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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-6068

SAMUEL LEWIS BAKER, JR.,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, District

Judge. (5:04-cr-30073-SGW; 7:06-cv-00129-SGW)

Submitted: June 11, 2007 Decided: April 28, 2008

Before WILLIAMS, Chief Judge, and TRAXLER and DUNCAN, Circuit

Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Samuel Lewis Baker, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Joseph William Hooge

Mott, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Samuel Lewis Baker, Jr., seeks to appeal the district

court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion.

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge

issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)

(2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any

assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is

debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by

the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell,

537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484

(2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Baker has not

made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
----

CONSENT OF NETHERLAND, SEWELL & ASSOCIATES, INC, TO: 

The Board of Directors of Provident Energy Ltd.
We refer to the renewal annual information form dated March 30, 2005 (the "AIF")of Provident Energy Trust (the "Trust") and the Form 40-F of the TrustNetherland, Sewell & Associates, Inc. ("NSA") was engaged to evaluate the oiland natural gas reserves in respect of certain properties held by BreitBumEnergy Company LLC. (the "NSA Report"). 

We understand that the AIF and Form 40-F contain referencesto the NSA Report dated March 2, 2005 and to our having evaluated the oil andnatural gas reserves in respect of these properties. The AIF and Form 40-F alsocontain the Form 51-101F2 of NSA dated March 1, 2005. 

We hereby consent to the reference to our firm name and to the reference to,summaries of and excerpts from the NSA Report in the AIF and Form 40-F and tothe inclusion in the AIF and Form 40-F of our report on Form 51-101F2.

Dated this 30th day of March, 2005.
Sacra

m

en to R iver

T13N R1E T13N R2E

T12N R1E T12N R2E

3 2 1 6

34

22 24

13

36

23

25

15 14

27

18

35

19

31

26 30

10 11 12 7

SSUUTTTTEE RR CC OO

CCOOLL UUSSAA CCOO

YYOOLLOO CC OO

Kirkville

Boyers Landing

Millers Landing

Poffenbergers Landing

56.3 L

55.1 L

56.95 L

45

Contractor's Service Area

Point of Diversion

Contract No. 14-06-200-1286A-R-1

Exhibit B

Bardis, Christo D., et al. (Broomieside Farms)

725-202-6

Note: The Public Land Survey depicted here

was digitized from USGS topographic maps.

0 0.5

Miles

Date: October 28, 2004

File Name: N:\districts\contracts\bardis_christo-broomieside_farms\bardis.mxd
#### Kuhnen *v.*Postal Telegraph-Cable Company.

November 18, 1910.

Evans, P. J.

The rule that where there have been two concurrent verdicts for the plaintiff on the same state of facts, and where no error of law is alleged to have been committed on the last trial, and where under the evidence the verdict is not manifestly wrong, the trial judge should not grant a second new trial *(Gregory*v. *Georgia Granite Railroad Co.,*132 *Ga.*587 (64 S. E. 686) ), is applicable only where there have been . two new trials granted by the trial judge in the exercise of his discretion.

(a) Thus, where a plaintiff recovers a verdict which the trial court refuses to set aside on motion, and the refusal to grant a new trial is reversed by the Supreme Court because of errors of law committed in the. charge, the new trial thus obtained does not come from the exercise. of the discretion of the trial judge; and therefore, if on the second trial the plaintiff again prevails on substantially the same state of facts, and the court grants a new trial upon a motion which does not complain that any error of law has been committed, the second hew trial is the first exercise of the discretion of the trial judge; and where the evidence does not demand the verdict, the judgment granting a new trial will not be disturbed by this court.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*

*391Damages. Before Judge Kimsey. Habersham superior court. August 14, 1909.

*J. C.-Edwards,*for plaintiff. *Howard Thompson*and Anderson, *Felder, Rountree & Wilson,*for defendant.
§ 3162.4-2 Samples, tests, and surveys. ( a ) During the drilling and completion of a well, the operator shall, when required by the authorized officer, conduct tests, run logs, and make other surveys reasonably necessary to determine the presence, quantity, and quality of oil, gas, other minerals, or the presence or quality of water; to determine the amount and/or direction of deviation of any well from the verticial; and to determine the relevant characteristics of the oil and gas reservoirs penetrated.
( b ) After the well has been completed, the operator shall conduct periodic well tests which will demonstrate the quantity and quality of oil and gas and water. The method and frequency of such well tests will be specified in appropriate notices and orders. When needed, the operator shall conduct reasonable tests which will demonstrate the mechanical integrity of the downhole equipment.
( c ) Results of samples, tests, and surveys approved or prescribed under this section shall be provided to the authorized officer without cost to the lessor.
[47 FR 47765, Oct. 27, 1982. Redesignated and amended at 48 FR 36583, Aug. 12, 1983, further amended at 53 FR 17363, May 16, 1988]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-10803

