alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Al Hajj Maliki Almahdi vs. Commonwealth.

November 9, 2007.

*Moot Question. Bail.*

The case was submitted on briefs.

*Al Hajj Maliki Almahdi,*pro se.

*Jane Davidson Montori,*Assistant District Attorney, for the Commonwealth.

Al Hajj Maliki Almahdi (defendant) appeals from a judgment of the county court denying his petition under G. L. c. 211, § 3, in which he sought bail review. The Commonwealth has moved to dismiss the appeal as moot. We agree with the Commonwealth.

After the single justice denied relief, the defendant was released on personal recognizance. The charges against him were subsequently disposed of, one by a nolle prosequi and the other by dismissal after a continuance without a finding. G. L. c. 276, § 87. This renders his claim for bail review moot. See *Allen*v. *Commonwealth,*449 Mass. 1020, 1020 (2007), citing *LaChance*v. *Commonwealth,*437 Mass. 1013 (2002). To the extent that the defendant claims he is entitled to compensation for time spent in confinement, that claim is not properly before us and we express no view on its merits. A proper forum for such a claim would be a civil action commenced in the trial court.

*Appeal dismissed.*
Exhibit 31.1I, Richard K. Crump, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Sterling Chemicals, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report isbeing prepared;(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe 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 whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: August 14, 2007            /s/ RICHARD K. CRUMP         Richard K. Crump
Exhibit 31.1
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Sterling Chemicals, 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.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included
in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report.4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) 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)) for the registrant and have:
     5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) 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 functions):
    /s/ JOHN V. GENOVAJohn V. GenovaPresident and Chief Executive Officer
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      Exhibit 23


              CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
              ---------------------------------------------------



Vitafort International Corporation
Los Angeles, California


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on 
Form S-* no. 33-300435, no. 33-304271, no. 33-307989, and no. 33-317763 of 
Vitafort International Corporation of our report dated April 14, 1997 relating 
to the consolidated balance sheet of Vitafort International Corporation and 
subsidiaries as of December 31, 1996, and the related consolidated statements of
operations, stockholders' equity (deficit), and cash flows for the year then 
ended, which report appears in the December 31, 1996, annual report on Form 
10-KSB of Vitafort International Corporation and Subsidiaries.









                                                                BDO Seidman, LLP



Los Angeles, California
April 14, 1997
#### Christopher A. Measom et al., Respondents, v Greenwich and Perry Street Housing Corporation, Appellant.

Submitted December 10, 2007;

decided February 7, 2008

Motion for reargument of motion for leave to appeal denied *[see 9*NY3d 946 (2007)].
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman, Chief Justice

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

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

 March 22, 2017

s0315

Order 

Clerk

March 22, 2017

152835

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 152835 

COA: 321490

Wayne CC: 13-003881-FC

WILLIE LEE WIMBERLY,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 20, 2015 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
Exhibit 32.2


Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,


as Adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the


Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Phillips Edison—ARC Grocery Center REIT II, Inc. (the “Registrant”) for the year ended December 31, 2013 , as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, Devin I. Murphy, Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge and belief:


|   |                                                                                                                      
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|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 Registrant.

Date: March 6, 2014








/s/ Devin I. MurphyDevin I. MurphyChief Financial Officer
Opinion issued August 31 , 2023

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01 - 23 - 00242 - CR

——————————— PETRINA KEPPARD , Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee On Appeal from 443rd District Court Ellis County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 46666CR
MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant Petrina Keppard has neither established indigence for purposes of court costs nor paid , or made arrangements to pay , the fee for preparing the clerk’s record
. See T EX . R. C IV . P. 145; T EX . R. A PP . P . 37.3( a ) , (b)
. On May 5, 2023, we notified Appellant that her appeal could be dismissed for want of prosecution if the2

clerk’s record was not filed. We directed Appellant to submit written evidence from the trial court clerk by June 5, 2023, reflecting she paid, or ma de arrangements to pay, the fee for preparing the clerk’s record. To date, Appellant has not responded and the clerk’s record has not been filed. W e dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution
. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 37.3(b), 42.3(b)

- (c), 43.2(f); see also Thomas v. State , No. 01

- 15

- 00380

- CR, 2015 WL 6081785, at *1 (Tex. App.

— Houston [1st Dist.] Oct. 15, 2015) (per curiam) (mem. op .) (dismissing criminal appeal for want of prosecution based on Appellant’s failure to pay for clerk’s record)
. All pending motions are denied as moot. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Goodman, Rivas

- Molloy , and Guerra
. Do not publish. T EX . R. A PP . P. 47.2 ( b).
UN PUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20

- 7624

DOSHAY ANTWAN SMITH , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. DEPUTY PARKER; DEPUTY PORTER , Defendants

- Appellees , and

WARDEN OF ROANOKE CITY JAIL , Defendant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia , at Roanoke

. Robert Stewart Ballou, Magistrate Judge. ( 7:19

- cv
- 00410

- RSB )

