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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-6890

JAMES P. MOODY, JR., 

Plaintiff – Appellant, 

v. 

WILLIE EAGLETON, Warden; MICHAEL BEINOR, Doctor; KIMBERLY C. 

GASTIN, LPN; AMY SMITH; ADRIENN L. FULLER, in their 

individual capacities and in their official capacities, 

Defendants – Appellees. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Beaufort. Cameron McGowan Currie, District 

Judge. (9:09-cv-01480-CMC) 

Submitted: August 19, 2010 Decided: August 30, 2010

Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. 

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

James P. Moody, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Bradford Cary Andrews; 

Samuel F. Arthur, III, AIKEN, BRIDGES, NUNN, ELLIOTT & TYLER, 

PA, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellees. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM: 

James P. Moody, Jr., seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order adopting the recommendation of the magistrate 

judge and dismissing Moody’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) civil 

rights action. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction 

because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. 

Parties are accorded thirty days after the entry of 

the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, 

Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends 

the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the 

appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he timely 

filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional 

requirement.” Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007). 

The district court’s order was entered on the docket 

on April 13, 2010. The notice of appeal was filed on 

May 25, 2010.*

 * For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date 

appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could 

have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to 

the court. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack, 487 

U.S. 266, 276 (1988). 

Because Moody failed to file a timely notice of 

appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal 

period, we dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument 

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented 
3

in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process. 

DISMISSED
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

DAY HIGH

 237

 258

 293

 264

 279

 272

 215

 185

 164

 170

 187

 192

 235

 225

 240

 211

 200

 175

 167

 149

 152

 159

 167

 174

 185

 188

 219

 192

 227

 236

 250

 256

 254

 201

 168

 150

 149

 157

 166

 185

 186

 197

 188

 131

 133

 126

 115

 121

 137

 149

 156

 166

 171

 178

 182

 129

 232

 244

 260

 258

 263

 234

 186

 168

 157

 161

 176

 188

 195

 205

 210

 181

 162

 151

 135

 131

 143

 154

 161

 170

 177

 183

 197

 160

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

FEBRUARY 2019 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: March 1, 2019

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

14 DAY

ACCUM

MEAN

14 DAY

AVG

MEAN

 2,945

 2,895

 2,897

 2,931

 2,992

 3,027

 3,023

 3,014

 3,002

 2,986

 2,974

 2,961

 2,944

 2,927

 2,905

 2,842

 2,744

 2,637

 2,509

 2,406

 2,363

 2,349

 2,353

 2,362

 2,363

 2,358

 2,360

 2,315

 210

 207

 207

 209

 214

 216

 216

 215

 214

 213

 212

 212

 210

 209

 208

 203

 196

 188

 179

 172

 169

 168

 168

 169

 169

 168

 169

 165

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

EMMATON BOTTOM ON THE SACRAMENTO RIVER
### §4573. Commission recommendations and report

#### (a) In general

If the Commission makes an affirmative determination under section 4572 of this title, the Commission shall recommend the action that is necessary to address the material harm or threat of material harm found.

#### (b) Limitation

Only those members of the Commission who agreed to the affirmative determination under section 4572 of this title are eligible to vote on the recommendation required to be made under subsection (a).

#### (c) Report

Not later than the date that is 60 days after the date on which the determination is made under section 4572 of this title, the Commission shall submit to the President a report that includes—

(1) the determination and an explanation of the basis for the determination;

(2) if the determination is affirmative, recommendations for action and an explanation of the basis for the recommendation; and

(3) any dissenting or separate views by members of the Commission regarding the determination.

#### (d) Public notice

Upon submitting a report to the President under subsection (c), the Commission shall—

(1) promptly make public the report (with the exception of information which the Commission determines to be confidential business information); and

(2) publish a summary of the report in the Federal Register.