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

RAY SALINAS,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:11-CR-19-1

Before SMITH, ELROD, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Ray Salinas raises arguments

that he concedes are foreclosed by United States v. Vickers, 540 F.3d 356 (5th

Cir. 2008), and United States v. Brown, 920 F.2d 1212, 1216-17 (5th Cir. 1991),

abrogated on other grounds by United States v. Candia, 454 F.3d 468, 472-73

(5th Cir. 2006). In Vickers, this court held that the Texas offense of delivery of

a controlled substance is a “serious drug offense” for purposes of the Armed

Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e). Vickers, 540 F.3d at 366. In Brown,

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

August 21, 2012

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

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.

Case: 11-10803 Document: 00511963582 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/21/2012
No. 11-10803

this court held that 18 U.S.C. § 3584 authorizes a district court to order a federal

sentence to run consecutively to a yet-to-be-imposed state sentence. Brown, 920

F.2d at 1216-17; see Setser v. United States, 132 S. Ct. 1463, 1468-73 (2012). The

Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, the Government’s

alternative motion for an extension of time to file a brief is DENIED, and the

judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

2

Case: 11-10803 Document: 00511963582 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/21/2012
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                       4,592,900
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,045,800
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  6,856,600
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            13,604,800
<PP&E>                                      89,730,700
<DEPRECIATION>                               8,685,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              97,879,600
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       10,417,500
<BONDS>                                     26,895,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       461,100
<OTHER-SE>                                  95,278,900
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                97,879,600
<SALES>                                      7,391,600
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             7,391,600
<CGS>                                        4,885,600
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,885,600
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,429,700
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             533,700
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (114,800)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (114,800)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (114,800)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.00)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.00)
        

</TABLE>
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsDynamics explorer interdisciplinary scientist investigationsThis document is a final report on research activities and accomplishments that occurred during the funding period of 10-1-90 through 1-30-94. The focus of our interdisciplinary investigation during the Dynamics Explorer Mission was on the complex coupling processes that tap the magnetic-storm energy, stored in the ring current particle reservoir, and transport this energy into the subauroral, midlatitude and even equatorial ionospheric regions. The transport of energy through the inner magnetosphere and into the underlying ionospheric regions is a critical element in our understanding of the impact of solar and magnetic disturbances on upper atmospheric and ionospheric regions equatorward of the auroral zone.Document ID19940021701Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsKozyra, Janet U.*(Michigan Univ. Ann Arbor, MI, United States)*Nagy, A. F.*(Michigan Univ. Ann Arbor, MI, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateJanuary 1, 1994Subject CategoryGeophysicsReport/Patent NumberNASA-CR-195226NAS 1.26:195226UMICH-021979Accession Number94N26204Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NAG5-472Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19940021701.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 192 (Tuesday, October 5, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59611-59612]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-22364]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency


Announcement of Performance Review Board Members

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Emergency Preparedness and 
Response Directorate, Department of Homeland Security.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the names of new members of the 
Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate Performance Review 
Board.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shirley Schell, Executive Resources 
Program Manager, Human Capital Division, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, 
DC 20742, 202-646-3297.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 5 U.S.C. 4314 (c)(4) requires agencies to 
publish notice of Performance Review Board appointees in the Federal 
Register before their service begins. The role of the Performance 
Review Board is to review and make recommendations to the appointing 
authority on performance management issues such as appraisals, pay 
adjustments, bonuses, and Presidential Rank Awards for members of the 
Senior Executive Service. Under Secretary Michael D. Brown has named 
the following members of the Emergency Preparedness and Response 
Directorate Performance Review Board:


[[Page 59612]]


Patricia Stahlschmidt, Director, Strategic Planning and Evaluation.
Thomas McQuillan, Program Advisor, Facilities Management Division.
Edward Kernan, Chief Information Policy and Resources Management.
David Trissell, Associate General Counsel.
Michael Hall, Acting Director, Human Capital Division.
Charlie Dickerson, Deputy Administrator, U.S. Fire Administration.
David Maurstad, Regional Director, Region VIII, Denver, CO.
Reynold Hoover, Director Office of National Security Coordination.

