alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

CERTIFICATION

 

I, Janet Mathews, certify that:

 

1.     I have reviewed this quarterly report onForm 10-Q of Gaiam, Inc.;

 

2.     Based on my knowledge, this report does notcontain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3.     Based on my knowledge, the financialstatements, and other financial information included in this report, fairlypresent in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;

 

4.     The registrant’s other certifying officerand I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have:

 

(a)        Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

 

(b)        Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

 

(c)        Disclosed in this report any change inthe registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred duringthe registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscalquarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and

 

5.     The registrant’s other certifying officerand I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controlover financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committeeof the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

 

(a)        All significant deficiencies andmaterial weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and

 

(b)        Any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 
| Date: October 27, 2004 | /s/ Janet Mathews       |   |
|------------------------|-------------------------|--------|
|                   | Janet Mathews           |
|                   | Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
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 Quarterly Report of BF Acquisition Group
I, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending July 31,
2001 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), I, William Colucci, Treasurer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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 the Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.

Dated: January 22, 2004

                           /s/ William Colucci
                           -----------------------------
                           William Colucci, Treasurer
                           BF Acquisition Group I, Inc.
85 A.3d 479

#### HOSPITAL & HEALTHSYSTEM ASSOCIATION OF PENNSYLVANIA, Pennsylvania Medical Society and Pennsylvania Podiatric Medical Association, Respondents v. INSURANCE COMMISSIONER, Petitioner.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

Feb. 12, 2014.

*307
      *ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 12th day of February 2014 the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issue set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all remaining issues. The issue, as stated by petitioner, is:

> Did the Commonwealth Court err by concluding that 40 P.S. § 1303.712(d) requires the Commission to “spend down” any balance in the MCARE Fund in calculating annual provider assessments when the Court’s opinion disregards the plain language and purpose of the statute, disregards accepted statutory construction principles and conflicts with the court’s decision in *Meier v. Maleski,*670 A.2d 755 (Pa. Cmwlth.1996), *aff'd without op.,*549 Pa. 171, 700 A.2d 1262 (1997)?
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Federal Maritime Commission","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov","author_name":"cmoran","title":"Commission Meeting Scheduled for May 29, 2024\u00a0 - Federal Maritime Commission","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"nQYrAIz89T\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/articles\/commission-meeting-scheduled-for-may-29-2024\/\">Commission Meeting Scheduled for May 29, 2024\u00a0<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/articles\/commission-meeting-scheduled-for-may-29-2024\/embed\/#?secret=nQYrAIz89T\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Commission Meeting Scheduled for May 29, 2024\u00a0” — Federal Maritime Commission\" data-secret=\"nQYrAIz89T\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"SUNSHINE ACT MEETING  TIME AND DATE: May 29, 2024; 1:00 p.m.  PLACE: The meeting will be held at the Surface Transportation Board at the address below and also streamed live on the Federal Maritime Commission\u2019s YouTube channel. Surface Transportation Board395 E. Street, SWRoom # 1042 (Hearing Room)Washington, DC 20423 STATUS: Parts of this meeting will be open to the public. The rest [...]","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/seal_final_sm.jpg","thumbnail_width":300,"thumbnail_height":293}
#### Helena Celeste Lola Pedro PUATI; et al., Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 07-71925.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Nov. 16, 2010.*

Filed Nov. 22, 2010.

Helena Celeste Lola Pedro, pro se.

Samuel Ouya Maina, Law Offices of S. Ouya Maina, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioners.

Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, OIL, DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice, Russell John Verby, Dalin Riley Holyoak, Esquire, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

*181Before: TASHIMA, BERZON, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Helena Celeste Lola Pedro Puati, and her children, natives and citizens of Angola, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying them application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence factual findings. *Wakkary v. Holder,*558 F.3d 1049, 1056 (9th Cir.2009). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s determination that Puati did not demonstrate the harms she and her friends and family suffered amounted to past persecution. *See Singh v. INS,*134 F.3d 962, 969 (9th Cir.1998) (explaining that when there is no evidence of significant physical violence or specific threats of serious harm, the court is unlikely to find persecution). Substantial evidence also supports the IJ’s finding that Puati does not have a well-founded fear of future persecution because her fear of individualized risk is too speculative. *See Nagoulko v. INS,*333 F.3d 1012, 1018 (9th Cir.2003). Further, the record does not compel the conclusion that Puati established a pattern or practice of persecution. *See Wakkary v. Holder,*558 F.3d 1049, 1060-61 (9th Cir.2009). Accordingly, Puati’s asylum claim fails.