(Pub. L. 116–113, title III, §323, Jan. 29, 2020, 134 Stat. 57.)
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

DAY HIGH

 145

 141

 136

 134

 135

 137

 138

 141

 140

 140

 141

 146

 149

 150

 151

 148

 148

 146

 142

 140

 142

 142

 144

 146

 151

 155

 154

 152

 156

 156

 137

 132

 128

 128

 131

 132

 133

 136

 136

 136

 137

 139

 144

 145

 145

 143

 143

 138

 135

 133

 132

 133

 134

 138

 140

 143

 145

 147

 149

 151

 142

 137

 132

 131

 132

 133

 136

 138

 138

 138

 139

 141

 146

 147

 148

 147

 145

 142

 138

 136

 135

 136

 138

 141

 144

 147

 147

 149

 151

 153

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

JUNE 2005 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: July 11, 2005

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

14 DAY

ACCUM

MEAN

14 DAY

AVG

MEAN

 1,835

 1,830

 1,825

 1,828

 1,847

 1,865

 1,879

 1,892

 1,901

 1,908

 1,915

 1,921

 1,927

 1,930

 1,936

 1,946

 1,959

 1,970

 1,976

 1,979

 1,978

 1,976

 1,976

 1,979

 1,984

 1,990

 1,991

 1,993

 1,996

 2,002

 131

 131

 130

 131

 132

 133

 134

 135

 136

 136

 137

 137

 138

 138

 138

 139

 140

 141

 141

 141

 141

 141

 141

 141

 142

 142

 142

 142

 143

 143

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

EMMATON TOP ON THE SACRAMENTO RIVER
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 32


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         The undersigned,  Moreal Chu and Starcia Chang,  hereby jointly certify
as follows:

         Pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections
(a) and (b) of Section 1350,  Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code),  each
of the undersigned  officers of Visual Frontier,  Inc., does hereby certify,  to
such officer's knowledge, that:

         The Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2003
of Visual  Frontier,  Inc. fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the
Form 10-QSB fairly presents,  in all material respects,  the financial condition
and results of operations of Visual Frontier, Inc.


                       By: /s/ Moreal Chu
                           ---------------------------------------
                           Name: Moreal Chu
                           Title: President and General Manager

                       Date: August 25, 2003



                       By: /s/ Starcia Chang
                           ---------------------------------------
                           Name: Starcia Chang
                           Title: Chief Financial Officer

                       Date: August 25, 2003



         The  foregoing  certification  is being  furnished  solely  pursuant to
Section  906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of  2002  (subsections  (a)  and (b) of
Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed
as part of the Form 10-QSB or as a separate disclosure document.

         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or
other document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature
that  appears  in typed  form  within the  electronic  version  of this  written
statement  required by Section 906, has been provided to Visual  Frontier,  Inc.
and will be retained by Visual  Frontier,  Inc. and furnished to the  Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



                                       16
| | EXHIBIT 32.2 | 
| | ------------ | 

|
|

| | CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 | 
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 

|In connection with the Quarterly Report of ICrystal, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, David Loflin, Acting Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), 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.

|
|

|Dated: August 20, 2004. | /s/ DAVID LOFLIN | 
|----------------------- | ---------------- | 

| | David Loflin | 
| | ------------ | 

| | Acting Chief Financial Officer | 
| | ------------------------------ |
[No. 8472.

Department Two.

February 21, 1910.]

#### Bessie Anderson, *Respondent,*v. Spokane, Portland & Seattle Railway Company, *Appellant.**1*

Taxation — Action to Recover Lands Sold — Limitations. An action to quiet title to land sold for taxes, attacking tke validity of tke tax foreclosure, is within Rem. & Bal. Code, § 162, providing that actions to set aside or cancel a tax deed or for the recovery of lands sold for delinquent taxes must be commenced within three years from and after the date of the issuance of the treasurer’s deed.

Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for Franklin county, Zent, J., entered January 6, 1909, in favor of the plaintiff, upon overruling a demurrer to the complaint, in an action to quiet title.

Reversed.

*Cannon*# *Lee (Carey <$• Kerr,*of counsel), for appellant.

*Horrigan, O’Brien*# *Coad,*for respondent.

1

Reported in 107 Pac. 183.

Crow, J.

