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

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2988 

For the relief of Fernando Javier Cervantes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 19, 2009 

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

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

For the relief of Fernando Javier Cervantes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. WAIVER OF GROUNDS FOR REMOVAL OF, DE4 NIAL OF ADMISSION TO, FERNANDO JAVIER 

5 CERVANTES. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding sections 212(a) 

7 and 237(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, Fer8 nando Javier Cervantes may not be removed or deported 

9 from the United States, or denied admission to the United 

10 States, by reason of any act of his that is a ground for 

11 removal or denial of admission and is reflected in the 

12 records of the Immigration and Naturalization Service of 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

2 

•HR 2988 IH

1 the Department of Justice, or the Visa Office of the De2 partment of State, on the date of the enactment of this 

3 Act. 

4 (b) RESCISSION OF OUTSTANDING ORDER OF RE5 MOVAL OR DEPORTATION.—The Attorney General shall 

6 rescind any outstanding order of removal or deportation, 

7 or any finding of deportability or removability, that has 

8 been entered against Fernando Javier Cervantes by reason 

9 of any act described in subsection (a). 

10 (c) PERMANENT RESIDENCE STATUS.—Notwith11 standing any order terminating the status of Fernando 

12 Javier Cervantes as an alien lawfully admitted for perma13 nent residence, for purposes of the Immigration and Na14 tionality Act he shall be considered lawfully admitted for 

15 permanent residence as of the date on which such status 

16 first was granted, and such status shall be considered not 

17 to have changed between such date and the date of the 

18 enactment of this Act. 

19 (d) ESTABLISHMENT OF GOOD MORAL CHAR20 ACTER.—Notwithstanding section 101(f) of the Immigra21 tion and Nationality Act, any act described in subsection 

22 (a) may not be considered in determining whether Fer23 nando Javier Cervantes is, or during any period has been, 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

3 

•HR 2988 IH

1 a person of good moral character for purposes of the Im2 migration and Nationality Act. 

Æ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7324

DAVID M. CHAPMAN, Petitioner - Appellant, versus STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; CHARLESTON COUNTY; CHARLESTON COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE; MAGWOOD, Deputy Sheriff; HENRY MCMASTER, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. David C. Norton, District Judge. (CA-03-2511-8-18B) Submitted: January 30, 2004 Decided: February 17, 2004 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. David M. Chapman, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: David M. Chapman, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a § 2254 proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue for claims addressed by a district court absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find both that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are debatable or wrong. SeeMiller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Chapman has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.

DISMISSED
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 09-1162

___________ Carl Eric Olsen, * * Petitioner, * * Petition for Review of an v. * Order of the United States * Drug Enforcement Agency. Drug Enforcement Administration, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Respondent. *

___________ Submitted: August 25, 2009 Filed: August 26, 2009

___________ Before MURPHY, COLLOTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Carl Olsen petitions this court, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 877, for review of a final determination by the Drug Enforcement Ad ministration denying his request for a rescheduling of marijuana based upon its medi cal usefulness. He maintains that he has been injured by his inability to use marijuana for religious purposes. Upon de novo review, we conclude that Olsen lack s standing under Article III of the United States Constitution. See Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife , 504 U.S. 555, 560-61 (1992) (Article III standing requires “injury in fact,” causal c onnection between injury and conduct complained of, and likelihood that injury will be redressed by favorable decision); Young Am. Corp. v. Affiliated Computer Servs., Inc. , 424 F.3d 840, 843 (8th Cir. 2005) (Article III standing is que stion of subject matter jurisdiction which-2- this court reviews de novo); Gettman v. DEA , 290 F.3d 430, 433 (D.C. Cir. 2002) ( § 811(a)(2) does not provide “automatic standing” to petition federa l court for review of DEA’s denial of reques t; petitioner must have ArticleIII standing). Accordingly, we dismiss the petition for lack of jurisdiction.

