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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-7262 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

JOHNNY SWANSON, III,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, District

Judge. (CR-95-432)

Submitted: December 22, 2005 Decided: January 3, 2006

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Johnny Swanson, III, Appellant Pro Se. John Frank Eisinger, OFFICE

OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Johnny Swanson, III, appeals the district court’s order

denying his motions challenging his conviction and sentence.

Because Swanson’s motions amounted to successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255

(2000) motions for which Swanson failed to obtain authorization

under 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (2000) from this court to file, the district

court was without jurisdiction to grant Swanson relief.

Accordingly, we affirm. Swanson’s Motion for Default is denied.

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.

AFFIRMED
Filed 5/25/00 by Clerk of Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2000 ND 100

David Bublitz d.b.a. 

DC Marketing, Plaintiff and Appellee

v.

Abies Tsang d.b.a. 

Purple Rooster, Defendant and Appellant

No. 990313

Appeal from the District Court of Cass County, East Central Judicial District, the Honorable Ralph R. Erickson, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Dennis W. Lindquist, P.O. Box 490, Mandan, N.D. 58554-0490, for plaintiff and appellee.

Abies Tsang, pro se, 4820 E. Second Street, Benicia, CA 94510, defendant and appellant.

Bublitz v. Tsang

No. 990313

Per Curiam.

[¶1]Abies Tsang, acting pro se, appeals from a judgment of the East Central Judicial District Court against him and in favor of David Bublitz.  Tsang argues, among other things, that the district court erred in finding he submitted to the court’s jurisdiction.

[¶2]This Court has held that the party challenging the findings of fact of a district court has the burden of demonstrating those findings are clearly erroneous.  See N.D.R.Civ.P. 52; Rosendahl v. Rosendahl, 470 N.W.2d 230, 231 (N.D. 1991).  Rule 10(b), N.D.R.App.P., requires that the appellant provide a transcript of the proceedings on appeal.  Sabot v. Fargo Women’s Health Org., Inc., 500 N.W.2d 889, 891 (N.D. 1993).  “When an appellant raises issues on appeal regarding the findings of fact, it is difficult, if not impossible, for us to discuss the merits of the appeal without a transcript.”  Rosendahl, at 231 (citing Davis v. Davis, 448 N.W.2d 619, 620 (N.D. 1989)).  If the record does not allow for a meaningful and intelligent review of alleged error, we will decline to review the issue.  Buzick v. Buzick, 533 N.W.2d 676, 677 (N.D. 1995); Cullen v. Williams County, 446 N.W.2d 250, 253 (N.D. 1989).

[¶3]The rules of procedure are not to be applied differently merely because a party is acting pro se.  Rosendahl, 470 N.W.2d at 231 (citing Davis, 448 N.W.2d at 620).  By failing to submit a transcript of the district court proceedings, Tsang has not met his burden of showing that the district court’s findings of fact are clearly erroneous.  Rosendahl, 470 N.W.2d at 231.

[¶4]Because Tsang included materials in his brief that were not part of the district court’s record, we award Bublitz double costs on appeal.  See N.D.R.App.P. 13, 28, 30; Estate of Wieland, 1998 ND 130, ¶ 22 n.3, 581 N.W.2d 140.

[¶5]The judgment of the district court is affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1) and (2).

[¶6]Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

Dale V. Sandstrom

William A. Neumann

Mary Muehlen Maring

Carol Ronning Kapsner
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A20D0422. WILLIAM G. MITCHELL v. THE STATE.

In August 2012, William G. Mitchell pled guilty to one count of theft by

taking, for which he received a ten-year probated sentence. In November 2019, the

trial court revoked part of Mitchell’s probation and required him to serve 160 to 180

days in the Probation Detention Center followed by substance abuse treatment. The

State subsequently filed another petition for probation revocation on February 3,

2020, and Mitchell was scheduled to appear for a hearing on March 19, 2020.

Mitchell filed a motion for continuance and a motion to recuse the trial judge. On

March 30, 2020, the trial court denied the motion for continuance and dismissed the

motion to recuse, and, on May 11, 2020, Mitchell filed an appeal challenging these

ordersin the Georgia Supreme Court, which docketed the appeal as an application for

discretionary appeal.

1 After finding no basis for exercising its jurisdiction, the

Supreme Court transferred the application to this Court. See Case No. S20D1248

(transferred June 8, 2020). We, however, also lack jurisdiction.