This action was commenced in the superior court of Franklin county, by Bessie Anderson against Spokane, Portland & Seattle Railway Company, a corporation, to quiet title to certain lots in the city of Pasco. The controlling question involved is the validity of a tax foreclosure, under which the defendants deraigned and now hold title. The defendant railway company demurred to the complaint for want of facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and because the action was not commenced within the time limited by law. The demurrer being overruled, final judgment was entered annulling the tax sale and quieting plaintiff’s title. The defendant railway has appealed.

The respondent in her complaint attacks the tax foreclosure proceedings, contending that they were void for want of jurisdiction and for other reasons, all of which were raised in *Timmerman v. McCullagh,*55 Wash. 204, 104 Pac. 212. *440In that case, which arose out of the identical tax foreclosure proceeding here involved, we held against each and every contention now made by the respondent.

The record shows that the tax judgment was entered on June 4, 1902, and that the tax deed under which the appellant deraigns its title was executed and delivered on August 23, 1902. This action was commenced on June 13, 1908. Laws 1907, page 398, ch. 173 (Rem. & Bal. Code, § 162), provides:

“Actions to set aside or cancel the deed of any county treasurer issued after and upon the sale of lands for general, state, county or municipal taxes, or for the recovery of lands sold for delinquent taxes, must be brought within three years from and after the date of the issuance of such treasurer’s deed: Provided, This act shall not apply to actions not otherwise barred on deeds heretofore issued if the same be commenced within one year after the passage of this act.”

Under the construction placed on this statute in *Cordiner v. Dear, 55*Wash. 479, 104 Pac. 780, it is manifest that this action was not commenced within the time limited by law.

The judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded with instructions to sustain the demurrer, upon both of the grounds therein stated.

Mount, Dunbar, and Parker, JJ., concur.

Rudkin, C. J., concurs in the result.
§ 19.709 Gauging. ( a ) *Gauging equipment and methods.* A proprietor of an alcohol fuel plant must perform periodic gauges of the distilled spirits and fuel alcohol at the alcohol fuel plant. The procedures for the gauging of spirits set forth in part 30 of this chapter also apply under this subpart. In addition, the following rules for the gauging of distilled spirits and fuel alcohol under this subpart also apply: ( 1 ) The proprietor must determine the proof of spirits by using a glass cylinder, hydrometer and thermometer;
( 2 ) The proprietor must ensure that hydrometers, thermometers, and other equipment used to determine proof, volume, or weight are accurate;
( 3 ) The proprietor may determine the quantity of spirits or fuel alcohol either by volume or weight;
( 4 ) To determine quantity by volume, the proprietor may use a tank or receptacle with a calibrated sight glass installed, a calibrated dipstick, conversion charts, an accurate mass flow meter, or other devices approved by the appropriate TTB officer;
( 5 ) Unless the proprietor chooses to do so, the proprietor is not required to determine the proof of fuel alcohol manufactured, on hand, or removed; and
( 6 ) The proprietor may account for fuel alcohol in wine gallons;
( b ) *Verification by TTB.* TTB officers may at any time verify the accuracy of the gauging equipment used.
( c ) *When gauges are required.* A proprietor must gauge spirits and record the results in the records required by § 19.718, at the following times: ( 1 ) Upon completing the production of distilled spirits;
( 2 ) On the receipt of spirits at the plant;
( 3 ) Prior to the addition of materials to render the spirits unfit for beverage use;
( 4 ) Before withdrawal from plant premises or other disposition of spirits (including fuel alcohol); and
( 5 ) When spirits are inventoried.
(26 U.S.C. 5201, 5204)
EXHIBIT 32





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002














The certification set forth below is hereby made solely for the purpose of satisfying the requirements of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and may not be relied upon or used for any other purposes.





In connection with the Annual Report of Realmark Property Investors Limited Partnership - V (the “Partnership”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Joseph M. Jayson, Individual General Partner and Principal Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:





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





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








March 31, 2011
/s/ Joseph M. JaysonDate
Joseph M. JaysonIndividual General Partner,Principal Executive Officer andPrincipal Financial Officer
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL
- TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 14a0488n.06

Case No. 13

- 5167

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. TRAVIS LITTLE,

Defendant

- Appellant

. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY

BEFORE: MOORE, SUTTON and ALARC Ó N , Circuit Judges. 