Submitted : November 30, 2021 Decided: December 7, 2021

Before NIEMEYER and HARRIS , Circuit Judges , and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Doshay Antwan Smith , Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Doshay Antwan Smith appeals the magistrate judge’s * order granting Defendant s’
motion for summary judgment and denying relief on Smith’s amended complaint, which
he filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. We have reviewed the record and found no

reversible error . Accordingly, we affirm the magistrate judge ’s order

. Smith v. Parker ,
No. 7 :1 9

- c v
- 00410

- RSB ( W .D. Va

. Oct. 14, 2020 ). 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

* The parties consented to jurisdiction before a magistra te judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73

.
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 179 (Monday, September 18, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 43556]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-19794]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Office of the Secretary


Notice of Availability for Memorandum on Rescission of Deferred 
Action for Childhood Arrivals

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Department of Homeland Security.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: In a memorandum dated September 5, 2017, the Acting Secretary 
of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) rescinded the June 15, 
2012 DHS memorandum entitled ``Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion with 
Respect to Individuals Who Came to the United States as Children.'' The 
September 5, 2017 memorandum is available on the DHS Web site at the 
following location: https://www.dhs.gov/news/2017/09/05/memorandum-rescission-daca.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 15, 2012, then Secretary of Homeland 
Security Janet Napolitano issued a memorandum entitled ``Exercising 
Prosecutorial Discretion with Respect to Individuals Who Came to the 
United States as Children.'' The 2012 memorandum established the policy 
known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA).
    On September 5, 2017, Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Elaine 
Duke issued a memorandum entitled ``Rescission of the June 15, 2012 
Memorandum Entitled `Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion with Respect 
to Individuals Who Came to the United States as Children.' '' The 
September 5, 2017 memorandum rescinded the June 15, 2012 memorandum and 
directed DHS personnel to take all appropriate actions to execute a 
wind-down of the DACA program consistent with the parameters 
established in the memorandum. The September 5, 2017 memorandum is 
available on the DHS Web site at the following location: https://www.dhs.gov/news/2017/09/05/memorandum-rescission-daca.

    Dated: September 11, 2017.
Elaine C. Duke,
Acting Secretary of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2017-19794 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-97-P
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 182 (Thursday, September 21, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 44218]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-20123]


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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Advisory Committee for Polar Programs; Notice of Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, as amended), the National Science Foundation (NSF) announces the 
following meeting:
    Name and Committee Code: Advisory Committee for Polar Programs 
(1130).
    Date and Time: October 19, 2017, 2:00 p.m.-6:00 p.m., October 20, 
2017, 9:00 a.m.-2:00 p.m.
    Place: National Science Foundation, 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, 
Alexandria, Virginia 22314, Room C 2010 (October 19) and E 2020 
(October 20).
    Type of Meeting: Open.
    Contact Person: Andrew Backe, National Science Foundation, Room W 
7134, 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, Virginia 22314; Phone 703-
292-2454.
    Minutes: May be obtained from the contact person listed above.
    Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice and recommendations to the 
National Science Foundation concerning support for polar research, 
education, infrastructure and logistics, and related activities.

Agenda

October 19, 2017; 2 p.m.-6:00 p.m.

<bullet> Opening Remarks and Introductions
<bullet> Harassment Policy
<bullet> Polar Data/Cyberinfrastructure
<bullet> Antarctic Infrastructure Modernization for Science (AIMS)
<bullet> Strategic Planning--Part 1

October 20, 2017; 9 a.m.-2 p.m.

<bullet> Community Engagement in Research in Alaska
<bullet> Navigating the New Arctic
<bullet> Strategic Planning--Part 2
<bullet> Meeting with the NSF Director and COO
<bullet> Thwaites Project
<bullet> Wrap-up and Action Items

    Dated: September 18, 2017.
Crystal Robinson,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2017-20123 Filed 9-20-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
Exhibit 32.2


Certification of Chief Financial Officer


Pursuant to


Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)


In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021 (the “Report”) of TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp. (the “Registrant”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Christopher M. Mathieu, Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, that:


(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.


/s/ Christopher M. MathieuName:Christopher M. MathieuDate:March 2, 2022
exv10w159wq






Exhibit 10.159Q




Attachment F — Information regarding MADP and QADP Rights if no 787s are reconfirmed




Attachment B to Letter Agreement 6-1162-AKP-110R3 (Model 777)

MADP Rights Aircraft Delivery Months and Exercise Dates

(if no 787s are reconfirmed)



[CONFIDENTIAL
PORTION OMITTED AND FILED SEPARATELY WITH THE COMMISSION PURSUANT TO A REQUEST
FOR CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT]



					
	 	 	 	 	 
	PA No. 1980
	 	SA No. 20
	 	Page 1 of 1






 








 





Attachment F — Information regarding MADP and QADP Rights if no 787s are reconfirmed




Attachment C to Letter Agreement 6-1162-AKP-110R3 (Model 777)

QADP Rights Aircraft Delivery Quarters and Exercise Dates

(if no 787s are reconfirmed)



[CONFIDENTIAL
PORTION OMITTED AND FILED SEPARATELY WITH THE COMMISSION PURSUANT TO A REQUEST
FOR CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT]



					
	 	 	 	 	 
	PA No. 1980
	 	SA No. 20
	 	Page 1 of 1
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS
13 - 18 - 00322 - CR Orlando Campos v. The State of Texas
On a ppeal from the 156th District Court of Bee County , Texas Trial Cause No. B
- 15 - 2049 - 0 - CR
- B

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this caus e on appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction

. The Court orders the appeal DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION in accordance with its opinion

. We further order this decision certified below for observance. August 9, 2018
# Missouri Court of Appeals

Southern District

FEBRUARY 19, 2016

THE FOLLOWING CASES WERE AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 84.16(b).

