alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Donald WASHINGTON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Rosie B. GARCIA, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 00-55862. D.C. No. CV-99-06055-R.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 17, 2001 *.

Decided Jan. 2, 2002.

*249Before SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, TROTT and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*
        *249Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM**

California State prisoner Donald Washington appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition challenging his conviction for first-degree murder, attempted murder, discharging a firearm from a vehicle, and great bodily harm as untimely under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253. We review de novo the district court’s dismissal of Washington’s federal habeas petition, *Patterson v. Gomez,*228 F.3d 959, 963 (9th Cir.2000), and we affirm.

Washington contends that he is entitled to equitable tolling of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act’s (“AED-PA”) one-year statute of limitations period, because he allegedly was “abandoned by his lawyer while incarcerated in state prison as a mentally handicapped pro se prisoner.” We disagree.

The AEDPA’s limitation period began to run in Washington’s case on April 25, 1996, as his state conviction became final in 1993. *See*28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1)(A); *Bowen v. Roe,*188 F.3d 1157, 1158-59 (9th Cir.1999). Absent any tolling during the pendency of an application for State post-conviction review, *see Nino v. Galaza,*183 F.3d 1003, 1006 (9th Cir.1999), *cert. denied,*529 U.S. 1104, 120 S.Ct. 1846, 146 L.Ed.2d 787 (2000), Washington was required to file his federal habeas petition no later than April 24, 1997, *see Patterson v. Stewart,*251 F.3d 1243, 1245-46 (9th Cir. 2001) (concluding that Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(a)’s method for computing time period applies in federal habeas actions). Washington, nevertheless, filed his first habeas petition in the State court 16 months after expiration of the one-year statute of limitations, and thus his first federal habeas petition more than 24 months after the expiration of the statute of limitations.

Where, as here, a petitioner seeks equitable tolling of the statute of limitations, a petitioner must demonstrate extraordinary circumstances beyond his control that made it impossible to file a petition on time. *Allen v. Lewis,*255 F.3d 798, 799 (9th Cir.2001), *citing Calderon v. United*
      *250
      *States Dist. Court (Beeler),*128 F.3d 1283, 1288 (9th Cir.1997).

In this case, however, Washington has failed to show that equitable tolling of the statute of limitations was warranted. The district court therefore properly dismissed Washington’s petition as untimely. *See*28 U.S.C. § 2244(d); *Allen,*255 F.3d at 800-01 (requiring prisoner to show that the extraordinary circumstances warranting equitable tolling were the but-for and proximate cause of his untimeliness).

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Exhibit 23




                       Consent of Independent Accountants


We  hereby  consent  to the  incorporation  by  reference  in  the  Registration
Statement on Form S-8 (No.  33-22068),  the  Registration  Statement on Form S-8
(No.  33-60278),  the  Registration  Statement on Form S-8 (No.  33-66124),  the
Prospectus  constituting  part of the  Registration  Statement  on Form S-3 (No.
33-25699),  the Prospectus  constituting  part of the Registration  Statement on
Form  S-3  (No.  333-03011),   and  the  Prospectus  constituting  part  of  the
Registration  Statement on Form S-3 (No. 333-17847) of our report dated February
12, 1998,  appearing on page A-10 of the Annual  Report to  Shareholders  in the
Appendix to the Illinova  Corporation  Proxy  Statement which is incorporated in
this Annual Report on Form 10-K.




/s/ Price Waterhouse LLP
Price Waterhouse LLP

March 10, 1998
#### Elizabeth B. Riley, Respondent, v. Eleanor M. Ransom and Others, Appellants.

Motion denied, without costs, without prejudice to any application appellants may desire to make in the proper court. Present — Jenks, P. J., Carr, Rich, Stapleton and Putnam, JJ.
Exhibit 23.1
                                                                    ------------

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the  incorporation  by reference in  Registration  Statements  No.
333-71476  and No.  333-95327  of Herley  Industries,  Inc.  on Forms S-8 of our
report dated October 24, 2003, relating to the consolidated financial statements
of Herley Industries, Inc. as of and for the years ended August 3, 2003 and July
28, 2002 appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Herley Industries, Inc.
for the year ended August 3, 2003.