SUTTON, Circuit Judge. Travis Little pleaded guilty to possessing around 20 grams of
crack cocaine , and in February 2008, the district court sentenced him to serve five years in prison
for that offense

— the statutory minimum sentence at the time

— on top of five years for a related firearms charge

. Two years later, Congress eliminated the statutory minimum for Little’s crack

cocaine offense in the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010. Little sought to take advantage of the change by requesting a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) in district court , but to
no avail

. He now presses his claim for relief under § 3582(c)(2) on appeal.

 The Honorable Arthur L. Alarc ó n, Senior Circuit Judge of th e United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, sitting by designation.Case No. 13

- 5167

United States v. Little

2 While Little’s ap peal was pending, our court decided United States v. Blewett , 746 F.3d 647 (6th Cir. 2013) (en banc). Unfortunately for Little, this decision forecloses all three arguments he presses on appeal: that the Fair Sentencing Act applies retroactively to defen dan ts sentenced before its passage; that denying Little a sentence reduction viola tes the Equal Protection Clause; and that Little’s sentence violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusua l punishment

. Id. at 650

– 60. Little recogniz es that Blewett binds this panel and dictates affirmance. He wishes only to preserve these arguments for review by a higher tribunal, as he is entitled to do. For these reasons, we affirm.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

DAY HIGH

 367

 172

 167

 161

 161

 161

 158

 158

 158

 160

 151

 159

 155

 159

 162

 146

 144

 151

 153

 152

 164

 182

 172

 191

 217

 236

 261

 236

 292

 269

 163

 158

 156

 152

 142

 155

 154

 144

 135

 135

 132

 130

 125

 131

 133

 128

 126

 122

 127

 128

 121

 130

 128

 135

 139

 142

 146

 150

 154

 154

 177

 167

 162

 157

 155

 157

 156

 153

 146

 145

 139

 137

 136

 138

 139

 136

 134

 131

 132

 131

 133

 137

 140

 151

 161

 166

 177

 173

 189

 178

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

JUNE 2010 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: July 2, 2010

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

14 DAY

ACCUM

MEAN

14 DAY

AVG

MEAN

 2,487

 2,465

 2,442

 2,413

 2,388

 2,367

 2,345

 2,322

 2,292

 2,261

 2,226

 2,192

 2,156

 2,125

 2,087

 2,056

 2,028

 2,002

 1,979

 1,953

 1,930

 1,914

 1,908

 1,914

 1,936

 1,965

 2,006

 2,041

 2,091

 2,133

 178

 176

 174

 172

 171

 169

 168

 166

 164

 162

 159

 157

 154

 152

 149

 147

 145

 143

 141

 140

 138

 137

 136

 137

 138

 140

 143

 146

 149

 152

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

EMMATON TOP ON THE SACRAMENTO RIVER
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 512 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 512

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 115 South Swenson Street in Stamford, Texas, as the ``Charles W. 
                    Stenholm Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 11, 2019

Mr. Conaway (for himself, Mr. Wright, Ms. Granger, Mr. Thornberry, Mr. 
  Gohmert, Mr. Marchant, Mr. Flores, Mr. Arrington, Mr. Williams, Mr. 
  McCaul, Mr. Cloud, Mr. Babin, Mr. Crenshaw, Mr. Hurd of Texas, Mr. 
  Olson, Mr. Brady, Mr. Burgess, Mr. Weber of Texas, Mr. Gooden, Mr. 
   Vela, Mr. Veasey, Ms. Johnson of Texas, Mr. Castro of Texas, Mr. 
  Cuellar, Ms. Jackson Lee, Mr. Doggett, Mr. Ratcliffe, Mr. Green of 
    Texas, and Mr. Allred) introduced the following bill; which was 
           referred to the Committee on Oversight and Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 115 South Swenson Street in Stamford, Texas, as the ``Charles W. 
                    Stenholm Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. CHARLES W. STENHOLM POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 115 South Swenson Street in Stamford, Texas, shall be known 
and designated as the ``Charles W. Stenholm Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Charles W. 
Stenholm Post Office Building''.
                                 <all>
```