______________________________
OFFICE OF THE ATK)RNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

Arbuokla , &orrtary 

Bond of ~irdror8ur 

Your requert to 

quertlon hnr boon reoolva 

Your letter reo 

b th nQea m not roquo8t a 

l rkr thnt wo imue l nh op 

the firoal rear oi 1939 

itlonnl romlttnnor ~ha ubo 

. MnJ wo do thir9* 

Thn ulnunl lioulso f.0 for oonduoting a beauty parlor #hall be the 
Queen Arbuoklr, Page 8 

8~ or rite a~uue (Woo), pr~~ia~a, 

howovu, that ln ovont say bauty pu- 

‘lor I8 ooaduotea and opanted by one 

(1) puroa only, thoa aad la that meat 

no fee Ml be oharpd for ooaduotlag 

8uoh beauty parlor, but the operator 

theroot l hall bo liable for Three Dallam .($3.00) anaual roglrtratloa re0 

huelaarter provldod, and the annual 

lloensr fee for opurtore to work at 

the trade or pactloo ot beauty oulturo 

#hall be tb mum or Throo Dollare ($3.00) 

aad the am&al regiatratloa for ror mauio ur I8te l hall be Two Dollar8 and msty 

Cents ($e.bO), and the annunl ragllrtratloa rer ror an lnetruotor ehall be Ten 

Dollar8 (;lO.OO) , aad the annual regletntion fee to ooaduot a beaut eohaol 

ahall be One Hunbrad Dollare ( 5 100.00). 

*It IO Iatoaded by this Act to levy 

via 00ur0t f2-0~1 th8 0p8m0r or MY 

beauty parlor ooaduoted and operated by 

one (1) pereon only a0 tax .or .ree ror 

exasIuatIoa oharge L •XOOII~ of the 

Three Dollars 03.00) roe herolaberore 

prmldad. any other l eotion Or thIB AOt 

30 the 06atriiry notwltheta511ag.W 

Seotioa b 0r Art1018 VIII or the State 

tioa provldee: 

Viím1 n00 ey l hnll be dram +EWJIL%~O 

Treaarer but la ~ureuanoe or ape0iri0 

approprlatloae ~81~48 by law; nor ehall 

say appropriation 8f moary be mnde for 

a lo-r stew thaa two year8 * * +" 

OoaetItuThe oaeb of Union ve. Lockhart, ll4 S.W. (2d) 

sib, am118 other things hold8 in orfoot that a fudgmeat 

ox-editor who 18 matitled to p a p wa t 0r ma ey l rroaeolialy 

plaord In the Oeneral Revoaue tuad by the State Traaeurer 

I8 not l ntltlod to a writ 0r mandame oompelling payment 

theroor by 8uOh orrioor to the #td5aeat orrdltor. 

You ire re8~pmotM.l~ l dvleed tht $t. Isi the opInIon or thie drpartmeat that the Stat.0 Board or Halrdreeeere 

c 008ia010gi8t8 0-0t urea th0 ~~CU~OY 00ii00tea thr0u8h 
- . . - 

Queen Arbuokle, Pwp S 

t 

an error whloh ham bean dopoeltmd la the Oenml Revenue 

Tuna or the State, aor Imm a #hop lloease ror the rlroal 

par oi 1939 for the acl2ifional rmlttanoo l rroaeouely oolleotod, after euoh rea hae born plaoea in tb General Lavaau0 mid or the state. 

inQuiry 

. 

;~VI that the rorogoing r+ny axywue your 

Your8 vary truly 

ATTORmY oJnmll& OT TEXAS 

BY (6) ba0ii WI~MUI 

Ae8Ietant 

APPROVED: 6eptember 19, 1939 

oerpld c. yann (13) 

ATTORREY OBJRRAL OF T!ZXA.S 

APPROVED 

OPLHI3~ 

GOWITTY3 

BY B.Y;.B. 

0BAm
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE AUDITED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED APRIL 30, 1997, AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-1997
<CASH>                                           4,645
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 4,645
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   4,645
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,645
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,000
<OTHER-SE>                                      32,494
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     4,645
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                29,430
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (29,430)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (29,430)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (29,430)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

PEDRO LUIS COLON,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 777 MAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 30th day of May, 2019

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
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 of Allied Security Innovations Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I Michael
J. Pellegrino, Senior Vice President & CFO 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, 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 the operations of the
  Company.





