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

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2955 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to clarify the requirement of the 

Department of Defense to procure footwear from American sources. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 15, 2011 

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

Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to clarify the requirement of the Department of Defense to procure footwear 

from American sources. 

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 ‘‘American Shoes for 

5 American Servicemembers Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. CLARIFICATION OF REQUIREMENT OF DEPART7 MENT OF DEFENSE TO PROCURE FOOTWEAR 

8 FROM AMERICAN SOURCES. 

9 Section 2533a(b)(1)(B) of title 10, United States 

10 Code, is amended— 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2955 IH

1 (1) by inserting ‘‘, including footwear,’’ before 

2 ‘‘and the materials’’; and 

3 (2) by striking ‘‘(and the materials and compo4 nents thereof)’’ and inserting ‘‘, including footwear, 

5 and the materials and components thereof’’. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Submitted May 11, 2009

Decided June 11, 2009

Before

ILANA DIAMOND ROVNER, Circuit Judge

    DIANE P. WOOD, Circuit Judge

    DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge

No. 08‐2026

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff‐Appellee,

v.

ANTONIO ABARCA,

Defendant‐Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District

Court for the Northern District of Illinois,

Eastern Division.

No. 06 CR 575‐1

Joan Humphrey Lefkow,

Judge.

O R D E R

Antonio Abarca pleaded guilty to robbing three banks, see 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a), and

was sentenced to 92 months’ imprisonment. Abarca appeals, but his appointed counsel has

moved to withdraw because she cannot identify any nonfrivolous argument to pursue. See

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Abarca has not accepted our invitation to comment

on counsel’s motion. See CIR. R. 51(b). We confine our review to the potential issues

outlined in counsel’s facially adequate brief. See United States v. Schuh, 289 F.3d 968, 973‐74

(7th Cir. 2002).

NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited only in accordance with

Fed. R. App. P. 32.1
No. 08‐2026 Page 2

Counsel informs us that Abarca does not wish to challenge his guilty plea, so she

properly refrains from discussing possible arguments about the voluntariness of the plea or

the adequacy of the plea colloquy. See United States v. Knox, 287 F.3d 667, 671‐72 (7th Cir.

2002).  

One possible argument evaluated by counsel is whether the district court erred by

failing to rule on Abarca’s motion to suppress the identity of a bank teller. But before the

court could rule on the motion to suppress, Abarca pleaded guilty. And by entering an

unconditional guilty plea, Abarca waived all non‐jurisdictional errors that might have

occurred prior to the plea. See United States v. Rogers, 387 F.3d 925, 934 (7th Cir. 2004);

United States v. Elizalde‐Adame, 262 F.3d 637, 639 (7th Cir. 2001).

The only other argument counsel considers is whether Abarca could argue that a 92‐

month sentence is unreasonable. Here, because the district court sentenced Abarca to the

bottom of the properly calculated guidelines range of 92 to 115 months, his sentence would

be presumptively reasonable. See Rita v. United States, 127 S. Ct. 2456, 2462 (2007); United

States v. Mykytiuk, 415 F.3d 606, 608 (7th Cir. 2005). The sentencing transcript shows that the

district court adequately considered all of the § 3553(a) factors, including the seriousness of

the offenses, Abarca’s characteristics and personal history, and the need to protect the

public. See United States v. Laufle, 433 F.3d 981, 987 (7th Cir. 2006). We agree with counsel

that there are no nonfrivolous arguments to rebut the presumption of reasonableness for

this sentence, and thus any potential challenge to his sentence would be frivolous.  

Accordingly, we GRANT counsel’s motion to withdraw and DISMISS the appeal.
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2


                       Consent of Independent Accountants


   We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
   Statements on Form S-8 (No. 333-8151, No. 33-94606, No. 33-80856, and No. 33-
   49642) and in the Prospectuses constituting part of the Registration
   Statements on Form S-3 (No. 33-94598, No. 33-94600, No. 33-94602, No. 33-
   72924, No. 33-72760, No. 33-94604, No. 33-94608, No. 33-80421, No. 333-8149,
   No. 333-11229 and No. 33-71814) and the Registration Statement on Form S-4
   (No. 333-1016) of PerSeptive Biosystems, Inc. of our report dated December
   28, 1994, except for Note 13, as to which the date is August 11, 1995,
   appearing on page F-3 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.  We also consent to
   the incorporation by reference of our report on the Financial Statement
   Schedule, which appears on page S-2 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.



   /s/ Price Waterhouse LLP
   PRICE WATERHOUSE LLP

   Boston, Massachusetts
   December 23, 1996
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           1,519
<SECURITIES>                                     3,102
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,013
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      1,501
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 7,601
<PP&E>                                           1,598
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (1,331)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  10,231
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,027
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        56,304
<OTHER-SE>                                    (51,110)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    10,231
<SALES>                                          6,341
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 9,005
<CGS>                                            2,661
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,661
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 6,950
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   6
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (12,717)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (12,717)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (12,717)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.59)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.59)
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.2



     Certification pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



     I, Joseph W. Pooler, Jr., the Senior Vice President of Finance of Pegasus
Satellite Communications, Inc., hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Form 10-Q of Pegasus Satellite
Communications, Inc. for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2003 (the
"September 30, 2003 Form 10-Q"), which this certification accompanies, 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 information contained in the
September 30, 2003 Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of Pegasus Satellite
Communications, Inc.