Because it appears that no final judgment has been entered in the probation

revocation proceeding and the case remains pending below, the orders Mitchellseeks

to appeal are interlocutory. Although Mitchell filed an application for discretionary

1 Mitchell has filed two more applications for discretionary appeal seeking to

challenge other orders issued in his probation revocation proceeding. See Case Nos.

A20D0420 and A20D0421.

July 27, 2020
appeal, as described in OCGA § 5-6-35,

2

compliance with that procedure does not

excuse a party seeking appellate review of an interlocutory order from complying

with the interlocutory appeal procedures – including obtaining a certificate of

immediate review from the trial court – set forth in OCGA § 5-6-34 (b). See Bailey

v. Bailey, 266 Ga. 832, 832-833 (471 SE2d 213) (1996); Scruggs v. Ga. Dept. of

Human Resources, 261 Ga. 587, 588-589 (1) (408 SE2d 103) (1991). Mitchell’s

failure to follow the interlocutory appeal procedures deprives this Court of

jurisdiction over his application, which is hereby DISMISSED. Mitchell’s pro se

motions for appointment of counsel and to amend his appeal are hereby DENIED as

moot.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

2 OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (5) providesthat “ordersrevoking probation” are subject

to the discretionary appeal procedure. (Emphasis supplied.)

07/27/2020
EXHIBIT 32.2


Written Statement of the Chief Financial Officer


of CNA Financial Corporation


Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350


(As adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)


The undersigned, the Chief Financial Officer of CNA Financial Corporation (the Company), hereby certifies that, to his knowledge:


|  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                
|- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|• | the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter endedSeptember 30, 2011filed on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

|  |                                                                                                                                                     
|- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|• | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated:November 1, 2011By/s/ D. Craig MenseD. Craig MenseChief Financial Officer





The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
#### § 1005.111 Notice.

The agency shall make available to employees, applicants, participants, beneficiaries, and other interested persons such information regarding the provisions of this part and its applicability to the programs or activities conducted by the agency, and make such information available to them in such manner as the head of the agency finds necessary to apprise such persons of the protections against discrimination assured them by section 504 and this regulation.
Editorial Note on Part 240
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 240 appear at 57 FR 36501, Aug. 13, 1992, and 57 FR 47409, Oct. 16, 1992.

§ 240.0-1 Definitions. ( a ) As used in the rules and regulations in this part, prescribed by the Commission pursuant to Title I of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (48 Stat. 881-905; 15 U.S.C. chapter 2B), unless the context otherwise specifically requires: ( 1 ) The term *Commission* means the Securities and Exchange Commission.
( 2 ) The term *act* means Title I of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
( 3 ) The term *section* refers to a section of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.[1]
( 4 ) The term *rules and regulations* refers to all rules and regulations adopted by the Commission pursuant to the act, including the forms for registration and reports and the accompanying instructions thereto.
( 5 ) The term *electronic filer* means a person or an entity that submits filings electronically pursuant to Rules 100 and 101 of Regulation S-T (§§ 232.100 and 232.101 of this chapter, respectively).
( 6 ) The term *electronic filing* means a document under the federal securities laws that is transmitted or delivered to the Commission in electronic format.
( b ) Unless otherwise specifically stated, the terms used in this part shall have the meaning defined in the act.
( c ) A rule or regulation which defines a term without express reference to the act or to the rules and regulations, or to a portion thereof, defines such term for all purposes as used both in the act and in the rules and regulations, unless the context otherwise specifically requires.
( d ) Unless otherwise specified or the context otherwise requires, the term *prospectus* means a prospectus meeting the requirements of section 10(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 as amended.

