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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-7859

ERIC LEE JOHNSON,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

RONALD E. MOATS; RICHARD LANHAM, SR., Commissioner of Correction; GARY KENT, Correctional

Officer; JEFFRY WILSON, Correctional Officer;

KAREN ELLIOTT, Case Management Supervisor;

RICHARD GROVE, Case Manager; HERBERT COOPER,

Lieutenant, Housing Unit #1 Manager; GENE

RIPPEON, Commissary Supervisor; JACK HARNE,

Captain, RCI Administrative Remedy Coordinator; GARY R. SMITH, Sergeant involved on

3/26/94; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER INVOLVED ON

2/12/95; JEFFERY ENGLEHART, Correctional

Officer, Individually and in their Official

Capacities,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA95-545-CCB)

Submitted: March 21, 1996 Decided: April 10, 1996

Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
2

Eric Lee Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr.,

Attorney General, Audrey J. S. Carrion, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY

GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. Johnson v. Moats, No. CA-95-545-CCB (D. Md. Nov. 1, 1995).

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
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED October 24, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-11372 Conference Calendar

RONALD D. KELLY, Petitioner-Appellant,

versus DAN JOSLIN, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:05-CV-1402

-------------------- Before JOLLY, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Ronald D. Kelly, federal prisoner # 15592-064, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition. Kelly pleaded guilty in the Western District of Oklahoma to possession with the intent to manufacture a controlled substance. His § 2241 petition challenged the constitutionality of his sentence in light of United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220 (2005).No. 05-11372 -2- On direct appeal, Kelly’s sentence was vacated under Booker , and the matter was remanded for resentencing. United States v. Kelly , 159 F. App’x 864, 867-68 (10th Cir. 2005). As Kelly has received all of the relief he was seeking in his § 2241 petition, his appeal is moot. See McRae v. Hogan , 576 F.2d 615, 616-17 (5th Cir. 1978). Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED as moot.
Order entered February 8, 2021

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-19-01553-CV

PHYLLIS SLICKER, Appellant

V.

WILLIAM SLICKER AND LESLIE G. MARTIN, P.C., Appellees

On Appeal from the 330th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DF-11-15742

ORDER

Before the Court is appellee Leslie G. Martin, P.C.’s February 4, 2021 

second motion for extension of time to file its brief. We GRANT the motion and 

ORDER the brief be filed no later than February 18, 2021.

/s/ KEN MOLBERG 

JUSTICE
Exhibit 99.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection  with the Quarterly  Report of Altair  Nanotechnologies  Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the  quarterly  period ended March 31, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
I, William P. Long, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

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

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


/s/ William P. Long
--------------------------------
William P. Long
Chief Executive Officer
May 14, 2003
Exhibit
32.1

STATEMENT
FURNISHED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE 
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002, 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

The
undersigned, Charles M. Sprock, is the President and Chief Executive Officer of
Rome Bancorp, Inc. (the Registrant). This statement is being furnished in
connection with the filing by the Company of the Registrants Quarterly Report
on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 (the Report).

By
execution of this statement, I certify that:

| |    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                     
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | A) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of
 Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)) and                                                                 
| |    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                     
| | B) | the information contained in the Report fairly
 presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
 operations of the Registrant as of the dates and for the periods covered by
 the Report.

This
statement is authorized to be attached as an exhibit to the Report so that this
statement will accompany the Report at such time as the Report is filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not intended
that this statement be deemed to be filed for purposes of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

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

|      |              |                                       | 
|----- | ------------ | ------------------------------------- | 
|Date: | May 10, 2010 | /s/ Charles M. Sprock                 | 
|      |              |                                       | 
|      |              | Charles M. Sprock                     | 
|      |              | President and Chief Executive Officer | 

---
**Exhibit 99.1**

 

**Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to**

**18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to**

**Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

I, Vincent C. Smith, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002, that the Quarterly Report of Quest Software, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2003, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and thatinformation contained in such Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Quest Software, Inc. 

 

 

By:         /s/    VINCENT C.SMITH                                         

Name:    **Vincent C. Smith**

Title:    **  Chief Executive Officer**
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2832 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2832

  To require the Secretary of the Treasury to develop a strategy and 
    timeline for the repayment of assistance received by financial 
  institutions under the Troubled Asset Relief Program, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 11, 2009

Mr. Edwards of Texas introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                 to the Committee on Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To require the Secretary of the Treasury to develop a strategy and 
    timeline for the repayment of assistance received by financial 
  institutions under the Troubled Asset Relief Program, and for other 
                               purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Taxpayer Repayment Act of 2009''.

SEC. 2. TIMELINE FOR REPAYMENT OF TARP FUNDS.