    Dated: September 30, 2004.
Michael D. Brown,
Under Secretary, Emergency Preparedness and Response, Department of 
Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 04-22364 Filed 10-4-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-49-P
[GRAPHIC OMITTED] AHOLD

                                                                   PRESS RELEASE

AHOLD AND COPERA INFORMED OF A NOTICE OF APPEAL FILED AGAINST ORDER
APPROVING AHOLD'S UNITED STATES SECURITIES CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

Amsterdam, the Netherlands and Denver, Colorado, the United States, July 21,
2006 - Ahold and the Public Employees' Retirement Association of Colorado
("COPERA"), one of the lead plaintiffs in the securities class action entitled
"In re Royal Ahold N.V. Securities & ERISA Litigation", today announced that
Drs. W.C.M. Oud has filed a notice of appeal against the final order and
judgment of Judge Blake of the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, located in Baltimore, approving Ahold's agreement with the lead
plaintiffs to settle the securities class action. Mr. Oud's objection was
rejected previously by Judge Blake, and Ahold and COPERA believe the appeal has
no merit and intend to oppose it.

Ahold Press Office: +31 (0)20 509 5343

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS NOTICE
Certain statements in this press release are "forward-looking statements" within
the meaning of U.S. federal securities laws. These forward-looking statements
include, but are not limited to, statements as to the expected amount of the
settlement of the securities class action and expectations that the court order
will become final, as well as the expected timing thereof. These forward-looking
statements are subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors that could
cause actual results to differ materially from the future results expressed or
implied by the forward-looking statements. Important factors that could cause
actual results to differ materially from the information set forth in the
forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, the risks that the
court order would be successfully reversed on appeal, Ahold's ability to defend
itself, actions of courts, government regulators and law enforcement agencies,
and other factors some of which are discussed in the public filings of Ahold.
Many of these factors are beyond Ahold's ability to control or predict. Given
these uncertainties, readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on the
forward-looking statements, which only speak as of the date of this press
release. Ahold does not undertake any obligation to release publicly any
revisions to the forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances
after the date of this press release or to reflect the occurrence of
unanticipated events or circumstances, except as may be required under
applicable securities laws. Outside the Netherlands, Koninklijke Ahold N.V.,
being its registered name, presents itself under the name of "Royal Ahold" or
simply "Ahold."

ALBERT ALBERT HEIJN ALBERT.NL C1000 ETOS FEIRA NOVA GALL & GALL GIANT FOOD
GIANT FOOD STORES HYPERNOVA ICA NORTH STAR FOODSERVICE PEAPOD PINGO DOCE
STOP & SHOP TOPS U.S. FOODSERVICE / WE MAKE IT EASY TO CHOOSE THE BEST

2006021                                                            www.ahold.com
2 

Lader v. Warden, 121 Nev. 682, 686, 120 P.3d 1164, 1166 (2005). Here, 

the district court conducted an evidentiary hearing, heard testimony from 

the victim and Newmon's trial counsel, and concluded that counsel's 

performance was not deficient and Newmon failed to demonstrate 

prejudice. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-88, 694 (1984); 

Kirksey v. State, 112 Nev. 980, 987, 923 P.2d 1102, 1107 (1996). The 

district court's finding is supported by substantial evidence and not clearly 

wrong, and Newmon has not demonstrated that the district court erred as 

a matter of law. Therefore, we conclude that the district court did not err 

by rejecting Newmon's claim. 

Newmon also contends that the district court erred by not 

finding that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to (1) communicate 

honestly with him, (2) move for a change of venue, (3) move to disqualify 

the trial judge, (4) notify him that the State, in its case-in-chief, intended 

on calling the prison nurse who treated him and the victim after the 

incident, (5) object to unfavorable jury instructions, (6) object to the 

inclusion of his prison disciplinary record in the presentence investigation 

report, and (7) object to prosecutorial misconduct. Newmon, however, 

offers no argument or citation to legal authority in support of these claims, 

therefore, we need not address them. See Maresca v. State, 103 Nev. 669, 

673, 748 P.2d 3, 6 (1987). Nevertheless, based on our review of the record 

on appeal, we conclude that the district court did not err by rejecting 

Newmon's ineffective-assistance claims. See Lader, 121 Nev. at 686, 120 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A 

M:L21WMilMMSBN2iNiMaiii 
OINKEIMIREN (Mg 

P.3d at 1166; see also Strickland, 466 U.S. at 687-88, Kirksey, 112 Nev. at 

987, 923 P.2d at 1107. Accordingly, we 

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 

Hardesty 

CLAil 1 

Parraguirre 

cc: Seventh Judicial District Court Dept. 2 

Christopher R. Oram 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Attorney General/Ely 

