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

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

NOVEMBER 1, 2005

THOMAS K. KAHN

CLERK

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 04-13210

 

(D.C. Docket No. 03-00023-CV)

 

TANNER ADVERTISING GROUP, L.L.C., 

 Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

FAYETTE COUNTY, GEORGIA, 

 Defendant-Appellee.

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

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Northern District of Georgia

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

(Opinion June 9, 2005, 411 F.3d 1272, 11 Cir. 2005) th

(November 1, 2005)

Before EDMONDSON, Chief Judge, TJOFLAT, ANDERSON, BIRCH, DUBINA, BLACK, CARNES, BARKETT,

HULL, MARCUS, WILSON and PRYOR, Circuit Judges*.

B Y T H E C O U R T :

A member of this Court in active service having requested a poll on the suggestion of rehearing en banc

and a majority of the judges in this Court in active service having voted in favor of granting a rehearing en banc,

IT IS ORDERED that the above cause shall be reheard by this court en banc. The previous panel's

opinion is hereby VACATED.

 __________________________

*Senior United States Circuit Judge Phyllis A. Kravitch has elected to participate in further proceedings in this matter

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 46(c).
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-7655

BYRON MONROE STEWART, Petitioner - Appellant,
v. ROBERT KOPPEL, Warden; STATE OF MARYLAND, Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District ofMaryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (1:07-cv02866-AMD) Submitted: May 22, 2008 Decided: May 27, 2008 Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Byron Monroe Stewart, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Byron Monroe Stewart seeks to appeal the district court’s order treating his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion as a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition, and dismissing it on that basis. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000); Reid v. Angelone , 369 F.3d 363, 369 (4th Cir. 2004). A certificate of appealability will not issue 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 that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Stewart has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. Additionally, we construe Stewart’s notice of appeal and informal brief as an application to file a second or successive petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. United States v. Winestock , 340 F.3d 200, 208 (4th Cir. 2003). In order to obtain authorization to file a successive § 2254 petition, a prisoner must assert claims- 3 - based on either: (1) a new rule of constitutional law, previously unavailable, made retroactive by the Supreme Court to cases on collateral review; or (2) newly discovered evidence, not previously discoverable by due diligence, that would be sufficient to establish by clear and convincing evidence that, but for constitutional error, no reasonable factfinder would have found the petitioner guilty of the offense. 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(2) (2000). Stewart’s claims do not satisfy either of these criteria. Therefore, we deny authorization to file a successive § 2254 petition. 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
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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.

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

January 25, 2013

h0122

Order 

January 25, 2013

145914

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 145914

COA: 310613

Kent CC: 98-011526-FH

IRVING VELEZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the September 5, 2012 

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

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
**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**

|   | (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 result of operations of the                Company. |

|                                      |                                                                        |                             |
|-------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------|
|                                      |                                                                        |                             |
| Date: August                10, 2007 | By:                                                               | /s/                David R. Ross |
|                                      | David                R. Ross                                                |
|                                      | President                and Interim Chief Executive                Officer |

----
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16

- 60673 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee

v. CHRIS EUGENE COSNER,
Defendant-Appellant

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi USDC No. 1:15 -CR- 96 -1

Before JONES, WIENER, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * A jury convicted Chris Eugene Cosner of bank robbery in violation of
18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and (d) and brandishing a firearm in relation to a crime of violence in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1) (A) (ii). The district court sentenced Cosner as a career offender pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 4 B1.1 to a total of 360 months of imprisonment. Cosner now appeals, contending that his bank robbery conviction is not a “crime of violence” for the purpose s of serving as a

* 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 Fif h Circuit 

### FILED June 13, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 16-60673 Document: 00514031263 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/13/2017No. 16

- 60673

2 predicate offense for his § 924(c)(1) conviction or for application of the career
offender guideline. He also asserts that the district court improperly participated in plea negotiations and that trial counsel rendered constitutionally ineffective assistance. We affirm. First, as Cosner concedes, his challenges to the characterization of his federal bank robbery conviction of a “crime of violence” are foreclosed by our
recent decision in United States v. Brewer , which held that federal bank robbery is categorically a “crime of violence” as defined by § 4B1.2(a)(1) for the purpose of the career
- offender guideline. See 848 F.3d 711, 714

