alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to 5TH 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED April 18, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-50799 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus WILLIAM RAFAEL RIVERA, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 5:03-CR-564-7

-------------------- Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent William Rafael Rivera on appeal has requested leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as required by Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Rivera has filed a response. Our independent review of the brief, Rivera’s response, and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration of Rivera’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. See United States v. Higdon , 832 F.2d 312, 313-14 (5th Cir. 1987). Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw isNo. 05-50799 -2- GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH C IR . R. 42.2.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Michael Ellis TAYLOR, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 10-20260

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

April 14, 2011.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

*315Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Molly Estelle Odom, Esq., H. Michael Sokolow, Assistant Federal Public Defenders, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before KING, BENAVIDES, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Michael Ellis Taylor appeals from the revocation of his probation. The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Taylor has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Taylor has not filed a response. In revoking Taylor’s probation, the district court imposed a sentence of 10 months of imprisonment with no additional term of probation or supervised release. During the pendency of this appeal, Taylor completed his term of imprisonment and has been discharged from prison.

This court must examine the basis of its jurisdiction, sua sponte, if necessary. *Mosley v. Cozby,*813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir.1987). Article III, section 2, of the Constitution limits federal court jurisdiction to actual cases and controversies. *Spencer v. Kemna,*523 U.S. 1, 7, 118 S.Ct. 978, 140 L.Ed.2d 43 (1998). The case-or-controversy requirement demands that “some concrete and continuing injury other than the now-ended incarceration or parole — some ‘collateral consequence’ of the conviction — must exist if the suit is to be maintained.” *Id.*at 7, 118 S.Ct. 978. Because Taylor has completed the entire sentence imposed for his probation revocation, there is no case or controversy for us to address. *See Spencer,*523 U.S. at 7, 14-18, 118 S.Ct. 978; *United States v. Clark,*193 F.3d 845, 847-48 (5th Cir.1999).

For the foregoing reasons, this appeal is DISMISSED as moot, and counsel’s motion to withdraw is DENIED as unnecessary.

*

 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.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

IN RE :

ROBERT JOSEPH GAUDET JR.

,

Relator. §

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 2 4

- 00 315

- CV

AN ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

IN MANDAMUS

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator, Robert Joseph Gaudet Jr.

, has filed a petition for writ of mandamus asking this

Court to set aside an order of the Honorable Jesus Rodriguez, presiding judge of County Court at

Law No. 5 of El Paso County, Texas, allowing Real Party in Interest Karin Gaudet

- Asmus to

testify by Zoom at an upcoming hearing on an application for a Protective Order.

To be entitled to mandamus relief, a relator generally must meet two requirements. First,

the relator must show that the trial court clearly abused its discretion. In re Prudential Insurance

Co . of America , 148 S.W.3d 124, 135 (Tex. 2004) . Second, the relator must demonstrate that he

has no adequate remedy by appeal. Id. at 135

– 36 . After reviewing the mandamus record and

petition, we conclude that Relator has failed to establish that he is entitled to mandamus relief.

Accordingly, w e deny the petition. All pending motions are denied as moot.2 G INA M. PALAFOX, Justice

August 20, 2024

Before Alley , C.J., Palafox, J, and Barajas

, C .J. (Ret.)

Barajas, C.J. (Ret.) (Sitting by Assignment)
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

TERRANCE L. McCLOUD
,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA
, Appellee

.

No. 4D 15

- 1774

[October 7, 2015 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.853 motion from the Circuit Court for

the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; Raag Singhal , Judge;

L.T. Case No s

. 00

- 4477CF10A, 00

- 4936CF10A and 00

- 5995CF10A

.

Terrence L. McCloud, Okeechobee, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

We affirm the trial court’s order summarily d enying appellant’s motion for DNA testing, filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure

3.853.

Appellant alleged the Coral Springs Police Department had his fingerprints. They were allegedly obtained after his arrest in three separate cases in which he was convicted of burglary of a dwelling and grand theft. He claimed DNA testing of the “crime sc een fingerprint” [sic] would exonerate him in the three cases. He alleged that identity was an issue in the cases, but he did not include a statement as to why it was, or how the DNA evidence would exonerate him as he claimed. This is required in

Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.853(b)(4). Also, the motion was not verified as required in Rule 3.853(b).

Affirmance is without prejudice to appellant promptly filing a legally sufficient motion if he can do so in good faith. Rosa v. State , 147 So. 3d 583, 584 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (citing Oquendo v. State , 2 So. 2d 1001, 1 005 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) ).2 Affirmed without prejudice.

G ROSS

, T

AYLOR and L EVINE
, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
EXHIBIT 99.3

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of SE Global Equities Corp. (the"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the three month period ended March 31, 2002, asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the"Report"), I, Toby Chu , President, CEO and Director of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

- The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)  of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
- The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material  respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the  Partnership.

