38,375
<PP&E>                                           5,074
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,490
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  47,836
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           12,400
<BONDS>                                          1,729
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            57
<OTHER-SE>                                       7,681
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    47,836
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                88,920
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   82,574
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,155
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   127
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,053
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    171
<INCOME-TAX>                                       116
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 55
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        55
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.01
        

</TABLE>
G3 ,US3 0!

July 13, 201s
C out of C wei ne | iN
fo. Bie 13301 pee pels
apite tadion
Austin Tx 181) RECEIVED IN
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
. 5
RE: Villareal, Jesus Rebevto Mare
Abel Acosta, Clerk

Tr. Ct No. OL- CK 00
tbae8y483-0F DOODHI3-A

Deav Court,

On, &-I5-a0s

of rece aa fijenation Se he gare oy notice
ov Writ of Habeas eee Psy os ‘there 2

\cacti on fov \
receive @ "pn

possi Wy 2 ey oo
‘Jace of o" ‘Ure contentS Pues a1ee$, OW). fe 5
ser

tT Ye Una
reek help as me. Pleasd Peon!
your 4 He, rion an

A 04 would be oF 4°
U2st. Thank you in  duahee Sov
Meter, Please sens your cesponse | in writing

address Viste helow.
“Sora RV llarveal 444570

Clements Unit
A\od\ Spay sAl
Amarillo , Gq Wipr- Lob
EXHIBIT
23.1














Consent
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm








The Board
of Directors


RehabCare
Group, Inc:





We
consent to the incorporation by reference in registration statements Nos.
33-67944, 33-82106, 33-82048, 333-11311, 333-120005, and 333-138628 on Form S-8
of RehabCare Group, Inc. (“the Company”) of our report dated March 10, 2009 with
respect to the consolidated balance sheets of the Company as of December 31,
2008 and 2007, and the related consolidated statements of earnings,
stockholders’ equity and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year
period ended December 31, 2008, and the effectiveness of internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2008, which report appears in the
December 31, 2008 annual report on Form 10-K of the Company.





Our
report refers to the adoption of Financial Accounting Standards Board
Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income
Taxes, effective January 1, 2007.





/s/ KPMG
LLP








St.
Louis, Missouri


March 10,
2009
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-40677

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MARIA LETICIA GUTIERREZ-OROZCO, also known as Leticia GutierrezOrosco,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:14-CR-394

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Maria Leticia Gutierrez-Orozco appeals the 46-month sentence imposed 

following her guilty plea conviction for being found in the United States after 

a previous deportation. For the first time on appeal, she contends that the 

district court plainly erred in imposing a 16-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. 

§ 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(i) based on her prior federal convictions for conspiracy to 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

July 20, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 14-40677 Document: 00513122110 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/20/2015
No. 14-40677

2

distribute 50 or more grams of methamphetamine and conspiracy to distribute 

500 or more grams of cocaine because the statute of conviction, 21 U.S.C. § 846, 

does not require proof of commercial activity or proof of an overt act.

This argument is foreclosed by our holdings in United States v. MartinezLugo, 782 F.3d 198, 204-05 (5th Cir. 2015), United States v. Rodriguez-Bernal, 

783 F.3d 1002, 1003, 1008 (5th Cir. 2015), and United States v. RodriguezEscareno, 700 F.3d 751, 754-55 (5th Cir. 2012). Accordingly, Gutierrez-Orozco 

has shown no clear or obvious error with regard to her sentence. See Puckett 

v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009).

AFFIRMED. 

 Case: 14-40677 Document: 00513122110 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/20/2015
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 4.11

                              CERTIFICATE OF TRUST
                                       OF
                      FORD MOTOR COMPANY CAPITAL TRUST III


                  The undersigned Trustees of Ford Motor Company Capital Trust
III (the "Trust"), pursuant to the Delaware Business Trust Act (12 Del. C.
ss.3801, et seq.), HEREBY CERTIFY:

                  1. Name. The name of the business trust formed hereby is Ford
Motor Company Capital Trust III.

                  2. Delaware Trustee. The name and business address of the
Delaware Trustee of the Trust in the State of Delaware is Chase Manhattan Bank
USA, National Association, c/o JPMorgan Chase, Attention: Institutional Trust
Services, 500 Stanton Christiana Road, Floor3/OPS4, Newark, Delaware 19713.

                  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, being all of the Trustees
of the Trust, have executed this Certificate of Trust as of the 30th day of
November, 2001


                                             DELAWARE TRUSTEE:
                                             Chase Manhattan Bank USA,
                                               National Association



                                             By: /s/ John J. Cashin
                                                --------------------
                                                Name:  John J. Cashin
                                                Title: Vice President




                                             TRUSTEES:

                                             /s/ Douglas J. Cropsey
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             Douglas J. Cropsey

                                             /s/ Louis J. Ghilardi
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             Louis J. Ghilardi
@misc{1215191,
  author = {Stephen Zimmerman and Andrew K. Persily},
  title = {Plumbing System Models for a Set of Reference Buildings},
  year = {2023},
  month = {2023-09-21 04:09:00},
  publisher = {Technical Note (NIST TN), National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD},
  url = {https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=956413},
  doi = {https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.TN.2266},
  language = {en},
}
#### In re: Myron ORLINSKY, Debtor. Peter Patraka, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Myron Orlinsky, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 09-16392.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

March 9, 2011.

John G. Crabtree, George R. Baise, Jr., Crabtree *&*Associates, P.A., Key Biscayne, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellant

Roarke Owen Maxwell, Andrew C. Hall, Hall Lamb & Hall, Miami, FL, for Defen-danb-Appellee.