Cross References:
For definition of “listed”, see § 240.3b-1; “officer”, § 240.3b-2; “short sale”, § 240.3b-3. For additional definitions, see § 240.15c1-1. [13 FR 8178, Dec. 22, 1948, as amended at 13 FR 9321, Dec. 31, 1948; 19 FR 6730, Oct. 20, 1954; 58 FR 14682, Mar. 18, 1993; 62 FR 36459, July 8, 1997] Footnotes -
240.0-1
[1] The provisions of paragraph (a)(3) of 17 CFR 240.0-1 relate to the terminology of rules and regulations as published by the Securities and Exchange Commission and are inapplicable to the terminology appearing in the Code of Federal Regulations.
§ 130.13 Information to be furnished to applicant, supplier or vendor by a recipient of a fee or commission. ( a ) Every applicant or supplier, and each vendor thereof; ( 1 ) In order to determine whether it is obliged under § 130.9 or § 130.12 to furnish information specified in § 130.10 with respect to a sale; and
( 2 ) Prior to furnishing such information, must obtain from each person, if any, to whom it has paid, or offered or agreed to pay, a fee or commission in respect of such sale, a timely statement containing a full disclosure by such a person of all political contributions paid, or offered or agreed to be paid, by it or on its behalf, or at its direction, in respect of such sale. Such disclosure must include responses to all the information required to enable the applicant, supplier or vendor, as the case may be, to comply fully with §§ 130.9, 130.10, and 130.12.
( b ) In obtaining information under paragraph (a) of this section, the applicant, supplier or vendor, as the case may be, must also require each person to whom a fee or commission is paid, or offered or agreed to be paid, to furnish from time to time such reports of its political contributions as may be necessary to enable the applicant, supplier or vendor, as the case may be, to comply fully with §§ 130.9, 130.10, 130.11, and 130.12.
( c ) The applicant supplier or vendor, as the case may be, must include any political contributions paid, or offered or agreed to be paid, by or on behalf of, or at the direction of, any person to whom it has paid, or offered or agreed to pay a fee or commission in determining whether applicant, supplier or vendor is required by §§ 130.9, 130.11, and 130.12 to furnish information specified in § 130.10.
#### § 1008.670 Suspension.

*Suspension* means an action taken by a Federal agency that immediately prohibits a recipient from participating in Federal Government procurement contracts and covered nonprocurement transactions for a temporary period, pending completion of an investigation and any judicial or administrative proceedings that may ensue. A recipient so prohibited is suspended, in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation for procurement contracts (48 CFR part 9, subpart 9.4) and the common rule, Government-wide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement), that implements Executive Order 12549 and Executive Order 12689. Suspension of a recipient is a distinct and separate action from suspension of an award or suspension of payments under an award.
#### Arjon Sela, Respondent, v Hammerson Fifth Avenue, Inc., Appellant.

[716 NYS2d 564]

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward Lehner, J.), entered April 5, 2000, which denied defendant’s motion to vacate a prior order, entered September 13, 1999, granting plaintiffs motion to strike defendant’s answer on default, unanimously reversed, on the law, the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, without costs, the motion to vacate granted, and the answer reinstated.

The motion court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying defendant’s motion to vacate the default order. Defendant established, as required by CPLR 5015, a reasonable excuse for the default, i.e., inadvertent law office failure, and a meritorious defense. As to the latter issue, the affirmation submitted by defendant’s attorney, whether or not based on his personal knowledge of the underlying facts, was a proper vehicle for the submission of evidence in admissible form *(see, Grossberg Tudanger Adv. v Weinreb,*177 AD2d 377, 378; *Zuckerman v City of New York,*49 NY2d 557, 563), consisting of agreement between defendants and a waste disposal contractor purporting to show that maintenance of the waste compactor unit that was the alleged cause of plaintiffs slip and fall injury was the responsibility of the contractor. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Williams, Wallach, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.
#### § 130.14 Recordkeeping.

Each applicant, supplier and vendor must maintain a record of any information it was required to furnish or obtain under this part and all records upon which its reports are based for a period of not less than five years following the date of the report to which they pertain.
§ 1002.8 Exemptions. The Act authorizes exemption from disclosure of records and information concerning matters that are: ( a ) Specifically required by Executive order to be exempt from disclosure in the interest of the national defense or foreign policy;
( b ) Related solely to the internal personnel rules and practices by the Foundation;
( c ) Specifically exempted from disclosure by statute;
( d ) Trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from any person which is privileged or confidential;
( e ) Interagency or intra-agency memoranda or letters which would not be available by law to a private party in litigation with the Foundation;
( f ) Personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy;
( g ) Investigatory files (including security investigation files and files concerning the conduct of employees) compiled for law enforcement purposes except to the extent available by law to a private party.
The Foundation will not honor requests for exempt records or information.
#### § 1006.500 What is the purpose of the Excluded Parties List System (EPLS)?