1. Case No. SD34089

Re: IN THE INTEREST OF: A.R.T., Minor,
GREENE COUNTY JUVENILE OFFICE, Petitioner-Respondent,

vs. D.R., Respondent-Appellant.
EXHIBIT 32



CERTIFICATION



Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, for the purposes of section 1350 of chapter 63 of title 18 of the United States Code, in his capacity as an
officer of SRI/Surgical Express, Inc. (SRI), that, to his knowledge, the Quarterly Report of SRI on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2004, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that
the information contained in this report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of SRI.



|                   |  |  |  |     |  |                         |  |                        
|------------------ |  |  |  | --- |  | ----------------------- |  | -----------------------
|Date: May 14, 2004 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/    Joseph A. Largey
|                   |  |  |  |     |  |                         |  | Joseph A. Largey       
|                   |  |  |  |     |  |                         |  | Chief Executive Officer
|                   |  |  | 
|Date: May 14, 2004 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/    Charles L. Pope 
|                   |  |  |  |     |  |                         |  | Charles L. Pope        
|                   |  |  |  |     |  |                         |  | Chief Financial Officer
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2592 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the limitation 

on the amount of charitable contributions of ordinary income property 

taken into account in determining the charitable contribution deduction 

for any trade or business. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 19, 2011 

Mr. SCHOCK introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase 

the limitation on the amount of charitable contributions 

of ordinary income property taken into account in determining the charitable contribution deduction for any 

trade or business. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Charitable Contribu5 tion Parity and Enhancement Act’’. 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2592 IH

1 SEC. 2. SPECIAL RULE FOR CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS 

2 OF ORDINARY INCOME PROPERTY FOR ALL 

3 TRADES OR BUSINESSES. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subparagraph (A) of section 

5 170(e)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amend6 ed by striking ‘‘by a corporation (other than a corporation 

7 which is an S corporation)’’ and inserting ‘‘from a trade 

8 or business of the taxpayer’’. 

9 (b) LIMITATION.—Subparagraph (A) of section 

10 170(e)(3) of such Code is amended by adding at the end 

11 the following flush sentence: 

12 ‘‘In the case of a taxpayer other than a C cor13 poration, the aggregate amount of such con14 tributions for any taxable year which may be 

15 taken into account under this subparagraph 

16 shall not exceed 10 percent of the taxpayer’s 

17 aggregate net income for such taxable year 

18 from all trades or businesses from which such 

19 contributions were made, computed without re20 gard to this section.’’. 

21 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

22 this section shall apply to contributions made after De23 cember 31, 2011, and to taxable years ending after such 

24 date. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
#### Commonwealth vs. Yasmani Quezada.

February 1, 2008.

*Firearms. Constitutional Law,*Search and seizure. *Search and Seizure,*Emergency, Reasonable suspicion. *Protective Custody.*

*Kathleen Celio,*Assistant District Attorney, for the Commonwealth.

*Frances A. King*for the defendant.

The defendant has been charged in the Charlestown Division of the Boston Municipal Court Department with unlawful possession of a firearm. G. L. c. 269, § 10 *(a).*The firearm was seized from the defendant by a police officer who encountered him on the street in the company of another individual. The officer noticed that the defendant may have been injured and appeared to be “out of it” and “not fully aware of his surroundings.” When the officer asked to speak with the defendant, he fled and the officer gave chase. The officer eventually caught and stopped the defendant and discovered the weapon on his person. The facts are recounted in greater detail in *Commonwealth*v. *Quezada,*67 Mass. App. Ct. 693 (2006).

A judge in the Boston Municial Court allowed the defendant’s motion to suppress the firearm. With leave of a single justice of this court, see Mass. R. Crim. P. 15 (b), as appearing in 422 Mass. 1501 (1996), the Commonwealth appealed to the Appeals Court. The Appeals Court affirmed the motion judge’s ruling, holding that the officer’s stop of the defendant was not justified by the so-called community caretaking function; by the protective custody statute, G. L. c. 111B, § 8; or by reasonable suspicion. *Commonwealth*v. *Quezada, supra*at 695-697. We then granted the Commonwealth’s application for further appellate review.

Having carefully considered the record, the parties’ briefs, the oral arguments, and the supplemental authorities cited by the Commonwealth, we hold that the motion judge’s order should be affirmed for essentially the same reasons given by the Appeals Court.

*Order allowing motion to suppress affirmed.*