By:
                    /s/
      Michael J. PellegrinoMichael
      J. PellegrinoSenior
      Vice President & CFOApril
      14, 2010
<PAGE>   1

                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.01

                         CONSENT OF GRANT THORNTON LLP

We have issued our report dated August 16, 2001, accompanying the consolidated
financial statements of Cyberguard Corporation and Subsidiaries on Form 10-K for
the year ended June 30, 2001. We hereby consent to the incorporation by
reference of said report in the Registration Statements of CyberGuard
Corporation and Subsidiary on Forms S-8 (File No.'s 333-87347, 333-39573,
333-28813, 33-88446, 33-88448, 333-50042, 333-56768 and 333-58262).

Grant Thornton LLP

Fort Lauderdale, Florida
September 28, 2001
EXHIBIT 11 - COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS

Earnings per share has been calculated in accordance with the provisions of
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 128 "Earnings Per Share"
issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board. SFAS No. 128 requires
presentation of earnings per share on a basic computation and a diluted
computation. The basic computation divides net income by only the weighted
average number of common shares outstanding for the year and the diluted
computation gives effect to all diluted common shares that were outstanding
during the year. Earnings and outstanding shares for 1998 and 1997 have been
restated to give effect to the merger with Bryan Bancorp of Georgia, Inc. that
was consummated on December 15, 1998 and accounted for using the pooling of 
interests accounting method.

The following data shows the amounts used in computing earnings per share and
the effect on income and the weighted average number of shares of dilutive
potential common stock.

                                                   Years Ended December 31,
                                                ------------------------------
                                                  1998       1997        1996
                                                ------      ------      ------
  Income available to common shareholders:
   Used in basic earnings per share             $2,626      $2,911      $2,528
                                               -------      -------    -------
   Used in diluted earnings per share           $2,626      $2,911      $2,528
                                               -------      -------    -------
   Weighted average number of common
    shares used in basic earnings per share      2,661       2,640       2,641
   Effect of dilutive securities:
   Stock options                                    99         117          75
                                               -------     -------     -------
   Weighted average number of common
    and dilutive potential common shares
    used in diluted earnings per share           2,760       2,757       2,716
                                               =======     =======     =======
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



I, Jonathan Sandelman, state and attest that:



|1. | I am the President of Main Place Funding, LLC (the Registrant).
|-- | -----------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | I hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Registrant for the year ended December 31, 2003 (the
Report) containing financial statements 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 Registrant for the periods
presented.



|                                           
|-------------------------------------------
|                                           
|                                           
|/s/ Jonathan Sandelman                     
|                                           
|Jonathan Sandelman President March 30, 2004
#### Corvin Jerrod BOLDEN I, Appellant, v. Officer Mark BEAUPRE, in his individual capacity; Officer Kristin Sturgis, in her individual capacity; Officer John Engle, in his individual capacity; City of Minneapolis, as employer; Nurse Donna Doe, in her individual capacity, Appellees.

No. 10-2450.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: June 29, 2011.

Filed: July 5, 2011.

Corvin Jerrod Bolden I, Brooklyn Park, MN, pro se.

Cheryl Lynne Fundingsland, City Attorney’s Office, Tracey Nelson Fussy, Gregory P. Sautter, Amanda Trelstad, Minneapolis City Attorney, Minneapolis, MN, for Appellees.

Before MELLOY, GRUENDER, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

After a jury rendered a verdict for defendants on Corvin Jerrod Bolden’s 42 U.S.C. § 1988 complaint, he moved for post-judgment relief, arguing that the district court’s1 excessive-force instruction was erroneous. The district court denied his motion and Bolden appeals.

After careful review, this court concludes that the instruction fairly and adequately represents the evidence and the applicable law. *See Campos v. City of Blue Springs, Mo.,*289 F.3d 546, 551-52 (8th Cir.2002) (standard of review). This court affirms the judgment and denies the pending motion. *See*8th Cir. R. 47B.

