alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16

- 10487 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.

LUIS RIVERA

,

Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:15

- CR

- 51

- 1

Before DENNIS, PRADO, and OWEN, Circuit Judge s.
PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Luis Rivera 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).

Rivera has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently develope d to allow

us to make a fair evaluation of Rivera ’s claim of ine ffective assistance of

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED
December 20 , 2016
Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 16-10487 Document: 00513804370 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/20/2016No. 16

- 10487

2 counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claim without prejudice to

collateral review. See United States v. Isgar , 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014 )

. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record
reflected therein, as well as Rivera ’s response. We concur with counsel’s

assess ment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review.
Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused
from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See

5 TH C IR

. R . 42.2. Case: 16-10487 Document: 00513804370 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/20/2016
Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB   Document 121   Filed 10/19/11   Page 1 of 3 PageID: 4131

Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB   Document 121   Filed 10/19/11   Page 2 of 3 PageID: 4132

Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB   Document 121   Filed 10/19/11   Page 3 of 3 PageID: 4133
Case 2:11-cv-03671-WHW-MCA Document 40 Filed 06/25/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 536
Exhibit 32



CERTIFICATION OF THE

PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Eric Johnson, the CEO of First Responder Products Inc., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of First Responder Products Inc. on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended April 30, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of First Responder Products Inc.



|                        |     |                                  
|----------------------- | --- | ---------------------------------
|Date:     June 14, 2007 | By: | /s/ Eric Johnson                 
|                        |     | Eric Johnson                     
|                        |     | Chief Executive Officer/President



I, Richard Reincke, the CFO of First Responder Products Inc., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of First Responder Products Inc. on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended April 30, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of First Responder Products Inc.



|                        |     |                        
|----------------------- | --- | -----------------------
|Date:     June 14, 2007 | By: | /s/  Richard Reincke   
|                        |     | Richard Reincke        
|                        |     | Chief Financial Officer





1
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D18-4623

_____________________________

LILLIAN THURMAN,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Jackson County.

Christopher N. Patterson, Judge.

September 13, 2019

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

RAY, C.J., and B.L. THOMAS and ROWE, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Steven L. Seliger, Assistant 

Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5147 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5147

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
   at 23055 Sherman Way in West Hills, California, as the ``Evan Asa 
                    Ashcraft Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 24, 2004