- 16 (5th Cir. 2017). Because § 4B1.2(a)(1) defines “crime of violence” “in exactly the same manner as § 924(c)(3)(A),” see United States v. Jones , 854 F.3d 737, 740 (5th Cir. 2017) , Brewer necessarily dictates that federal bank robbery is also categorically a “crime of violence” for the purposes of his § 924(c)(1) conviction,

see 848 F.3d at 714

- 16. Second, Cosner fails to establish either that the district court impermissibly participated in plea discussions or , if it did, that such participation had any effect on the fairness and impartiality of his trial and sentencing. See F ED

. R. C RIM

. P. 11(c) (1), (h); United States v. Crowell , 60 F.3d 199, 205 (5th Cir. 1995). Third, we are unpersuaded that this is a “rare case” in which the record is sufficiently developed to allow this court to consider Cosner’s claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel in the first instance on direct appeal. See United States v. Isgar , 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014). Accordingly, we dismiss those claims without prejudice to collateral review. Id. AFFIRMED. Case: 16-60673 Document: 00514031263 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/13/2017
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Melinda Jackson v. Eugene Ethridge

Appellate case number: 01

- 21

- 00 667

- C V

Trial court case number: 1176269

Trial court: County Civil Court at Law No. 2 of Harris County

Roger G. Jain and Thomas H. Smith III of Roger G. Jain & Associates, P.C. have filed a motion to withdraw as appellate counsel for appellee, Eugene Ethridge. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 6.5(a), (b). The motion states that Jain and Smith were retained to represen t appellee in the trial court, but “have not been retained to represent [appellee] in this appeal.” Further, the motion states that Jain and Smith “have attempted to contact [appellee] several times to inquire as to whether [appellee] wishes to retain [Ja in and Smith], but [appellee] has not been responsive.”

The motion complies with the requirements of Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure

6.5. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 6.5(a), (b). Further, the motion includes a certificate of conference representing that appe llant, Melinda Jackson, is not opposed to Jain and Smith’s request to

withdraw as appellate counsel for appellee. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 10.1(a)(5), 10.3(a)(2).

Accordingly, the motion is granted . The Clerk of this Court is directed to note the

withdrawal o f Roger G. Jain and Thomas H. Smith III of Roger G. Jain & Associates, P.C. as counsel for appellee on the docket of this Court.

Roger G. Jain and Thomas H. Smith III are directed to immediately notify appellee of “any deadlines or settings that [ they ] kno ws about at the time of withdrawal but that were not previously disclosed” to appellee and file a copy of the notice provided to appellee

with the Clerk of this Court. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 6.5(c)It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature:

____

/s/ April Farris

_______  Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: ___ February 15, 2022

____
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3445 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow baby formula to 

be reimbursed under a health flexible spending arrangement if the mother 

has had a mastectomy and is medically unable to breastfeed. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 31, 2009 

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (for herself and Mr. MEEK of Florida) introduced 

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow baby 

formula to be reimbursed under a health flexible spending arrangement if the mother has had a mastectomy 

and is medically unable to breastfeed. 

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

3 SECTION 1. BABY FORMULA REIMBURSEMENT UNDER 

4 HEALTH FLEXIBLE SPENDING ARRANGE5 MENT. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 106 of the Internal Rev7 enue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the 

8 following new subsection: 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3445 IH

1 ‘‘(f) SPECIAL RULE FOR HEALTH FSA REIMBURSE2 MENT.—A plan shall not fail to be treated as a health 

3 flexible spending arrangement under this section merely 

4 because such plan provides for reimbursement of baby for5 mula for a child in cases in which the mother of the child 

6 has had a mastectomy and is medically unable to 

7 breastfeed.’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

9 this section shall apply to distributions on or after the date 

10 of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
**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**

|   | (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 result of operations of the                Company. |
|--------|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                       |                                                                                                      |                                   |
|--------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------|
| Date: November                6, 2006 | By:                                                                                             | /s/                William J. Loughman |
|                                       | William                J. LoughmanChief                Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer |
|                                       |                                                                                                      |
|                                       |                                                                                                      |

----
No. 841.

#### S. Graeme Harrison, Petitioner, *v.*The Philadelphia Contributionship for the Insurance of Houses from Loss by Fire.

April 11, 1910.

*Mr. R. Mason Lisle*for the petitioner.

No appearance for the respondent.

Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
IB 

Union Calendar No. 370 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3034 

[Report No. 117–476] 

To amend title 28, United States Code, to provide an additional place for 

holding court for the Western District of Washington, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 7, 2021 

Ms. DELBENE (for herself and Mr. LARSEN of Washington) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

SEPTEMBER 19, 2022 

Reported with an amendment, committed to the Committee of the Whole 

House on the State of the Union, and ordered to be printed 

[Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the part printed in italic] 

[For text of introduced bill, see copy of bill as introduced on May 7, 2021] 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 3034 RH

A BILL 

To amend title 28, United States Code, to provide an additional place for holding court for the Western District 

of Washington, and for other purposes. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•HR 3034 RH

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

3 SECTION 1. ADDITIONAL PLACE FOR HOLDING COURT. 

4 Section 128(b) of title 28, United States Code, is 

5 amended by inserting ‘‘Mount Vernon,’’ after ‘‘Tacoma,’’. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
Union Calendar No. 370 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3034 

[Report No. 117–476] 

A BILL 

To amend title 28, United States Code, to provide 

purposes. Western District of Washington, and for other an additional place for holding court for the 

SEPTEMBER 19, 2022 

Reported with an amendment, committed to the Comand ordered to be printed mittee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Federal Maritime Commission","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov","author_name":"Catie-Megan Moran","author_url":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/author\/cmoranfmc-gov\/","title":"Comments of Federal Maritime Commissioner Rebecca F. Dye at the American Metal Market Moving Metals Conference","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"0x1hoCt6zf\"><a href=\"\/comments-of-federal-maritime-commissioner-rebecca-f-dye-at-the-american-metal-market-moving-metals-conference\/\">Comments of Federal Maritime Commissioner Rebecca F. Dye at the American Metal Market Moving Metals Conference<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"\/comments-of-federal-maritime-commissioner-rebecca-f-dye-at-the-american-metal-market-moving-metals-conference\/embed\/#?secret=0x1hoCt6zf\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Comments of Federal Maritime Commissioner Rebecca F. Dye at the American Metal Market Moving Metals Conference” — Federal Maritime Commission\" data-secret=\"0x1hoCt6zf\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script type=\"text\/javascript\">\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(c,l){\"use strict\";var e=!1,o=!1;if(l.querySelector)if(c.addEventListener)e=!0;if(c.wp=c.wp||{},c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage);else if(c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if(!t);else if(!(t.secret||t.message||t.value));else if(\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret));else{for(var r,s,a,i=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),n=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=0;o<n.length;o++)n[o].style.display=\"none\";for(o=0;o<i.length;o++)if(r=i[o],e.source!==r.contentWindow);else{if(r.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message){if(1e3<(s=parseInt(t.value,10)))s=1e3;else if(~~s<200)s=200;r.height=s}if(\"link\"===t.message)if(s=l.createElement(\"a\"),a=l.createElement(\"a\"),s.href=r.getAttribute(\"src\"),a.href=t.value,a.host===s.host)if(l.activeElement===r)c.top.location.href=t.value}}},e)c.addEventListener(\"message\",c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",t,!1),c.addEventListener(\"load\",t,!1);function t(){if(o);else{o=!0;for(var e,t,r,s=-1!==navigator.appVersion.indexOf(\"MSIE 10\"),a=!!navigator.userAgent.match(\/Trident.*rv:11\\.\/),i=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),n=0;n<i.length;n++){if(!(r=(t=i[n]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\")))r=Math.random().toString(36).substr(2,10),t.src+=\"#?secret=\"+r,t.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",r);if(s||a)(e=t.cloneNode(!0)).removeAttribute(\"security\"),t.parentNode.replaceChild(e,t);t.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:r},\"*\")}}}}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n"}
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








In connection with the Quarterly Report of Big Cat Energy Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period end of January 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "report"), I, Timothy Barritt, Chief Executive 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:





(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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated this 11th day of March, 2011.





/s/ Timothy BarrittTimothy BarrittPresident and Chief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 32
                            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 Activeworlds Corp. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Paul Goodman, Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial 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 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/ Paul Goodman
                                           ----------------
                                               Paul Goodman,
                                               Chief Executive Officer and
                                               Chief Financial Officer

Date:  August 16, 2007

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

                                                                    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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Alaska Communications Systems
Holdings, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30,
2003 (the "Report"), I, Liane Pelletier Chief Executive Officer and President 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:

(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 result of operations of the Company.

Date:  November 13, 2003            /s/ Liane Pelletier
                                    ---------------------------
                                    Liane Pelletier
                                    Chief Executive Officer and President
                                    Alaska Communications Systems Holdings, Inc.