Because Puati did not establish eligibility for asylum, it necessarily follows she failed to satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. *See Zehatye v. Gonzales,*453 F.3d 1182, 1190 (9th Cir.2006).

Finally, substantial evidence also supports the IJ’s conclusion that Puati is not eligible for CAT protection because she failed to show it is more likely than not she would be tortured in Angola. *See Wakkary v. Holder,*558 F.3d 1049, 1067-68 (9th Cir.2009).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3329 

To amend title 49, United States Code, to allow certain urbanized areas 

with a population of over 200,000 to be eligible under the small transit 

intensive cities formula, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 19, 2021 

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

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To amend title 49, United States Code, to allow certain 

urbanized areas with a population of over 200,000 to 

be eligible under the small transit intensive cities formula, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Small Transit Commu5 nities Modernization Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. ELIGIBLE AREA. 

7 Section 5336(i) of title 49, United States Code, is 

8 amended— 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3329 IH

1 (1) in paragraph (1) by striking subparagraph 

2 (A) and inserting the following: 

3 ‘‘(A) ELIGIBLE AREA.— 

4 ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—Except as pro5 vided in clause (ii), the term ‘eligible area’ 

6 means an urbanized area with a population 

7 of less than 200,000 that meets or exceeds 

8 in one or more performance categories the 

9 industry average for all urbanized areas 

10 with a population of at least 200,000 but 

11 not more than 999,999, as determined by 

12 the Secretary in accordance with sub13 section (c)(2). 

14 ‘‘(ii) EXCEPTION.—For any fiscal 

15 year beginning after the date of enactment 

16 of the Small Transit Communities Mod17 ernization Act through fiscal year 2030, 

18 with respect to a transit agency that 

19 served an urbanized area determined by 

20 the 2010 census to have had a population 

21 of less than 200,000, the term ‘eligible 

22 area’ shall include an urbanized area 

23 that— 

24 ‘‘(I) was determined to be an ur25 banized area with a population of at 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 3329 IH

1 least 200,000 but not more than 

2 999,999, according to the most recent 

3 decennial census; and 

4 ‘‘(II) met or exceeded one or 

5 more of the performance categories 

6 described in subparagraph (B) in each 

7 of the 3 years prior to the year in 

8 which the apportionment is pro9 vided.’’; and 

10 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

11 ‘‘(3) CENSUS PHASE-OUT.—Before apportioning 

12 funds under subsection (h)(3), for any urbanized 

13 area that is no longer an eligible area due to a 

14 change in population in the most recent decennial 

15 census, the Secretary shall apportion to such urban16 ized area, for 3 fiscal years, an amount equal to half 

17 of the funds apportioned to such urbanized area pur18 suant to this subsection for the previous fiscal 

19 year.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
{"id":6769,"date":"2022-06-27T17:30:16","date_gmt":"2022-06-27T21:30:16","guid":{"rendered":"\/?p=6769"},"modified":"2022-06-27T17:50:54","modified_gmt":"2022-06-27T21:50:54","slug":"fmc-is-conducting-server-and-application-maintenance","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"\/fmc-is-conducting-server-and-application-maintenance\/","title":{"rendered":"Updated: FMC has Completed Conducting Server and Application Maintenance"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>Updated June 27, 2022\u00a0<\/strong>(Originally Posted June 13, 2022)<\/p>\n<p>The Federal Maritime Commission has completed conducting server maintenance on the following systems which are now accessible to the public:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Common Carrier Tariff and MTO Schedule Registration Automated Form FMC-1<\/li>\n<li>Application for License as an Ocean Transportation Intermediary Automated Form FMC-18<\/li>\n<li>E-Monitoring<\/li>\n<li>The Electronic Reading Room<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused.<\/p>\n<p> <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Updated June 27, 2022\u00a0(Originally Posted June 13, 2022) The Federal Maritime Commission has completed conducting server maintenance on the following systems which are now accessible to the public: Common Carrier Tariff and MTO Schedule Registration Automated Form FMC-1 Application for License as an Ocean Transportation Intermediary Automated Form FMC-18 E-Monitoring... <a class=\"read-more\" href=\"\/fmc-is-conducting-server-and-application-maintenance\/\">Read More »<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":7,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[4],"tags":[],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6769"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/7"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6769"}],"version-history":[{"count":8,"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6769\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6820,"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6769\/revisions\/6820"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6769"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6769"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6769"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3033 

To amend title 46, United States Code, with respect to the projects eligible 

for certain port and intermodal improvement grants, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 7, 2021 

Mr. DEFAZIO (for himself, Mr. GRAVES of Missouri, and Mr. CARBAJAL) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 

Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To amend title 46, United States Code, with respect to 

the projects eligible for certain port and intermodal improvement grants, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Resilient Ports Act’’. 

5 SEC. 2. PORT DEVELOPMENT. 

6 Section 50302 of title 46, United States Code, is 

7 amended— 

8 (1) in subsection (c)— 

9 (A) in paragraph (3)(A)(ii)— 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3033 IH

1 (i) in subclause (II) by striking ‘‘; or’’ 

2 and inserting a semicolon; and 

3 (ii) by adding at the end the fol4 lowing: 

5 ‘‘(IV) emissions mitigation meas6 ures directly related to reducing the 

7 overall carbon footprint from port op8 erations; or’’; 

9 (B) in paragraph (6)(B)— 

10 (i) in clause (i) by striking ‘‘; and’’ 

11 and inserting a semicolon; 

12 (ii) in clause (ii) by striking the pe13 riod and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

14 (iii) by adding at the end the fol15 lowing: 

16 ‘‘(iii) projects that increase the port’s 

17 resilience to sea-level rise, flooding, and ex18 treme weather events, including such 

19 events related to climate change.’’; 

20 (C) in paragraph (7)(B) by striking ‘‘18 

21 percent’’ and inserting ‘‘25 percent’’; and 

22 (D) in paragraph (12) by adding at the 

23 end the following: 

24 ‘‘(D) RESILIENCE.—The term ‘resilience’ 

25 means the ability to anticipate, prepare for, 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 3033 IH

1 adapt to, withstand, respond to, and recover 

2 from operational disruptions and sustain critical 

3 operations at ports, including disruptions 

4 caused by natural or manmade hazards. 

5 ‘‘(E) CARBON FOOTPRINT.—The term 

6 ‘carbon footprint’ means the total carbon-based 

7 pollutants, products, and any greenhouse gases 

8 that are emitted into the atmosphere resulting 

9 from the consumption of fossil fuels. 

10 ‘‘(F) CLIMATE CHANGE.—The term ‘cli11 mate change’ means detectable changes in 1 or 

12 more climate system components over multiple 

13 decades, including— 

14 ‘‘(i) changes in the average tempera15 ture of the atmosphere or ocean; 

16 ‘‘(ii) changes in regional precipitation, 

17 winds, and cloudiness; and 

18 ‘‘(iii) changes in the severity or dura19 tion of extreme weather, including 

20 droughts, floods, and storms.’’; and 

21 (2) in the heading for subsection (d) by striking 

22 ‘‘INLAND’’ and inserting ‘‘INLAND RIVER’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTHCOURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH 

	NO. 2-06-006-CV

NO. 2-06-155-CV

Ex Parte S.R.D., a child

In the Interest of B.G.D. a/k/a S.R.D., A Child	APPELLANT

	----------

	FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 COURT OF WICHITA COUNTY	NO. 2-006  -04400                  -CV

JOSEPH H. LEE, III, VIRGINIA K. LEE AND 	APPELLANTS

PATRICIA LEE BARROW AND SAVINGS 

OF AMERICA, INC.		   APPELLANT	

	V.

 OPAL LEE, IN HER CAPACITY AS 	APPELLEE

 TEMPORARY ADMINISTRATOR OF 

THE ESTATE OF DALE T. LEE, DECEASED	

	----------

	FROM THE         PROBATE DISTRICT COURT  NO. 2 OF                    TARRANT COUNTY

	----------

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

	----------

	We have considered appellant’s [s’]’ “Motion To Dismiss aAppealNotice Of Nonsuit.”  It is the court’s opinion that the motion should be granted; therefore, we dismiss the appeal.  See TEX. R. APP. P.Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1), 43.2(f).

	Costs of the appeal shall be paid by the appellants [ [s][- [oOR the the party incurring the same], for which let execution issue.  See Tex. R. App. P.Tex. R. App. P. 43.4.

								PER CURIAM

PANEL D:  

    HOLMAN, GARDNER, and WALKER                                     , JJ.

DELIVERED:    September 28, 2006  

	COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH 

	NO. 2-08-055              -CV

KiImMbBeErRlLyY VeErRhHoOeEvV	APPELLANT	

	V.

PrRoOgGrReEsSsSiIvVeE CoOuUnNtTyY MuUtTuUaAlL InNsSuUrRaAnNcCeE CoOmMpPaAnNyY 	APPELLEE

 INSURANCE COMPANY 	

	----------

	FROM THE  67th 7TH         DISTRICT COURT OF TRRANARRANT                     COUNTY

	----------

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

	----------

	We have considered the parties’ appellant’s [s’] “Agreed Motion For To Dismissal Of Appeal.”  It is the court’s opinion that  THE the motion should be granted and the prio; therefore, we withdraw ourthe prior opinion and judgment of July 30, 2009 and dismiss the appeal and the prioor opninion and jugdmgment of July 30, 2009 is wiethdrawnent of .  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(21), 43.2(f).  Appellant and appellee’s motiosns for rehearings are denied as moot.

	Costs of the appeal shall be paid by  appellant[s], for which let execution issue.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(d). [OR the party incurring the same, for which let execution issue.  See Tex. R. App. P. 43.4.]

								PER CURIAM

PANEL:    GARDNER and WALKER, JJ.

DELIVERED:  December 3November 245, 2009
#### Jeffrey MIMMS and Gloria Mimms, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. U.S. BANK, N.A., et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 15-2454.

United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 19, 2016.*

Decided Jan. 20, 2016.

Jeffrey Mimms, Flossmoor, IL, pro se.

Gloria Mimms, Flossmoor, IL, pro se.

Harry N. Arger, Rosa M. Tumialan, Dykema Gossett PLLC, Chicago, IL, Cody Joseph Cocanig, Winston *&*Strawn LLP, Chicago, IL, for Defendant-Appellee.

Before RICHARD A. POSNER, Circuit Judge, FRANK H. EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judge and DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge.

*

 After examining the briefs and record, we have concluded that oral argument is unnecessary. Thus the appeal is submitted on the briefs and record. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2)(C).

ORDER

Jeffrey and Gloria Mimms defaulted on their home mortgage, and in May 2014 an Illinois court entered a judgment of foreclosure. A judicial sale was conducted in March 2015, but the following month, before the state court had approved that sale, the Mimmses brought this action in federal court under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. They essentially claim that the defendants, all private financial institutions, violated the Constitution of the United States by filing the foreclosure action. The district court dismissed the suit.

The plaintiffs’ complaint and their appellate briefs are familiar. Twice previously we have reviewed complaints and briefs identical in both wording and typeface (except for details about the homeowners’ addresses and mortgages). *See Carter v. Homeward Residential, Inc.,*794 F.3d 806 (7th Cir.2015); *Sturdivant v. Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.,*602 Fed.Appx. 351, 351 (7th Cir.2015). Both times we concluded that the complaints did not invoke the district court’s subject-matter jurisdiction. The same is true for the plaintiffs’ complaint in this case, and their lawsuit was properly dismissed.

We note that the plaintiffs filed and pursued this appeal after our opinion in *Carter*was issued, making this appeal frivolous. Accordingly, we invoke Rule 38 and issue an order to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed for filing a frivolous appeal. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 38 (“If a court of appeals determines that an ap*628peal is frivolous, it may, after ... notice from the court and reasonable opportunity to respond, award just damages and single or double costs to the appellee.”). The Mimmses shall respond within 14 days of the date of this order.

AFFIRMED