Mr. Waxman (for himself, Mr. Lewis of California, Ms. Linda T. Sanchez 
  of California, Mr. Lantos, and Ms. Watson) introduced the following 
     bill; which was referred to the Committee on Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
   at 23055 Sherman Way in West Hills, California, as the ``Evan Asa 
                    Ashcraft Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. EVAN ASA ASHCRAFT POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 23055 Sherman Way in West Hills, California, shall be known 
and designated as the ``Evan Asa Ashcraft Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the Evan Asa 
Ashcraft Post Office Building.
                                 <all>
```
911 A.2d 64

#### MICHELLE ILIADIS, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS-MOVANTS, v. WAL-MART STORES, INC., ET AL., DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

November 21, 2006.

ORDERED that the motion for leave to appeal is granted.
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 Grace 4, Inc. (the “Registrant”) on Form
10-Q for the period ended February 28, 2009 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Virginia K. Sourlis,
Principal Executive Officer and the Principal Financial Officer of the
Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my
knowledge:




(1) the
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and




(2) the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the
Registrant.




Dated:  March
18, 2009





Grace
      4, Inc.By:
              /s/ VIRGINIA K. SOURLISVirginia
      K. SourlisPresident(Principal
      Executive Officer)(Principal
      Financial Officer)
Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB Document 260-2 Filed 12/21/12 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 9767
Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB Document 260-2 Filed 12/21/12 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 9768
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
  1.
    
    the report on Form 10-Q of Viad Corp for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2008 (the
Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and
 2.
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of Viad Corp.
 Date: November 7, 2008
    By /s/ Ellen M. IngersollEllen M. IngersollChief Financial Officer
In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06-22-00102-CR

IN RE JAMIE LEE BLEDSOE

Original Mandamus Proceeding

Before Morriss, C.J., Stevens and van Cleef, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Justice van Cleef
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Jamie Lee Bledsoe, proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus. Upon 

reading Bledsoe’s petition, we infer that he is complaining of a ruling in the trial court denying 

Bledsoe’s request for habeas corpus relief.1 Bledsoe has failed to provide this Court with any 

record upon which the relief he requests could be granted. 

While Bledsoe has filed copies of several documents, we find nothing in the record to 

establish that he has asked the trial court for any relief. The relator is obligated to “provid[e] this 

Court with a sufficient record to establish his right to mandamus relief.” Walker v. Packer, 827 

S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding). Hence, there is nothing this Court could 

compel the trial court to do. Further, if we were to infer that Relator seeks continued review of 

discretionary matters already presented and decided in his past direct appeal and habeas corpus 

proceedings, mandamus is not an appropriate vehicle. 

We deny the relief sought.

Charles van Cleef

Justice

Date Submitted: August 3, 2022

Date Decided: August 4, 2022

Do Not Publish

1Bledsoe’s petition says he “received a ‘white card’ from the Court of Criminal Appeals, where they dismissed the 

writ [of habeas corpus] without written order.” Again, Bledsoe has provided no documents to substantiate these 

assertions.
#### The America.1 Moran *v.*The America.

*(District Court, E. D. New York.*

June 22, 1886.)

1. Collision—Two Tugs—One at Rest Near Line oe Piers—Attempt to Pass Inside—Fault.

The tug M. was lying at rest in the East river, some 150 feet from the line of the piers, when the tug A., coming down the river, ported in an attempt to pass between the M. and the piers, and collided with the M. *Heldfimi,*if the original course of the A. would have carried her outside of the M., the A. was in fault for porting. The A. insisted that her porting was when the vessels were close together, and collision was inevitable. *Held,*in that event, that the A. was in fault for not starboarding in time to pass outside of the M.; and, in either view, the A. was solely responsible for the collision.

2. Same—Vessel at Rest—Applicability of Rule 19.

Rule 19 does not apply where the vessel having the other on her starboard hand is at rest.

In Admiralty.

*Carpenter & Mosher,*for libelant.

*Biddle & Ward,*for claimants.

1

 Reported by R. D. & Wyllys Benedict, Esqs., of the New York bar.

Benedict, J.

Under the existing circumstances, clearly proved, it was the duty of the America to pass under the stern of the Ida Miller, and not across her bow. I incline to the opinion that the course of the America, when the Ida Miller was seen by her, would have carried her astern of the Ida Miller, and that the immediate cause of the collision was a change from this course, effected by porting the wheel in an effort to pass between the Ida Miller and Pier 4. If such be the fact, the fault of the America which caused the collision was porting her wheel. But if it is true, as insisted in behalf of the America, that the porting of her whéel was when the vessels were close together, and collision inevitable, then, in my opinion, the America was at fault for not starboarding her wheel so as to carry her further out into the river, and astern of the Ida Miller, seen by her to have backed off Pier 4, and to be at rest in the river. Bule 19 is not applicable in a ease like this. The Ida Miller came to a rest. When seen to be so at rest, common prudence on the part of the America, as it appears to me, would have prevented an attempt to pass astern of the Ida Miller, when, by holding her course, or, at most, by a turn of her wheel to starboard, she would have passed astern of the Ida Miller, and at the same time assumed her proper course in the river.

Let a decree be entered in favor of the libelant, with an order of reference to ascertain damages.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of PRIMEDIA Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the
period ended September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Charles J. Stubbs, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §
1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|                                     
|/s/ CHARLES J. STUBBS                
|Charles J. Stubbs,                   
|President and Chief Executive Officer

November 9, 2009

This certification accompanies each Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by
the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

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.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA % Hon. Katharine S. Hayden

Crim. No. 11-554
Ve

CONTINUANCE ORDER
GREGORY CICCONE

This matter having come before the Court on the joint
application of Paul J. Fishman, United States Attorney for the
District of New Jersey (by Joseph Mack, Assistant U.S. Attorney),
and defendant Gregory Ciccone (by K. Anthony Thomas, Assistant
Federal Public Defender) for an order granting a continuance of
the proceedings in the above-captioned matter, and the defendant