    (a) In General.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall develop a 
strategy and timeline for the repayment of all assistance received by 
financial institutions under TARP.
    (b) Report to the Congress.--Not more than 6 months after the date 
of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Treasury shall issue 
a report to the Congress containing--
            (1) the strategy and timeline developed under subsection 
        (a);
            (2) the date by which the Secretary expects to have 
        received all repayment of assistance received by financial 
        institutions under TARP;
            (3) the date by which the Secretary expects the Government 
        to have divested itself of all assets acquired under TARP; and
            (4) the date by which the Secretary expects to have 
        recovered all TARP funds spent on insuring troubled assets.
    (c) TARP Defined.--For purposes of this section, the term ``TARP'' 
means the Troubled Asset Relief Program under title I of the Emergency 
Economic Stabilization Act of 2008.
                                 <all>
```
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

IN RE:

ROBERT JOSEPH GAUDET JR.,

Relator.

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-24-00315-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, we deny the petition. All pending motions are denied as moot.
2

GINA M. PALAFOX, Justice

August 20, 2024

Before Alley, C.J., Palafox, J, and Barajas, C.J. (Ret.)

Barajas, C.J. (Ret.) (Sitting by Assignment)
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, December 08, 2014.

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, December 08, 2014

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A15I0063. NANCY A. FELIX et al. v. JUDITH ANN MCCLELLAN.

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

hereby DENIED.

LC NUMBERS:

13C05995
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF RENTAL SERVICE CORPORATION AS OF AND FOR THE
THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1999 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-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                          12,208
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  127,607
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,341
<INVENTORY>                                     47,869
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                         904,723
<DEPRECIATION>                                 171,726
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,370,412
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                        785,497
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           243
<OTHER-SE>                                     425,664
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,370,412
<SALES>                                         59,045
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               174,752
<CGS>                                           42,322
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  128,109
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                16,088
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   439
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              16,500
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 13,616
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,852
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              7,764
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,764
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .32
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .32
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1999 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999             DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999             JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                          10,900                     367
<SECURITIES>                                     1,011                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      286                     443
<ALLOWANCES>                                       175                      95
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                12,974                     910
<PP&E>                                           3,174                   1,136
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,001                     319
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  15,237                   1,792
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,900                   3,671
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           29,801                   8,247
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                             4                       4
<OTHER-SE>                                    (22,124)                (10,454)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    15,237                   1,792
<SALES>                                            653                     434
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,276                     724
<CGS>                                              100                     112
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      425                     212
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                11,330                   4,577
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    33                      41
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  83                      66
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (10,215)                 (4,118)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (10,215)                 (4,118)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (10,215)                 (4,118)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (3.28)                  (1.93)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (3.28)                  (1.93)


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          20,220
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                             869
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                15,250
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     48,160
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        151,151
<ALLOWANCE>                                      2,631
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 231,967
<DEPOSITS>                                     206,637
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              2,881
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        15,229
<OTHER-SE>                                       7,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 231,967
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 15,793
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                2,416
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   427
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                18,636
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               5,348
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,452
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           13,184
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      375
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  15
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  9,455
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,316
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       5,580
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    427
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,673
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.40
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.31
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.04
<LOANS-NON>                                      1,197
<LOANS-PAST>                                        16
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 2,219
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      217
<RECOVERIES>                                       254
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                2,631
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          2,631
        

</TABLE>
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 92-4120

Summary Calendar

CURTIS SHABAZZ,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

JAMES A. LYNAUGH, ET AL.,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

(September 29, 1992)

Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, DUHÉ and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Curtis Shabazz, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis,

appeals the dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) of his civil rights

suit. The district court found an absence of a significant injury,

a requirement under then controlling circuit precedents. Those

precedents were overruled by the intervening decision of the
 

1 _____ U.S. _____, 112 S.Ct. 995, 117 L.Ed.2d 156 (1992).

 

2 Spears v. McCotter, 766 F.2d 179 (5th Cir. 1985). In

Spears we approved the use of a limited evidentiary hearing in lieu

of a written questionnaire to flesh out the factual and legal bases

for pro se prisoner complaints. These hearings were recorded on

audiotape, a procedure which, after transcription, produced what we

implicitly approved as a sufficient appellate record. See Wesson

v. Oglesby, 910 F.2d 278 (5th Cir. 1990). In the present case, as

in several others previously reviewed by us including 92-4125,

Sparks v. Murphy; 92-4191, Green v. Ward; 92-4183, Green v. Scott;

92-4256, Aguilar v. Terrell; 92-4205, Winn v. Turner; 92-4298,

Graves v. Russell; and 92-4233, Holman v. Reed, the hearing was

recorded on videotape which is superior to the audiotape and, for

Spears hearings purposes, is considered a sufficient record of the

proceedings.

2

Supreme Court in Hudson v. McMillian.

1 We vacate and remand for

reconsideration in light of Hudson.

Shabazz filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suit against various

officials of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice and a

corrections officer at the Eastham Unit, complaining of excessive

force which resulted in injury to his knee and shoulder. Following

a Spears2 hearing, and determining that no significant injury was

sustained, the district court exercised the authority vested by

28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) and dismissed the in forma pauperis suit as

frivolous. Shabazz timely appealed.

In overruling this court's precedents, the Hudson Court held

that in order to establish an eighth amendment violation in an

excessive force case, the complainant need not plead and prove

significant injury as a necessary requisite for his claim.

Accordingly, we must vacate the dismissal and remand for

reconsideration in light of the teachings of Hudson. In this
 

3 _____ U.S. at _____, 112 S.Ct. at 999, 117 L.Ed.2d at 166

(citing Whitley v. Albers, 475 U.S. 312, 321, 106 S.Ct. 1078, 1085,

89 L.Ed.2d 251, 261-62 (1986)).

3

reconsideration the district court should look to: the extent of

the injury suffered; the need for application of force; the

relationship between that need and the amount of force used; the

threat reasonably perceived by responsible officials; and any

efforts made to temper the severity of a forceful response.

Hudson.

3

VACATED and REMANDED.