White Pine County Clerk 

,J. 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A 

3
# Jornal Oficial C 232A/21 d

| | ISSN 1725-2482 |
| --- | --- |
| Jornal Oficial
  da União Europeia | C 232A |
| | |
| Edição em língua portuguesa | Comunicações e Informações | 48.o ano21 de Setembro de 2005 |

ISSN 1725-2482

Jornal Oficial

da União Europeia

C 232A

Edição em língua portuguesa

Comunicações e Informações

48.o ano21 de Setembro de 2005

---

| Número de informação | Índice | Página |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | III   Informações |
| | Comissão |
| 2005/C 232A/1 | Publicação de uma vaga de director executivo da Agência Comunitária de Controlo das Pescas (grau A*14) — COM/2005/10004 | 1 |

Número de informação

Índice

Página

III   Informações

Comissão

2005/C 232A/1

Publicação de uma vaga de director executivo da Agência Comunitária de Controlo das Pescas (grau A*14) — COM/2005/10004

1

| PT | |
| --- | --- |

PT

---

III Informações

Comissão

| 21.9.2005 | PT | Jornal Oficial da União Europeia | CA 232/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.9.2005

PT

Jornal Oficial da União Europeia

CA 232/1

---

PUBLICAÇÃO DE UMA VAGA DE DIRECTOR EXECUTIVO DA AGÊNCIA COMUNITÁRIA DE CONTROLO DAS PESCAS

(Grau A*14)

COM/2005/10004

(2005/C 232 A/01)

A Agência Comunitária de Controlo das Pescas pretende nomear um director.

Os candidatos deverão ter a nacionalidade de um dos Estados‐Membros da União Europeia.

O director será nomeado pelo Conselho de Administração da Agência com base numa lista de candidatos seleccionados e propostos pela Comissão Europeia. O candidato escolhido será nomeado como agente temporário de grau A*14, em conformidade com a a alínea a) do artigo 2.o do regime aplicável aos outros agentes das Comunidades Europeias, por um período de cinco anos, renovável uma vez por período não superior a cinco anos. A Agência e a Comissão aplicam uma política de igualdade de oportunidades.

A descrição das funções, o formulário de candidatura e as instruções para o envio da candidatura podem ser descarregados a partir dos seguintes endereços internet:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/dgs/personnel_administration/working_senior_mgt_en.htm

ou

http://europa.eu.int/comm/fisheries

O prazo de recepção das candidaturas termina em 21 de Outubro de 2005 (fazendo fé a data do carimbo dos correios).

---
UNITIED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION

VERONICA BRAYMAN CASE NO.: 9:20-cv-80717

Plaintiff,

vs.

STATE FARM BANK, F.S.B.,

Defendant. 

________________________________/

JOINT STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the parties hereby 

dismiss the above-entitled action and all claims asserted in the action with prejudice. The parties 

agree to bear their own fees and costs.

Respectfully Submitted, 

/s/ Christopher W. Boss

Christopher W. Boss, Esq.

Florida Bar No.: 13183

Andrea D. Abercrombie, Esq. 

Florida Bar No.: 91402

BOSS LAW

9887 Fourth Street North, Suite 202 

St. Petersburg, Florida 33702 

Telephone: (727) 471-0039 

Facsimile: (888) 449-8792

cpservice@bosslegal.com 

Attorney for Plaintiff

Respectfully Submitted,

/s/ David A. Mercer__ 

David A. Mercer, Esq.

Florida Bar No.: 

BUTLER WEIHMULLER KATZ CRAIG 

LLP

dmercer@butler.legal

400 N. Ashley Drive, Suite 2300

Tampa, FL 33602

Telephone: (813) 281-1900

Facsimile: (813) 281-0900

Counsel for State Farm Bank F.S.B.

Case 9:20-cv-80717-DMM Document 18 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/13/2020 Page 1 of 2
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 13th day of October 2020, I electronically filed the 

foregoing document with the Clerk of Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing 

document is being served this day on all counsel of record or pro se parties either via transmission 

of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those 

counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing, 

including the following:

David A. Mercer, Esq. 

Butler Weihmuller Katz Craig LLP

400 N. Ashley Drive, Suite 2300

Tampa, FL 33602

dmercer@butler.legal

Counsel for State Farm Bank, F.S.B

/s/ Christopher W. Boss

Christopher W. Boss, Esq.

Case 9:20-cv-80717-DMM Document 18 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/13/2020 Page 2 of 2
#### William J. Perry, Sr., as Administrator, etc., Plaintiff, v. Rochester Lime Company, Defendant.

Plaintiff’s exceptions overruled, motion for new trial denied, with costs, and judgment directed for the defendant upon the nonsuit, with costs. All concurred.