being aware that he has a right to have the matter brought to
trial within 70 days of the date of his appearance before a
judicial officer of this court pursuant to Title 18 of the United
States Code, Section 3161(c) (1), and as the defendant has
consented to an additional continuance, and for good and
sufficient cause shown,

IT IS THE FINDING OF THIS COURT that this action should
be continued for the following reasons:

1. Discovery made available in this case involves a

large volume of paper files which may necessitate a lengthy

review by defense counsel;



2. Taking into account the exercise of diligence,
therefore, the facts of this case require that defense counsel be
permitted a reasonable amount of additional time for effective
preparation in this matter; and

3. Plea negotiations are currently in progress, and

both the United States and the defendant desire additional time

to negotiate a plea agreement, which would render trial of this
matter unnecessary; and

4, Pursuant to Title 18 of the United States Code,
Section 3161(h) (7), the ends of justice served by granting the
continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the
defendant in a speedy trial.

WHEREFORE, on this day of December 2011,

IT IS ORDERED that proceedings in the above-captioned
matter are continued from January 25, 2012 through March 25,
2012; and

IT IS ORDERED that the period from January 25, 2012
through March 25, 2012 shall be excludable in computing time
under the Speedy Trial Act of 1974, pursuant to Title 18, United

States Code, Section 3161(h) (7). na ~—

HON. KATHARINE S. HAYDEN
United States District Judge

A hony TAgmas, AFPD
‘counsel for//Gregory Ciccone
Case 2:11-cr-00366-JLL Document 26 Filed 08/17/11 Page 1 of 5 PageID: 181
Case 2:11-cr-00366-JLL Document 26 Filed 08/17/11 Page 2 of 5 PageID: 182
Case 2:11-cr-00366-JLL Document 26 Filed 08/17/11 Page 3 of 5 PageID: 183
Case 2:11-cr-00366-JLL Document 26 Filed 08/17/11 Page 4 of 5 PageID: 184
Case 2:11-cr-00366-JLL Document 26 Filed 08/17/11 Page 5 of 5 PageID: 185
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Quarterly Report of PRIMEDIAInc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30,2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), I, Kevin J. Neary, Senior Vice President and Chief FinancialOfficer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adoptedpursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

(1)         The Report fully complieswith the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

(2)         The information containedin the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.

| /s/ KEVIN J. NEARY                                  |   |
|-----------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Kevin J. Neary                                      |   |
| *Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer* |   |

 

August 8, 2006

This certification accompanies each Report pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to theextent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by theCompany for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,as amended.

A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained bythe Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or itsstaff upon request.

----
ORDER GRANTING

MOTION TO SEi\L

M YLAN PHARMACEUTICALS LC, and,

MYLAN INC. : DOCuMENT FILED ELECTRONICALLY

Defendants.

THIS MATTER having been brought before the Court upon the Motion of

Defendants Mylan Pharmaceuticals inc. and Mvlan Inc. (collectively. “Mylan”), pursuant to

Local Civil Rule 5,3(c), to Seal portions of Defendants’ First Amended Answer to Complaint,

Separate Defenses, and Counterclaims (ECF No. 138) and the Court having considered the

papers submitted by Mylan in support of the present Motion; papers submitted by plaintiff Orexo

AB in further support or opposition thereto, if any; and any papers in reply thereto; and the Court

having considered and adopted the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law submitted by Mylan

in support of the present Motion; and the Court having further found that the standards of Local

Civil Rule 5.3(c)(2) have been met and support the sealing, of the confidential information set

forth below; and the Court having considered oral argument of the parties, if any; and for the

reasons set forth in the record of the proceedings, and [‘or other and good cause having beenshown;

I 1

ii IS on this Lay f’’jI’L

ORDERED that Mylan’s Motion, pursuant to Local Civil Rule 53(c), to Seal the

following material:
shall be sealed and maintained undci’ seal by the Court:

and it is further

ORDERED that Mylan shall electronically file on the docket a public copy of the above

filed document, redacted as consistent with tsOrd/

HONORABLE LOIS H. GOODMAN

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 134 (Wednesday, July 15, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 34396]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-16787]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

July 8, 2009.
    The Department of the Treasury will submit the following public 
information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13, on or 
after the publication date of this notice. Copies of the submission(s) 
may be obtained by calling the Treasury Bureau Clearance Officer 
listed. Comments regarding this information collection should be 
addressed to the OMB reviewer listed and to the Treasury Department 
Clearance Officer, Department of the Treasury, Room 11000, 1750 
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220.

DATES: Written comments should be received on or before August 14, 2009 
to be assured of consideration.

Bureau of Public Debt (BPD)

    OMB Number: 1535-0138.
    Type of Review: Revision.
    Title: New Treasury Direct.
    Forms: 5444, 5511, 5512, 5446.
    Description: The information is requested to establish a new 
account and process transactions.
    Respondents: Businesses or other for-profits.
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 97,000 hours.
    Clearance Officer: Judi Owens (304) 480-8150, Bureau of the Public 
Debt, 200 Third Street, Parkersburg, West Virginia 26106.
    OMB Reviewer: Shagufta Ahmed (202) 395-7873, Office of Management 
and Budget, Room 10235, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 
20503.

Celina Elphage,
Treasury PRA, Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. E9-16787 Filed 7-14-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-39-P
VIA ECFIlonorable Kevin McNulty, U.S.I).J.United States District Court

District of New Jersey

MLK, Jr. Federal Building & U.S. Courthouse

50 Walnut Street, 5th Floor

Newark, New Jersey 07102

Re: Nicholas Fitzgerald v. Gann Law Books, et aL

Civil Action No.: l1-4287(KM)(MCA)

Dear Judge MeN ulty:

This firm represents defendants in the referenced matter. Plaintiff tiled his papers in

support of(1) Final Approval ofthe Class Settlement; (2) Class Attorney’s Application for Fees,

Costs and Expenses; and (3) an Incentive Award for Plaintiff on September 1 8, 2014 (ECF No.90). In accordance with Local Civil Rule 7.1(d)(2), Defendants propose to file their response 14days before the scheduled November 13, 2014 Final Approval Hearing. This will allowdefendants an opportunity to address any objections that may be filed, which are due 21 daysbefore the Final Approval hearing.

If defendants’ proposal meets with the Court’s approval, we respectfully request that

Your Honor so order this letter and have it entered on the docket.

Respectfully,

Mayra V. Tarantino

AZL:emp

cc: Aytan Y. Bellin, Esq. (via ECF & email)

SO ORDERED THIS 

I)AY OF SEPTEMBER 2014

1-b Kevin McNulty, U.S.D.J.

437444