/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Baltimore, Maryland
October 30, 2003
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7128

CHARLES COOPER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (CA-96-1354-AM) Submitted: April 16, 1998 Decided: July 24, 1998 Before WILKINS and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Charles Cooper, Appellant Pro Se. John H. McLees, Jr., OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’sopinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Cooper v. Director, Dep’t of Corr. , No. CA96-1354-AM (E.D. Va. June 11, 1997). We deny Appellant’s motion for appointment of counsel and dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
§ 245a.14 Application for class membership in the *CSS, LULAC,* or *Zambrano* lawsuit. The Service will first determine whether an alien filed a written claim for class membership in the *CSS, LULAC,* or *Zambrano* lawsuit as reflected in the Service's indices, a review of the alien's administrative file with the Service, and by all evidence provided by the alien. An alien must provide with the application for LIFE Legalization evidence establishing that, before October 1, 2000, he or she was a class member applicant in the *CSS, LULAC,* or *Zambrano* lawsuit. An alien should include as many forms of evidence as the alien has available to him or her. Such forms of evidence include, but are not limited to: ( a ) An Employment Authorization Document (EAD) or other employment document issued by the Service pursuant to the alien's class membership in the *CSS, LULAC,* or *Zambrano* lawsuit (if a photocopy of the EAD is submitted, the alien's name, A-number, issuance date, and expiration date should be clearly visible);
( b ) Service document(s) addressed to the alien, or his or her representative, granting or denying the class membership, which includes date, alien's name and A-number;
( c ) The questionnaire for class member applicant under *CSS, LULAC,* or *Zambrano* submitted with the class membership application, which includes date, alien's full name and date of birth;
( d ) Service document(s) addressed to the alien, or his or her representative, discussing matters pursuant to the class membership application, which includes date, alien's name and A-number. These include, but are not limited to the following: ( 1 ) Form I-512, Parole authorization, or denial of such;
( 2 ) Form I-221, Order to Show Cause;
( 3 ) Form I-862, Notice to Appear;
( 4 ) Final order of removal or deportation;
( 5 ) Request for evidence letter (RFE); or
( 6 ) Form I-687 submitted with the class membership application.
( e ) Form I-765, Application for Employment Authorization, submitted pursuant to a court order granting interim relief.
( f ) An application for a stay of deportation, exclusion, or removal pursuant to a court's order granting interim relief.
( g ) Any other relevant document(s).
[66 FR 29673, June 1, 2001, as amended at 67 FR 38351, June 4, 2002]
#### § 106.33 Comparable facilities.

A recipient may provide separate toilet, locker room, and shower facilities on the basis of sex, but such facilities provided for students of one sex shall be comparable to such facilities provided for students of the other sex.

[45 FR 30955, May 9, 1980, as amended at 85 FR 30579, May 19, 2020]
Case 18-12095-BFK Doc 104 Filed 10/18/18 Entered 10/18/18 08:44:19 Desc MainDocument Page 1 of 29Case 18-12095-BFK Doc 104 Filed 10/18/18 Entered 10/18/18 08:44:19 Desc MainDocument Page 2 of 29Case 18-12095-BFK Doc 104 Filed 10/18/18 Entered 10/18/18 08:44:19 Desc MainDocument Page 3 of 29Case 18-12095-BFK Doc 104 Filed 10/18/18 Entered 10/18/18 08:44:19 Desc MainDocument Page 4 of 29Case 18-12095-BFK Doc 104 Filed 10/18/18 Entered 10/18/18 08:44:19 Desc MainDocument Page 5 of 29Case 18-12095-BFK Doc 104 Filed 10/18/18 Entered 10/18/18 08:44:19 Desc MainDocument Page 6 of 29Case 18-12095-BFK Doc 104 Filed 10/18/18 Entered 10/18/18 08:44:19 Desc MainDocument Page 7 of 29Case 18-12095-BFK Doc 104 Filed 10/18/18 Entered 10/18/18 08:44:19 Desc MainDocument Page 8 of 29Case 18-12095-BFK Doc 104 Filed 10/18/18 Entered 10/18/18 08:44:19 Desc MainDocument Page 9 of 29Case 18-12095-BFK Doc 104 Filed 10/18/18 Entered 10/18/18 08:44:19 Desc MainDocument Page 10 of 29Case 18-12095-BFK Doc 104 Filed 10/18/18 Entered 10/18/18 08:44:19 Desc MainDocument Page 11 of 29Case 18-12095-BFK Doc 104 Filed 10/18/18 Entered 10/18/18 08:44:19 Desc MainDocument Page 12 of 29Case 18-12095-BFK Doc 104 Filed 10/18/18 Entered 10/18/18 08:44:19 Desc MainDocument Page 13 of 29Case 18-12095-BFK Doc 104 Filed 10/18/18 Entered 10/18/18 08:44:19 Desc MainDocument Page 14 of 29Case 18-12095-BFK Doc 104 Filed 10/18/18 Entered 10/18/18 08:44:19 Desc MainDocument Page 15 of 29Case 18-12095-BFK Doc 104 Filed 10/18/18 Entered 10/18/18 08:44:19 Desc MainDocument Page 16 of 29Case 18-12095-BFK Doc 104 Filed 10/18/18 Entered 10/18/18 08:44:19 Desc MainDocument Page 17 of 29Case 18-12095-BFK Doc 104 Filed 10/18/18 Entered 10/18/18 08:44:19 Desc MainDocument Page 18 of 29Case 18-12095-BFK Doc 104 Filed 10/18/18 Entered 10/18/18 08:44:19 Desc MainDocument Page 19 of 29Case 18-12095-BFK Doc 104 Filed 10/18/18 Entered 10/18/18 08:44:19 Desc MainDocument Page 20 of 29Case 18-12095-BFK Doc 104 Filed 10/18/18 Entered 10/18/18 08:44:19 Desc MainDocument Page 21 of 29Case 18-12095-BFK Doc 104 Filed 10/18/18 Entered 10/18/18 08:44:19 Desc MainDocument Page 22 of 29Case 18-12095-BFK Doc 104 Filed 10/18/18 Entered 10/18/18 08:44:19 Desc MainDocument Page 23 of 29Case 18-12095-BFK Doc 104 Filed 10/18/18 Entered 10/18/18 08:44:19 Desc MainDocument Page 24 of 29Case 18-12095-BFK Doc 104 Filed 10/18/18 Entered 10/18/18 08:44:19 Desc MainDocument Page 25 of 29Case 18-12095-BFK Doc 104 Filed 10/18/18 Entered 10/18/18 08:44:19 Desc MainDocument Page 26 of 29Case 18-12095-BFK Doc 104 Filed 10/18/18 Entered 10/18/18 08:44:19 Desc MainDocument Page 27 of 29Case 18-12095-BFK Doc 104 Filed 10/18/18 Entered 10/18/18 08:44:19 Desc MainDocument Page 28 of 29Case 18-12095-BFK Doc 104 Filed 10/18/18 Entered 10/18/18 08:44:19 Desc MainDocument Page 29 of 29
### SERVED DECEMBER 18,2014 U,S, 

### DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASHINGTON, D.C

IN THE MATTER OF BIRMINGHAM FLIGHT CENTER, INC. DOCKETNO. (CP09GL0008) (Civil Penalty Action)

RESPONDENT'S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 

# RECEIVED DEC 24 2014 HEARING DOCKET

COMES NOW the Respondent, BIRMINGHAM FLIGHT CENTER., by and through its counsel, BARNETT & 

### BORTH, LLC, pursuant to 14 CFR §13.209 and hereby files its ANSWER inthe instant matter, and states as follows:

I. I. 

### ADMITS II. I. 

### ADMITS 2. DENIES 3. DENIES 4. Subparagraphs a. through e.: ADMITSIII. 5. Subparagraphs a. through g.: DENIES 6. DENIES
Respondent respectfully requests the Administrative Law Judge deny the Administrator's request to enter an orderpursuant to the FinalNotice ofProposed Civil Penalty proposing a civil penalty inthe amount of$11,000.00 dated November 19, 2014.
Dated: December 18,2014

Charles R. Barnett, III BARNETT & BORTH, LLC 800 Waukegan Road, Suite 200 Glenview, IL 60025-4387 (815) 356-8647 (815) 356-7042 (FAX)

2 Respectfully submitted, BARNETT & BORTH, LLC



# -:~

**~0Tlley(;sp0lldll** BirminghamFlight Center, Inc.CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that the foregoing Answer was served via Certified Mail, ReturnReceipt Requested as follows: ORIGINAL AND ONE COPY Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W!OOO FAX: 202-493-5142 ONE COPY Deitrick H. Johnson, Complainant's Counsel Federal Aviation Administration Office ofthe Regional Counsel, ASO-7 SouthernRegion 1701 ColumbiaAve Atlanta, GA 30337 TEL: 404-305-5200 FAX: 404-305-5223 The Honorable J. E. Sullivan,Administrative LawJudge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) Washington., DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-6941 FAX: 202-366-7536
Datedthis 18th day ofDecember, 2014.

# /-~~/**~/** 

## / ' /?-

# ~harld.arn::r Attorney for Respondent

3
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access to publicationsin the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging and locatorservices, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications (CGP). Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event that publicationsare no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title: Airpollution translations**
 
Volumes: 010204
 
SuDoc Number:HE 20.1309: | EP 1.21:AI 7/2/
Item Number:0483-E (online) | 0431-I-09(online)
CGP systemNumber: 000817590
 
July 23, 2019
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Robert Tarini, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of
Markland Technologies, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.

4. The small business issuer's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The small business issuer's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting.

Date:  May 23, 2005

/s/ Robert Tarini

Robert Tarini

Chief Executive Officer and Chairman
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4789 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 4789

 To allow Federal law enforcement officers to purchase retired service 
                    weapons, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 22, 2019

  Mrs. Demings (for herself, Mr. Steube, Mr. Soto, Mr. Bacon, and Mr. 
 Rutherford) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To allow Federal law enforcement officers to purchase retired service 
                    weapons, 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. PURCHASE OF RETIRED HANDGUNS BY FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT 
              OFFICERS.