The *EPLS* is a widely available source of the most current information about persons who are excluded or disqualified from covered transactions.
§ 300.400 Satisfaction of customer claims for standardized options. ( a ) For the purpose of sections 7(b)(1), 8 (b) and (d), and 16(11) of the Securities Investor Protection Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), this rule will be applied in determining what a customer will receive in either ( 1 ) a liquidation proceeding pursuant to the Act or
( 2 ) a direct payment procedure pursuant to section 10 of the Act, in satisfaction of a claim based upon Standardized Options positions.
( b ) As promptly as practicable after the initiation of a liquidation proceeding or a direct payment procedure under the Act, the trustee in a liquidation proceeding, or SIPC in a direct payment procedure, shall liquidate or cause to be liquidated, by sale or purchase, all Standardized Options positions held for the accounts of customers except to the extent that the trustee, with SIPC's consent, or SIPC as trustee, as the case may be, has arranged or is able promptly to arrange, a transfer of some or all of such positions to another SIPC member.
( c ) A trustee in a liquidation proceeding, or SIPC in a direct payment procedure, shall calculate the dollar amount of all Standardized Options positions held for the account of a customer in accordance with section 16(11) of the Act, and credit or debit, as appropriate, the dollar amount so calculated to the account of such customer.
( d ) Notwithstanding paragraph (b) of this section, neither the trustee in a liquidation proceeding nor SIPC in a direct payment procedure shall be required under this rule to liquidate any short position in Standardized Options covered by the deposit of ( 1 ) the underlying securities, in the case of a call option, or
( 2 ) treasury bills, in the case of a put option, by or on behalf of a customer with a bank or other depository. Any such positions that are not liquidated shall be excluded from the calculation provided for in paragraph (c) of this section.
( e ) In no event will Standardized Options positions be delivered to or on behalf of customers in satisfaction of claims pursuant to section 7(b)(1) of the Act except to the extent that such positions have been transferred as provided in paragraph (b) of this section.
( f ) In no event will Standardized Options be purchased for delivery to customers pursuant to section 8(d) of the Act.
( g ) This rule shall not be construed as limiting or restricting in any way the exercise of any right of a broker or registered clearing agency to liquidate or cause the liquidation of Standardized Options Positions.
( h ) As used in this rule the term *Standardized Options* means options traded on a national securities exchange, an automated quotation system of a registered securities association, or a foreign securities exchange, and any other option that is a security under section 16(14) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78lll(14), and is issued by a securities clearing agency registered under section 17A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. 78q-1, or a foreign securities clearing agency.
[48 FR 49840, Oct. 28, 1983, as amended at 79 FR 2781, Jan. 16, 2014]
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Anthony Emmino, Appellant.

In a *coram nobis*proceeding, defendant appeals from an order of the County Court, Kings County, dated November 3, 1961, which denied, without a hearing, his application to vacate a judgment of said court, rendered October 29, 1946 after a jury trial, convicting him of grand larceny in *704the first degree (three counts), and imposing sentence. Order affirmed. No opinion. Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Hill and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
#### § 1427.1 Scope.

This part sets forth procedures under which requests may be submitted to the Board seeking the issuance of general statements of policy or guidance under 22 U.S.C. 4107(c)(2)(F).
§ 38.401 General requirements. ( a ) *General.* ( 1 ) A designated contract market must have procedures, arrangements and resources for disclosing to the Commission, market participants and the public accurate information pertaining to: ( i ) Contract terms and conditions;
( ii ) Rules and regulations pertaining to the trading mechanisms; and
( iii ) Rules and specifications pertaining to operation of the electronic matching platform or trade execution facility.
( 2 ) Through the procedures, arrangements and resources required in paragraph (a) of this section, the designated contract market must ensure public dissemination of information pertaining to new product listings, new rules, rule amendments or other changes to previously-disclosed information, in accordance with the timeline provided in paragraph (c) of this section.
( 3 ) A designated contract market shall meet the requirements of this paragraph (a), by placing the information described in this paragraph (a) on the designated contract market's Web site within the time prescribed in paragraph (c) of this section.
( b ) *Accuracy requirement.* With respect to any communication with the Commission, and any information required to be transmitted or made available to market participants and the public, including on its Web site or otherwise, a designated contract market must provide information that it believes, to the best of its knowledge, is accurate and complete, and must not omit material information.
( c ) *Notice of regulatory submissions.* ( 1 ) A designated contract market, in making available on its Web site information pertaining to new product listings, new rules, rule amendments or other changes to previously-disclosed information, must place such information and submissions on its Web site concurrent with the filing of such information or submissions with the Secretary of the Commission.
( 2 ) To the extent that a designated contract market requests confidential treatment of any information filed with the Secretary of the Commission, the designated contract market must post on its Web site the public version of such filing or submission.
( d ) *Rulebook.* A designated contract market must ensure that the rulebook posted on its Web site is accurate, complete, current and readily accessible to the public. A designated contract market must publish or post in its rulebook all new or amended rules, both substantive and non-substantive, on the date of implementation of such new or amended rule, on the date a new product is listed, or on the date any changes to previously-disclosed information take effect.