 

| Date: May      15, 2003 | /s/ Toby Chu      _______________________Toby Chu , President and CEO/Director |
|-------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-Q
FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                             811
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   33,818
<ALLOWANCES>                                    (1,364)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                42,512
<PP&E>                                         226,517
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (98,961)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 523,607
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           37,516
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      7,050
<COMMON>                                         1,100
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   523,607
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                65,097
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   51,480
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    (2)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,057
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  7,222
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,886
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,336
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,437
<EPS-BASIC>                                       3.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     3.01


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 197 (Friday, October 13, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 47736]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-22137]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank 
or Bank Holding Company

    The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank 
Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and Sec.  225.41 of the Board's 
Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire shares of a bank or bank 
holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the 
notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).
    The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal 
Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for 
inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons 
may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for 
that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must 
be received not later than October 26, 2017.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis (Brendan S. Murrin, 
Assistant Vice President) 90 Hennepin Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota 
55480-0291:
    1. Edward Massee and Andrew Schmidt, both of Appleton, Minnesota; 
to acquire voting shares of MPS Investment Company, Appleton, 
Minnesota, and thereby indirectly acquire voting shares of Farmers & 
Merchants State Bank, Appleton, Minnesota.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, October 6, 
2017.
Ann Misback,
Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2017-22137 Filed 10-12-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE P
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Harley Davidson, :

Petitioner :

:

v. : No. 1274 C.D. 2019

:

Workers' Compensation Appeal :

Board (Ness), :

Respondent :

PER CURIAM O R D E R

NOW, August 17, 2020, upon consideration of Petitioner’s

application for reargument, and Respondent Brian Ness’s answer in response

thereto, the application is denied.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman

, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Kurtis T. Wilder

Elizabeth T. Clement

, 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.

November 22, 2017

t1121 

# Order

Clerk November 22, 2017

155457

ALLAN ROOKS,

Plaintiff,

v SC: 155457

COA: 328561

Macomb CC: 2013

- 001697

- NO

ANDOVER HEIGHTS CONDOMINIUM

ASSOCIATION,

Defendant/

Third

- Party Plaintiff

- Appellant,

and

JOHNNIES CONCRETE REPLACEMENT, INC.,

Third

- Party Defendant

- Appellee.

__________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the stipulation signed b y counsel for the parties agreeing to

the dismissal of this application for leave to appeal is considered, and the application for

leave to appeal is DISMISSED with prejudice and without costs.
Exhibit
      ___





**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**THE
      SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**


**CHIEF
      FINANCIAL OFFICER**








I,
      Skuli
      Thorvaldsson, certify that:





In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Digital Creative Development
      Corporation. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September
      30,
      2005 (the "Report"), the undersigned officer of the Company, certifies, pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of his knowledge:





(1)
      The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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.





Date:
      July 11, 2007





/
      s /
      Skuli Thorvaldsson





Skuli
      Thorvaldsson


Chief
      Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. §1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

§906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In
connection with the Annual Report of ATEL Cash Distribution Fund VI, L.P. (the Partnership) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Paritosh K. Choksi, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operating Officer of ATEL Financial Services, LLC, General Partner of the Partnership, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as
adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



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



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

Date: March 16, 2009



|                                                                                                                                  
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Paritosh K. Choksi                                                                                                            
|Paritosh K. Choksi                                                                                                                
|Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operating Officer of ATEL Financial Services, LLC (General Partner)

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Partnership and
will be retained by the Partnership and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
* 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. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-10189 Summary Calendar

PATRICK STARLING

Plaintiff - Appellant

v. TIMOTHY REVELL, DR; CHARLES RIDGE, DR

Defendants - Appellees

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas

(USDC No. 2:02-CV-7)

-------------------- August 15, 2002 Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Patrick Starling, Texas state prisoner #585248, has appealed the dismissal as frivolous of his civil rights action alleging inadequate medical treatment for pain in his shoulder and thigh.
We AFFIRM. Starling contends that the district court abused its discretion by dismissing his action with prejudice. He asserts that that court has determined that his complaint alleges a claim for deliberate indifference to his medical needs, under 42 U.S.C.No. 02-10189 -2- § 1983. The district court actually held that Starling’s claims are frivolous because he did not allege, and cannot make a valid allegation of, deliberate indifference. Because Starling did not raise the issues of deliberate indifference or seek leave to amend his complaint to so allege, in the district court, this court will not address these issues on appeal. See Reeves v. Collins , 27 F.3d 174, 177 (5th Cir. 1994). Furthermore, we reject Starling’s request for remand so that he can allege deliberate indifference because on appeal, he “has presented no more than conclusionary allegations in support of his claim[s].” Booker v. Koonce , 2 F.3d 114, 117, 115-17 (5th Cir. 1993). Therefore the district court’s judgment must be
AFFIRMED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Starling’s motion for leave to withdraw or amend his brief is DENIED.
MOTION DENIED; JUDGMENT AFFIRMED.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Keith Lyman, Also Known as Keith J. Lyman, Also Known as *1357Keith Joseph Lyman, Appellant.

[987 NYS2d 282]

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Genesee County (Robert C. Noonan, A.J.), rendered January 12, 2011. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted assault on a peace officer.