    (a) In General.--A Federal law enforcement officer may purchase a 
retired handgun from the Federal agency that issued the handgun to such 
officer.
    (b) Limitations.--A Federal law enforcement officer may purchase a 
retired handgun under subsection (a) if--
            (1) the purchase is made during the 6-month period 
        beginning on the date the handgun was so retired; and
            (2) the officer is not prohibited from possessing or 
        receiving the handgun under the laws of the United States or 
        the laws of the State, territory, or possession of the United 
        States in which the officer resides.
    (c) Cost.--A handgun purchased under this section shall be sold at 
the fair market value for such handgun taking into account the age and 
condition of the handgun.
    (d) Sense of Congress on Use of Funds.--It is the sense of Congress 
that any amounts received by the Government from the sale of a handgun 
under this section should be transferred and used to fund Federal gun 
safety programs.
    (e) Definitions.--In this section:
            (1) the term ``Federal law enforcement officer'' has the 
        meaning given that term in section 115(c)(1) of title 18, 
        United States Code;
            (2) the term ``handgun'' has the meaning given that term in 
        section 921(a) of title 18, United States Code; and
            (3) the term ``retired handgun'' means any handgun that has 
        been declared surplus by the applicable agency.
                                 <all>
```
NUMBER                                                                SHARES

                       INCORPORATED IN THE STATE OF TEXAS

                              ENVIRO-RECOVERY, INC.

                 250,000,000 AUTHORIZED SHARES OF CAPITAL STOCK
                       248,000,000 SHARES OF COMMON STOCK
                       2,000,000 SHARES OF PREFERRED STOCK

                    COMMON STOCK, PAR VALUE $.0001 PER SHARE

                                                             CUSIP 29403m 10 3

THIS CERTIFIES THAT:




IS RECORD HOLDER OF

         FULLY PAID AND NON-ASSESSABLE SHARES OF COMMON STOCK OF $.0001 PAR
VALUE EACH OF ENVIRO-RECOVERY, INC. transferable on the books of the Corporation
in person or by attorney upon surrender of this certificate duly endorsed or
assigned. This certificate and the shares represented hereby are subject to the
laws of the State of Texas, and to the Articles of Incorporation and By-laws of
the Corporation, as now or hereafter amended. This certificate is not valid
until countersigned by the Transfer Agent.

         WITNESS the facsimile seal of the Corporation and the facsimile
signatures of its duly authorized officers.

DATED:

   SECRETARY                    SEAL                 PRESIDENT


                                                                  COUNTERSIGNED:

                                                   MADISON STOCK TRANSFER, INC.
                                                               P.O. BOX 290-145
                                                       BROOKLYN, NEW YORK 11229
                                                                 TRANSFER AGENT
### §702. Importation of eggs of game birds for propagation

The Secretary of the Interior shall have the power to authorize the importation of eggs of game birds for purposes of propagation, and he shall prescribe all necessary rules and regulations governing the importation of eggs of said birds for such purposes.

(June 3, 1902, ch. 983, 32 Stat. 285; 1939 Reorg. Plan No. II, §4(f), eff. July 1, 1939, 4 F.R. 2731, 53 Stat. 1433.)

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Transfer of Functions

Transfer of functions of Secretary of Agriculture to Secretary of the Interior by Reorg. Plan No. II of 1939, see Transfer of Functions note set out under section 701 of this title.
#### § 101.13 Exclusion from hearing for misconduct.

Disrespectful, disorderly, or contumacious language or contemptuous conduct, refusal to comply with directions, or continued use of dilatory tactics by any person at any hearing before a presiding officer shall constitute grounds for immediate exclusion of such person from the hearing by the presiding officer.
EXHIBIT 3.2





AMENDMENT


TO THE


AMENDED AND RESTATED BY-LAWS


OF


U.S.I. HOLDINGS
CORPORATION





The undersigned, being the duly elected and acting Secretary of U.S.I. Holdings Corporation, a
Delaware corporation (the Corporation), does hereby certify in the name and on behalf of the Corporation that, pursuant to Article III, Section 14 of the Corporations Amended and Restated By-laws, Article III, Section 15 of the
Amended and Restated By-Laws has been amended to read in its entirety as follows:





SECTION 15. Definition
of Public Offering. When used in these Amended and Restated By-laws, Public Offering means the consummation by the Corporation of an initial sale of its Common Stock in an underwritten public offering pursuant to a
registration statement under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.





October 25, 2002





/s/ Ernest J. Newborn, IISecretary