      A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to Pegasus Satellite Communications, Inc. and will be retained by
Pegasus Satellite Communications, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

Dated:  November 14, 2003


                                   /s/ Joseph W. Pooler, Jr.
                                   -----------------------------------
                                   Joseph W. Pooler, Jr.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, January 19, 2022.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, January 19, 2022

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A22I0104. WENDY J. KATZ, DDS, INDIVIDUALLY AND d/b/a INNOVATIVE 

ORTHODONTICS v. JENNIFER CATRINI.

Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby DENIED.

LC NUMBERS:

20A4688
DISMISS and Opinion Filed May 23, 2013 

# S

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-11-01486-CV
EDITH BETH GRUBAUGH, Appellant V. JOSE ALMANZA GOMEZ AND TESCO CORPORATION, Appellees
On Appeal from the 68th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-09-07002

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Wright and Justices Lang-Miers and Lewis Opinion by Chief Justice Wright Before the Court is the parties’ agreed motion to dismiss. The parties informed the Court
they have settled their differences. Accordingl y, we grant the parties’ motion and dismiss the
appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.1(a)(1).

111486F.P05 /Carolyn Wright/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE–2– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT

EDITH BETH GRUBAUGH, Appellant

No. 05-11-01486-CV V.

JOSE ALMANZA GOMEZ AND TESCO CORPORATION, Appellees On Appeal from the 68th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas. Trial Court Cause No. DC-09-07002. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright. Justices Lang-Miers and Lewis, participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opi nion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED

. Subject to any agreement between the parties, it is ORDERED that appellees, JOSE ALMANZA GOMEZ AND TESCO CORPORATION, rec over their costs of this appeal from appellant, EDITH BETH GRUBAUGH.

Judgment entered May 23, 2013.

/Carolyn Wright/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE
Exhibit










December 19, 2017 


Multi Solutions II, Inc.
4400 Biscayne Boulevard; 10th Floor
Miami, FL 33137


Re:    Amendment No. 6 to Revolving Credit Promissory Note


Reference is made to the Revolving Credit Promissory Note (the “Revolver”) dated April 23, 2012 in consideration of the mutual agreements and covenants contained and other good and valuable consideration, the parties hereto agree to increase the Commitment Amount, as defined in the Revolver, from $350,000 to $450,000 and extend the Maturity Date of the Revolver to December 31, 2019 from December 31, 2018.


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment No. 6 to the Revolving Credit Promissory Note to be duly executed and attested, all as of the date first written above.


BORROWER:


MUTLI SOLUTIONS II, INC., a Florida Corporation




By:    /s/ Robert M. Lundgren        
Name:    Robert M. Lundgren
Director


LENDER:


VECTOR GROUP LTD., a Delaware Corporation




By:    /s/ Marc N. Bell            
Name:    Marc N. Bell
Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                       1,874,880
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  362,714
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                      48,278,503
<DEPRECIATION>                             (2,500,100)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              48,864,500
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                     24,616,551
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        29,280
<OTHER-SE>                                  23,444,188
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                48,864,500
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,397,663
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,528,449
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,798,544
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,070,670
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,070,670
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,070,670
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.37
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.37


</TABLE>
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT DE’ M A RIAN A. C LEM ONS, Plaintiff - Appe lla nt, v. R OB ER T C LINTON HAYES, M .D.; e t a l., De fe nda

nts - Appe lle e s. No. 13-15679 D.C . No. 2:10-c v-01163-KJDGW F M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Distric t of Ne v a da Ke nt J. Da

wson, Distric t

Judge , Pre siding Subm itte d M arc h 10, 2014 ** B e fore : PREGER SON, LEAVY, a n d M UR GUIA, C irc uit Judge s . Ne va da sta te prisone r De ’ M arian A. C le m ons a ppe a ls pro sefrom

the distric t c o urt’ s judgm e nt dismissing his 42 U.S.C . § 1983 a c tion a lle ging de libe rate indiffe re nc e to his serious m e dic a l ne e ds whilehe wa s a pre tria l de ta ine e . W e have 

# FIL ED MAR 17 2014 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S . CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se eFe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).jurisdic tion under 28 U.S.C . § 1291. W e re vie w for an a buse of disc re tion a dism issa l for fa ilure to c om p le te se rvic e in a

tim e ly m anne r. Oy ama v . She e han (In reShe e han) , 253 F.3d 507, 511 (9th C ir. 2001). W e a ffirm . The distric t c ourt did not a buse its disc re tion in dism issing C l e m ons’ s a c tion without pre

judic e be c a

u se C le m ons fa ile d to e ffe c t prope r se rvic e of the sum m ons and c om pla int. S e eFe d. R . C iv. P. 4(e ), (m ) (de s c ribing prope r m e thods for se rvic e of proc e s s on a

n individual a

nd re quiring servic e within 120 da y s a fte r the c om pla i nt is file d); Ne v. R . C iv. P. 4(d)(6) (se tting forth re quire m e nts of se rvic e on individuals unde r Ne v a da sta t e la w); In reShe e han , 253 F.3d a t 512. The distric t c ourt did not a buse its disc re tion by

de ny i ng C le m o ns’ s m otion for re c onside ration be c a

use C le m ons fa i le d to e sta b l ish grounds for such

re lie f. Se eSc h . Dist. N

o. 1J , Multnomah C

nty ., Or. v . AC

andS, Inc . , 5 F.3d 1255, 1262-63 (9th C ir. 1993) (se tting forth the sta nda rd of re vie w a

nd grounds for re c o nside ration). AFFIRM E D.