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

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted assault on a peace officer (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 120.08). We are unable to review defendant’s contentions that his plea was not voluntary or that the sentence is unduly harsh and severe inasmuch as the stipulated record on appeal does not include the transcript of the plea proceeding, nor has defendant complied with this Court’s request to provide the presentence report *(see Matter of Planned Parenthood of Niagara County v Maerten,*6 AD3d 1162, 1163 [2004]; *Matter of Santoshia L.,*202 AD2d 1027, 1028 [1994]; *cf. People v Douglas,*288 AD2d 859, 859 [2001], *lv denied*97 NY2d 681 [2001]; *see generally People v Kinchen,*60 NY2d 772, 774 [1983]).

Present — Scudder, PJ., Smith, Carni, Lindley and Whalen, JJ.
Exhibit 21.1
 List of Subsidiaries of Spanish Broadcasting System, Inc.
 Subsidiary Name
    
    State of IncorporationAlarcon Holdings, Inc.
    
    New YorkBroadspan
Music Holdings, Inc.
    
    DelawareBroadspan
Music, Inc.
    
    DelawareCadena Estereotempo, Inc.
    
    Puerto RicoGabriel Productions, LLC
    
    DelawareGabriel Series I, LLC
    
    DelawareJuJu Media, Inc.
    
    New YorkKLAX Licensing, Inc.
    
    DelawareKLEY Licensing, Inc.
    
    DelawareKPTI Licensing, Inc.
    
    DelawareKRZZ Licensing, LLC
    
    DelawareKSAH Licensing, Inc.
    
    DelawareKXOL Licensing, Inc.
    
    DelawareKZAB Licensing, Inc.
    
    DelawareKZBA Licensing, Inc.
    
    DelawareMega Media Holdings, Inc.
    
    DelawareMegafilms, Inc.
    
    DelawareMegaflix, Inc.
    
    DelawareMegaholdings, Inc.
    
    DelawareMegapics, Inc.
    
    DelawarePortorican American Broadcasting, Inc.
    
    Puerto RicoSBS Bay Area, LLC
    
    DelawareSBS Funding, Inc.
    
    DelawareSBS Miami Broadcast Center, Inc.
    
    DelawareSBS of Greater New York, Inc.
    
    New YorkSBS Promotions, Inc.
    
    New YorkSpanish Broadcasting System Finance Corporation
    
    DelawareSpanish Broadcasting System Group of Puerto Rico, Inc.
    
    Puerto RicoSpanish Broadcasting System Holding Company, Inc.
    
    Puerto RicoSpanish Broadcasting System Inc. (NJ)
    
    New JerseySpanish Broadcasting System Network, Inc.
    
    New YorkSpanish Broadcasting System of California, Inc.
    
    CaliforniaSpanish Broadcasting System of Florida, Inc.
    
    FloridaSpanish Broadcasting System of Greater Miami, Inc.
    
    DelawareSpanish Broadcasting System of Illinois, Inc.
    
    DelawareSpanish Broadcasting System of Puerto Rico, Inc.
    
    DelawareSpanish Broadcasting System of Puerto Rico, Inc.
    
    Puerto RicoSpanish Broadcasting System of San Antonio, Inc.
    
    DelawareSpanish Broadcasting System SouthWest, Inc.
    
    DelawareSpanish Broadcasting System-San Francisco, Inc.
    
    DelawareWCMA Licensing, Inc.
    
    Delaware




---



##### 



Subsidiary Name
    
    State of IncorporationWCMQ Licensing, Inc.
    
    DelawareWDEK Licensing, Inc.
    
    DelawareWEGM, Inc.
    
    Puerto RicoWIO, Inc.
    
    Puerto RicoWKIE Licensing, Inc.
    
    DelawareWKIF Licensing, Inc.
    
    DelawareWLEY Licensing, Inc.
    
    DelawareWMEG Licensing, Inc.
    
    DelawareWNOD, Inc.
    
    Puerto RicoWODA, Inc.
    
    Puerto RicoWOQI, Inc.
    
    Puerto RicoWPAT Licensing, Inc.
    
    DelawareWRMA Licensing, Inc.
    
    DelawareWSBS Licensing Inc. (f/k/a WDLP Licensing, Inc.)
    
    DelawareWSKQ Licensing, Inc.
    
    DelawareWXDJ Licensing, Inc.
    
    DelawareWZET Licensing, Inc.
    
    DelawareWZNT, Inc.
    
    Puerto Rico
  2
**Exhibit 99.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with theAnnual Report of Community Bankshares, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2002 filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, J. Alton Wingate, President and ChiefExecutive Officer of the Company, and I, Harry L. Stephens, Chief Financial 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:

> - The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and
- The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresult of operations of the Company.

 

|  | By:   /s/ J. AltonWingate                            J. Alton WingatePresident and Chief Executive Officer                    |
|--|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|  | By:   /s/ Harry L.Stevens                             Harry L. StephensChief Financial OfficerDate:  March 28, 2003 |