1

. The Honorable Ann D. Montgomery, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota.
**Exhibit
31.2**
 
 I, Harry
L. Stephens, Chief Financial Officer of Community Bankshares, Inc. (the
“Company”), certify that:
 
 1.  I have
reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of the registrant;
  2.
    Based
      on my knowledge, this annual 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 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 we have:
  a)
    designed
      such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
      controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure
      that material information relating to the registrant, including its
      consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
      entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is
      being prepared;
  b)
    evaluated
      the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures
      and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
      the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period
      covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
  c)
    disclosed
      in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over
      financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s fourth fiscal
      quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
      materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial
      reporting; and
  5.
    The
      registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
      most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
      the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of
      directors:
  a)
    all
      significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
      operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
      reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record,
      process, summarize and report financial information,
and
  b)
    any
      fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
      employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control
      over financial reporting.
   By:/s/
      Harry L. Stephens
      Harry
      L. Stephens
      Chief
      Financial Officer
      Date:
      March 31, 2005
Director’s Agreement

 

This Director’sAgreement between Vysis, Inc. ("Vysis"), a Delaware corporation, andDr. Walter R. Quanstrom is effective April 1, 2000.

 

WHEREAS, Vysisand Dr. Quanstrom wish to set out the terms of compensation for Dr. Quanstrom’sservice on Vysis’ Board of Directors after his retirement from employment withBP Amoco p.l.c.

 

Therefore,Vysis and Dr. Quanstrom agree to the following Director’s Agreement.

 

(1) Vysisagrees to pay Dr. Quanstrom a monthly Director’s retainer fee of $2,000 permonth, for each month or part thereof in which he serves as a member of Vysis’Board of Directors.

 

(2) Vysisagrees to pay Dr. Quanstrom for each Vysis Board of Directors meeting that heattends in person $2,000 and for attendance by teleconference $400 for up toone hour and $750 for teleconferences over 1 hour.  Vysis further agrees to reimburse all reasonable travel and otherexpenses Dr. Quanstrom incurs for attendance at a Board of Directors meeting.  Vysis shall pay the Board meeting fee promptlyafter each meeting and shall reimburse the expenses promptly after receipt fromDr. Quanstrom of an invoice therefor.

 

(3) Dr.Quanstrom will also participate in Vysis’ 1999 Outside Directors Stock OptionPlan ("Plan") according to the terms of the Plan.  Vysis agrees that Dr. Quanstrom will begranted an initial option for 10,000 shares as specified in the Plan, with thegrant to be made as of April 1, 2000. Dr. Quanstrom’s participation in the Plan is subject to the Plan and tohis acceptance and execution of Vysis' standard stock option agreement for thePlan.

 

(4) Vysis shallindemnify Dr. Quanstrom for his service as a member of Vysis' Board ofDirectors to the fullest extent permitted under Delaware law.

 

(5) Dr.Quanstrom agrees that Vysis shall have the right to make disclosures ofinformation concerning Dr. Quanstrom as a member of Vysis' Board of Directorswhich are required by applicable law.

 

Accepted andagreed to:

 
| VYSIS,  INC.             | DR.  WALTER R. QUANSTROM |
|--------------------------|--------------------------|
|                     |                     |
|                     |                     |
| /s/  John L. Bishop |                     | /s/  Walter R. Quanstrom |
| John  L. Bishop          |                     |
| President  & CEO     |                     |
|                          |                          |  |

#
Exhibit 32.02




CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


THE SARBANES -OXLEY ACT OF 2002


CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER





I, Vincent De Lorenzo, certify that:





Inconnection with the Quarterly Report on.Form 10-Q of Digital Creative Development Corporation for the quarter ending September 30, 2009 (the"Report"), the undersigned officer of the Company, certifies, 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; as amended; and





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






Date: June 3, 2011/s/ Vincent De LorenzoVincent De LorenzoChief Financial Officer