Before TJOFLAT, BARKETT and FAY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant sued appellee in state court and obtained a $6 million dollar judgment which was appealed without a supersedeas bond. Apparently a business arrangement had gone sour and, thus, this conflict arose between brothers-in-law. While the matter was on appeal appellant attempted to execute the judgment with no success. He then filed a petition for involuntary bankruptcy against appellee. During the pen-dency of the bankruptcy case, the state court judgment was reversed. The Bankruptcy Court, *sua sponte,*dismissed the bankruptcy proceeding. Appellee then sought costs and attorneys’ fees which were granted pursuant to Section 303(i)(l) of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. This was done by way of an oral ruling delivered after a hearing before the Bankruptcy Judge.

On appeal to the United States District Court, appellant urged reversal on multiple grounds. The District Court reviewed the matter in detail and entered a very comprehensive order affirming the ruling by the Bankruptcy Court. After reviewing the briefs and record and hearing the argument of counsel, we affirm the ruling of the Bankruptcy Court for the reasons set forth in the ORDER of the District Court dated December 8, 2009.

AFFIRMED.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Christopher J. Doxey, Appellant.

[976 NYS2d 918]

Appeal from a judgment of the Orleans County Court (James E Punch, J.), rendered July 13, 2012. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted burglary in the second degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of attempted burglary in the second degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 140.25 [2]), defendant contends that the waiver of the right to appeal is not valid and challenges the severity of the sentence. Although we agree with defendant that the waiver of the right to appeal is invalid because the *1365perfunctory inquiry made by County Court was “insufficient to establish that the court ‘engage[d] the defendant in an adequate colloquy to ensure that the waiver of the right to appeal was a knowing and voluntary choice’ ” *(People v Brown,*296 AD2d 860, 860 [2002], *lv denied*98 NY2d 767 [2002]; *see People v Hamilton,*49 AD3d 1163, 1164 [2008]), we nevertheless conclude that the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. Present — Smith, J.P, Fahey, Lindley, Valentino and Whalen, JJ.
----

|   | (1) | the                  quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Gulf Western Petroleum Corporation                  for                  the period ended February 28, 2007 (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 operations of                  Georgia                  Exploration, Inc. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | /                    s                    / Donald L. Sytsma                       |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                                               |
|   | Donald                    L. Sytsma                                                |
|   | Chief                    Financial Officer, Treasurer and Secretary                |
|   | (principal                    financial and accounting                    officer) |

----
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Juan Torres, Appellant.

[976 NYS2d 409]

Appeal by the defendant from a resentence of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Griffin, J.), imposed March 30, 2012, upon his conviction of attempted murder in the second degree, assault in the first degree (two counts), and reckless endangerment in the first degree, af*761ter a nonjury trial, the resentence being a period of postrelease supervision in addition to the determinate terms of imprisonment previously imposed by the same court (Roman, J.) on April 30, 2001.

Ordered that the resentence is affirmed.

Since the defendant had not yet completed the previously imposed terms of imprisonment when he was resentenced, his resentencing to a mandatory period of postrelease supervision did not subject him to double jeopardy or violate his right to due process of law *(see People v Lingle,*16 NY3d 621 [2011]; *People v Rogers,*105 AD3d 776 [2013]; *People v Dawkins, 87*AD3d 550 [2011]). Dillon, J.E, Leventhal, Chambers and Miller, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Richard L. Markee, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Form 10-Q of VS Holdings, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the
registrant and we have:

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures
to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report
is being prepared;

b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial
reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles;

c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this
report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants
fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and

4. The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants
ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that
involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.

Date:
September 30, 2009



|    |  |                                     
|--- |  | ------------------------------------
|By: |  | /s/ Richard L. Markee               
|    |  | Richard L. Markee                   
|    |  | Chief Executive Officer and Chairman
@article{1211216,
  author = {Kin (Charles) Cheung and Barry J O'Sullivan},
  title = {A field-effect transistor-based room-temperature quantum current source},
  year = {2023},
  number = {122},
  month = {2023-05-04 04:05:00},
  publisher = {Applied Physics Letters},
  url = {https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=936002},
  doi = {https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0146398},
  language = {en},
}
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 22-0403

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

WILLIAM HOMER MCCLELLAN,

Defendant and Appellant. 

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including December 6, 2023, within which to prepare, 

file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

October 30 2023

10/30/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0403
Exhibit 35.1
 
 1123
– Servicer Compliance Statement
 Transactions
Listed With SEC
 
 
 
 I, Herb
Gover, Senior Vice President of CitiMortgage, Inc., certify that:
 
 
 (a) A
review of CitiMortgage, Inc. (the “Servicer”) activities during the 12 month
period ending December 31, 2008 (“Reporting Period”) and of its performance
under the applicable servicing agreement as identified on Schedule A has been
made under my supervision.
 
 (b) To
the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all
of its obligations under the applicable servicing agreement in all material
respects throughout the Reporting Period.
 
 
 
 February
      20, 2009By:
                  /s/ Herb
      GoverName:
                  Herb
      GoverTitle:
                  Senior
      Vice President, CitiMortgage, Inc.Senior
      Officer in Charge of Servicing




Schedule A
                        SEC
      Listed TransactionsSecurity
                      Investor
      Code
                      Primary
      Servicer
                      Master
      Servicer
                      Trust
      AdministratorCMSI
      2008-01
                      9336-9341
                      X
                      
                      XCMSI
      2008-02
                      9344-9349
                      X
                      
                      XSLC
      2008-1
                      -
                      
                      
                      XSLC
      2008-2
                      -
                      
                      
                      X