1 3 - 1 5 6 7 9 2
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-2208

L. RUTHER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

LAKE DEL RAY APARTMENTS,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge.

(CA-01-1032-A)

Submitted: February 22, 2002 Decided: March 15, 2002

Before WILKINS, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

L. Ruther, Appellant Pro Se. Bernard Joseph DiMuro, DIMURO,

GINSBERG, & LIEBERMAN, P.C., Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

L. Ruther appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his

civil action and motion to reconsider. The record does not contain

a transcript of the hearing conducted on September 7, 2001, at

which the district court gave its reasons for dismissing the

action. Ruther has the burden of including in the record on appeal

a transcript of all parts of the proceedings material to the issues

raised on appeal. Fed. R. App. P. 10(b); 4th Cir. Local R. 10(c).

Appellants proceeding on appeal in forma pauperis are entitled to

transcripts at government expense only in certain circumstances.

28 U.S.C. § 753(f) (1994). By failing to produce a transcript or

to qualify for the production of a transcript at government expense, Ruther has waived review of the issues on appeal which depend upon the transcript to show error. Keller v. Prince George’s

Co., 827 F.2d 952, 954 n.1 (4th Cir. 1987). We therefore affirm

the district court’s orders. We dispense with oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

AFFIRMED
**Exhibit 23.1****CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 Nos. 33-45573,33-88590, 33-311419, 33-333647, 333-81647, 333-101467, 333-126785), and in the RegistrationStatements (Form S-3 No. 333-97207 and Form S-4 No. 333-107089) of Medicis PharmaceuticalCorporation of our reports dated March 10, 2006, with respect to the consolidated financialstatements and schedule of Medicis Pharmaceutical Corporation, Medicis Pharmaceutical Corporationmanagement’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, and theeffectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Medicis Pharmaceutical Corporation,included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K/T) for the transition period from July 1, 2005 toDecember 31, 2005.     /s/ Ernst & Young LLP   Phoenix, Arizona  March 14, 2006
**EXHIBIT 32.2** 
**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**
**PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)**
I, Timothy Brink, Chief Financial Officer of Continental Fuels, Inc. (the "Company"), have executed this certification in connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 (the "Report"). The undersigned hereby certifies 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 results of operations of the Company.

  

 

 

 

 

/s/  Timothy Brink

 

 

 

 

 

 

Timothy BrinkChief Financial OfficerApril 14, 2008
DENY and Opinion Filed April 22, 2022 

# S

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-21-00695-CV IN RE WALNUT HILL PHYSICIAN S’ HOSPITAL, LLC D/B/A WALNUT HILL MEDICAL CENTER, Relator Original Proceeding from the 192nd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-17-06696 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Osborne, Pe dersen, III, and Goldstein Opinion by Justice Osborne In this original proceeding, relator Walnut Hill Physicians’ Hospital, LLC d/b/a Walnut Hill Medical Center petiti ons this Court for a writ of mandamus ordering respondent to vacate and se t aside her August 13, 2021 order denying relator’s motion to quash a tr ial subpoena and to quash the trial subpoena at issue. Entitlement to mandamus relief requires re lator to show that the trial court clearly abused its discretion and that rela tor lacks an adequate appellate remedy. In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. , 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). After reviewing relator’s petiti on, the response, relator’s reply, the parties’ letters regarding s upplemental authorities, and the record, we conclude that–2– relator has failed to demonstrate a clear a buse of discretion. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 52.8(a).

Goldstein, J., dissenting without opinion.
210695F.P05 /Leslie Osborne / LESLIE OSBORNE JUSTICE
Exhibit 32



Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



The undersigned hereby certifies that, to his knowledge, (i) the Form 10-QSB of South Street Financial Corp. (the
Company) for the quarter ended September 30, 2005 (the Report), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, and (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company on the dates and for the periods presented therein.



|                        |  |                              |  |                                      
|----------------------- |  | ---------------------------- |  | -------------------------------------
|                        |  | SOUTH STREET FINANCIAL CORP.
|                        |  |                             
|Date: November 10, 2005 |  | By:                          |  | /s/ R. Ronald Swanner                
|                        |  |                              |  | R. Ronald Swanner                    
|                        |  |                              |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
|                        |  |                             
|Date: November 10, 2005 |  | By:                          |  | /s/ Christopher F. Cranford          
|                        |  |                              |  | Christopher F. Cranford              
|                        |  |                              |  | Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer