alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Walter A. SAHLI, District Director of Immigration and Naturalization, Appellant, v. Felix Gonzalez GONZALEZ, Appellee.

No. 16250.

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit.

June 18, 1957.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 4, 1957.

Brian S. Odem, Asst. U. S. Atty., Malcolm R. Wilkey, U. S. Atty., Houston, Tex., for appellant.

James C. Abbott, McAllen, Tex., for appellee.

Before HUTCHESON, Chief Judge, and CAMERON and JONES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Held under a warrant issued pursuant to an order of deportation, appellee, by a petition for habeas corpus, sought release from the order.

The district judge, determining on the authority of United States ex rel. Carson v. Kershner, 228 F.2d 142, that petitioner was not subject to deportation, granted the writ and ordered his release.

The United States appealing from the order and insisting that the Carson case was wrongly decided and the order must be reversed, while the appellee urged the contrary view upon us, the court held its decision in abeyance pending action of the Supreme Court in the Carson case.

On June '3, 1957, in its cause No. 72, Lehmann v. United States ex rel. Carson, 77 S.Ct. 1022, the Supreme Court disapproved the decision and reversed the judgment in the Carson case. The decision of the district court in this case is accordingly disapproved, its judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded for further and not inconsistent proceedings.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-10442

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

HILBERTO IBARRA, also known as Gilberto,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:14-CR-210-2

Before DAVIS, SMITH, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Hilberto Ibarra has moved for leave 

to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 

U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). 

Ibarra has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the 

relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s 

assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

February 17, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-10442 Document: 00513383419 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/17/2016
No. 15-10442

2

Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is 

excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 

See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 15-10442 Document: 00513383419 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/17/2016
1 ... T o p ro te c t t h e p riv a c y o f t h e p a rtie s in th is c a se , w e id e n tif y the c h ild re n b y the ir initials a n d the p a re n ts b y the ir fi rs t na m e s o n ly. See T EX . F AM . C O D E A NN . § 1 0 9
. 0 0 2 (d) (V ernon 2 0 0 8 ). i i i i i i



### MEM ORA ND UM OP INION No
. 04 -0 8- 00 38 7- CV IN THE I NT ER EST OF K .S. , V .H ., A. H. , a nd J.S. Fr om the 166th J udicial District Court, Be x ar County , Texas

Trial Court No. 2007-PA-00476 Honora ble Charles E. Montema

y or, Judge Pre siding Opinion by : Kar en Ang elini, J ustice Sitt ing: Kar en Ang elini, J ustice

Phy lis J . Speedlin, J ustice Marialy n Ba rnar d, J ustice Deliver ed and F iled: Marc h 4, 2009 AFF I RMED Th is i s an a c c e l e r a te d a

pp e a l f ro m an o rd e r t e rm inatin g De nin e M. ’s pa re nta l r ig hts
. 1 The trial court found D enine M. to be indig ent but conc l u ded that her appellate points were f

rivolous. See T EX . F AM . C ODE ANN . § 263.405(d) ( Ver non 2008). De nine M.’s cour t-appointed a

ppellate attorney has also conc luded that her appellate points a re frivolous. Counsel ha s filed a motion to withdraw
a nd a br ie f i n s up po rt

of that mo tio n, statin g that, in his pr of e ssi on a l opin ion , the a

pp e a l is fr ivo lou s. Counsel’s brief a

nd motion meet the require ments of An de rs v . Ca lif or nia , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by prese nting a

profe ssional evaluation of the rec ord demonstrating why there are no arguable g rounds04
- 08
- 00 38 7- CV

- 2- for r elief. See I

n re R.R. , N o. 04 -0 3- 00 09 6- CV , 20 03 WL 21 15 79 44 , a t *4 (T e x. Ap p. —Sa n A nto nio 2 0 0 3 , n o p et . ) ( ap p l y i n g An de rs proce dure in a ppeal f rom order terminating pare ntal rig hts). Counsel
se nt a c op y of the br ie f to De nin e M. a nd a dv ise d h e r o f h e r r ig ht t o e xami ne the re c or d a nd to f ile a pro se brief. D enine M., howeve r, di d not file a pro se brief. After review ing the rec ord, we ag ree that Denine M.’ s appea l is frivolous and without merit. There fore , we a ffirm the tria l court’s judgme nt terminating Denine M.’ s pare ntal rig hts and g rant c ounsel’s motion to withdraw.

Kar en Ang elini, J ustice
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

          - [Docket Nos. ER97-2353-000 and ER97-2353-004] 

      ( print page 67239)    
Take notice that on November 30, 2001, New York State Electric & Gas Corporation (NYSEG) tendered for filing an amendment to its September 15, 2001 Compliance Filing in the above docket to supply additional information requested by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) in its October 30, 2001 letter. 

Copies of the filing have been served on all parties listed on the official service list. 

                    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest such filing should file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's rules of practice and procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). All such motions and protests should be filed on or before the comment date. Protests will be considered by the Commission to determine the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection. This filing may also be viewed on the Commission's web site at                     *http://www.ferc.gov*                     using the “RIMS” link, select “Docket#” and follow the instructions (call 202-208-2222 for assistance). Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's web site under the “e-filing” link.                 

*Comment Date:*                     December 28, 2001.                

Linwood A. Watson, Jr., 

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 01-31992 Filed 12-27-01; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

SUNSHINE ACT NOTICE

BAC 6735-01

December 5, 2014

TIME AND DATE: 10:00 a.m., Thursday, December 18, 2014

PLACE: The Richard V. Backley Hearing Room, Room 511N, 1331 

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20004 (enter from 

F Street entrance)

STATUS: Open 

MATTERS TO BE 

CONSIDERED: The Commission will hear oral argument in the matter Secretary of 

Labor v. Small Mine Development, Docket Nos. WEST 2011-

1351-M, et al. (Issues include whether the Administrative Law 

Judge erred in concluding that a refuge must be installed during 

exploration or development of an ore body when the operator 

decides not to construct a second escapeway.)

Any person attending this oral argument who requires special 

accessibility features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign language 

interpreters, must inform the Commission in advance of those 

needs. Subject to 29 C.F.R. § 2706.150(a)(3) and § 2706.160(d).

CONTACT PERSON 

FOR MORE INFO: Emogene Johnson (202) 434-9935 / (202) 708-9300 for TDD

Relay / 1-800-877-8339 for toll free.

______________________________

Sarah L. Stewart

Deputy General Counsel
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the 
financial statements for the three months ended January 31, 1997 and is 
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements. 
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                            JAN-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                               OCT-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                 JAN-31-1999
<CASH>                                       24,869
<SECURITIES>                                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  198,882
<ALLOWANCES>                                   18000
<INVENTORY>                                    25,944
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               351,488
<PP&E>                                         1,973,185
<DEPRECIATION>                                 752,183
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1,864,757
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          2,548,096
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       382
<OTHER-SE>                                     (683,721
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1,864,757
<SALES>                                         326,593
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                326,465
<CGS>                                          135,164
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  135,164
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             28,068
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (230,341
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (230,341)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (0.06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.06)
        


</TABLE>
* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the Court has determ ined that this opinio n should not be published and is not precedent except under the limit ed circumstances set fo rth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED January 23, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-40760 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaint iff- Appellee, versus CHRISTOPHER W. JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court fo r the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:04-CR-113-ALL
Before DeMOSS, STEWART and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender has mo ved fo r leave to wit hdraw and has f iled a brief in accordance wit h Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief shows that there are no nonfrivolous issues fo r appeal. Accordingly, the motion fo r leave to wit hdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and this appeal is DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2. The Government’s motion to dismiss the appeal isDENIED.
# CIGINAL

INTHE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA OP 22-0751
MARSHALL BRADLEY ROWE,

Petitioner,

v. SGT.BRADLEY BRAGG, Lewis & Clark County Detention Center,

Respondent. 

# FILED JAN 1 1 2023 Bowen G eenwood CI_ r ,rerna Court

o* Montana ORDER

Marshall Bradley Rowe has filed a Petition for Writ ofHabeas Corpus, asserting that his sentence calculation is in error because his three sentences should all run concurrently. Rowe has also filed supplemental documents, including a sentence calculation and sentencingjudgments. Upon review ofhis Petition and attachments, we deem it appropriate torequire a response. Therefore, IT IS ORDERED that that the Attorney General or counsel for the Department of Correction is GRANTEDthirty days from the date ofthis Order in which to prepare, file, and serve a written response to the petition for a writ of habeas corpus together with appropriate documentary exhibits. The Clerk is directed to provide a copy ofthis Order to counsel of record and to Marshall Bradley Rowe personally. DATED this 

# 10

4 - day ofJanuary, 2023.

At " "", "'Ist,ftV •-•

. A l Justice 01/11/2023

Case Number: OP 22-0751
896.472
**EXHIBIT 31.2****CERTIFICATION**I, Timothy D. Heffner, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Foundry Networks, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15 (f)) for the registrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report isbeing prepared;  (b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internalcontrol over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to providereasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparationof financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally acceptedaccounting principles;  (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  (d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe 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 whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.              /s/ Timothy D. Heffner   Timothy D. Heffner   Chief Financial Officer,
#### Columbus Bar Association *v.*King.

[Cite as *Columbus Bar Assn. v. King,*139 Ohio St.3d 1242, 2014-Ohio-2679.]

(No. 2011-1418

Submitted June 18, 2014

Decided June 23, 2014.)

{¶ 1} This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing of an application for reinstatement by respondent, Ray Jetmore King, Attorney Registration No. 0020733, last known business address in Gahanna, Ohio.

{¶ 2} The court, coming now to consider its order of March 6, 2012, wherein the court pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(6)(B)(3) suspended respondent from the practice of law for a period of two years and ordered respondent to complete an additional 12 hours of continuing legal education related to accounting and law-practice management, finds that respondent has substantially complied with that order and with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. V(10)(A).

{¶ 3} Therefore, it is ordered by this court that respondent is reinstated to the practice of law in the state of Ohio. It is further ordered that respondent is placed on probation for a period of one year in accordance with Gov.Bar R. V(9) and consistent with the opinion rendered herein on March 6, 2012.

{¶ 4} It is further ordered that in accordance with Gov.Bar R. V(9), on or before 30 days from the date of this order, relator shall file with the clerk of this court the name of the attorney who will serve as respondent’s monitor. It is further ordered that at the end of respondent’s probationary period, relator shall file with the clerk of this court a report indicating whether respondent, during the probationary period, complied with the terms of the probation.

{¶ 5} It is further ordered that at the end of the probationary period, respondent may apply for termination of probation as provided in Gov.Bar R. V(9). It is further ordered that respondent’s probation shall not be terminated until (1) respondent files an application for terniination of probation in compliance with Gov.Bar R. V(9)(D), (2) respondent complies with this and all other orders issued by this court, (3) respondent complies with the Rules for the Government of the Bar of Ohio, (4) relator files with the clerk of this court a report indicating that respondent has complied with the terms of the probation, and (5) this court orders that the probation be terminated.

{¶ 6} It is further ordered that the clerk of this court issue certified copies of this order as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(1), that publication be made as *1243provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(2), and that respondent bear the costs of publication.

O’Connor, C.J., and Pfeifer, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, Kennedy, French, and O’Neill, JJ., concur.
78 A.3d 612

#### William REEL, Petitioner v. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY, Respondent.

No. 111 EM 2013.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

Oct. 16, 2013.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 16th day of October, 2013, the Application for Leave to File Original Process is GRANTED, and the *357Petition for Writ of Mandamus and/or Extraordinary Relief is DENIED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 7
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS CONTAINED IN THE FORM 10-K FOR THE YEAR ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 1997 FOR MARKEL CORPORATION AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                         1,063,191
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                     253,385
<MORTGAGE>                                           0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                               1,408,320
<CASH>                                           1,309
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                              15,530
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                          36,816
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,870,100
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                971,157
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                            192,815
<POLICY-OTHER>                                       0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                                0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                 93,166
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        24,660
<OTHER-SE>                                     332,144
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,870,100
<PREMIUMS>                                     332,878
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                             68,653
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                              15,834
<OTHER-INCOME>                                   1,682
<BENEFITS>                                     210,061
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                     80,519
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                            39,557
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 66,351
<INCOME-TAX>                                    15,924
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             50,427
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    50,427
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     9.20
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     8.92
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                 725,809
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                            236,037
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                             (25,976)
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                              44,382
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                               145,736
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                745,752
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                       (25,976)
        

</TABLE>