alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
ON PETITION FOR REHEARING UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7720

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DENNY R. GULLETT, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. John T. Copenhaver, Jr., District Judge. (CR-94-17, CA-97-456-2) Submitted: June 5, 2003 Decided: June 25, 2003 Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Cheryl Johns Sturm, Chadds Ford, Pennsylvania, for Appellant. Michael Lee Keller, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Denny R. Gullett was convicted following a jury trial of one count of maliciously damaging and destroying and attempting to damage and destroy by means of an explosive a building used in interstate commerce that resulted in death in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 844(i) (2000). Gullett was sentenced to thirty-eight years in prison and five years of supervised release. Gullett filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion to vacate his sentence. The magistrate judge recommended dismissal of Gullett’s claims. Following an evidentiary hearing on the issue of whether there had been improper contact during trial between a juror and the prosecution and a prosecution witness, the district court denied the motion. An 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 his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. SeeMiller-El v. Cockrell , 123 S. Ct. 1029, 1040 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.), cert. denied , 534 U.S. 941 (2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Gullett has not3 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
§ 155.5 Responsibilities. ( a ) The Assistant Secretary of Defense of Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence shall: ( 1 ) Establish investigative policy and adjudicative standards and oversee their application.
( 2 ) Coordinate with the General Counsel of the Department of Defense (GC, DoD) on policy affecting clearance decisions.
( 3 ) Issue clarifying guidance and instructions as needed.
( b ) The General Counsel of the Department of Defense shall: ( 1 ) Establish guidance and provide oversight as to legal sufficiency of procedures and standards established by this part.
( 2 ) Establish the organization and composition of the DOHA.
( 3 ) Designate a civilian attorney to be the Director, DOHA.
( 4 ) Issue clarifying guidance and instructions as needed.
( 5 ) Administer the program established by this part.
( 6 ) Issue invitational travel orders in appropriate cases to persons to appear and testify who have provided oral or written statements adverse to the applicant relating to a controverted issue.
( 7 ) Designate attorneys to be Department Counsels assigned to the DOHA to represent the Government's interest in cases and related matters within the applicability and scope of this part.
( 8 ) Designate attorneys to be Administrative Judges assigned to the DOHA.
( 9 ) Designate attorneys to be Administrative Judge members of the DOHA Appeal Board.
( 10 ) Provide for supervision of attorneys and other personnel assigned or attached to the DOHA.
( 11 ) Develop and implement policy established or coordinated with the GC, DoD, in accordance with this part.
( 12 ) Establish and maintain qualitative and quantitative standards for all work by DOHA employees arising within the applicability and scope of this part.
( 13 ) Ensure that the Administrative Judges and Appeal Board members have the requisite independence to render fair and impartial decisions consistent with DoD policy.
( 14 ) Provide training, clarify policy, or initiate personnel actions, as appropriate, to ensure that all DOHA decisions are made in accordance with policy, procedures, and standards established by this part.
( 15 ) Provide for maintenance and control of all DOHA records.
( 16 ) Take actions as provided for in § 155.6(b), and the additional procedural guidance in appendix A to this part.
( 17 ) Establish and maintain procedures for timely assignment and completion of cases.
( 18 ) Issue guidance and instructions, as needed, to fulfill the foregoing responsibilities.
( 19 ) Designate the Director, DOHA, to implement paragraphs (b)(5) through (b)(18) of this section, under general guidance of the GC, DoD.
( c ) The Heads of the DoD Components shall provide (from resources available to the designated DoD Component) financing, personnel, personnel spaces, office facilities, and related administrative support required by the DOHA.
( d ) The ASD(C3I) shall ensure that cases within the scope and applicability of this part are referred promptly to the DOHA, as required, and that clearance decisions by the DOHA are acted upon without delay.
[57 FR 5383, Feb. 14, 1992, as amended at 59 FR 35464, July 12, 1994]
#### The People of the State of New York, Plaintiff, v. Francis H. Bloeth, Defendant.

Motion by the People pursuant to statute (Code Grim. Pro., §§ 344^346), for the removal (before a new trial) of indictments from Suffolk County, to another county in New York State for trial outside the New York metropolitan area. Motion granted to the extent of changing the venue to New York County; the action is hereby transferred to the Supreme Court, New York County, Criminal Term, for trial. Ughetta, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Brennan and Rabin, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.2





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 (AS ADOPTED


PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE


SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)





In connection with this Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report of Sionix Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, David R. Wells, President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify to my knowledge and in my capacity as an officer of the Company, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





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 Company as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the Report.





Date: August 2, 2011




/s/ David R. WellsDavid R. WellsPresident, Chief Financial Officer, and Principal Financial and Accounting Officer
§ 2102.21 Procedures for appeal of determination to deny access to or amendment of requested records. ( a ) Individuals wishing to appeal an NSC Staff denial of a request for access or to amend a record concerning them must address a letter of appeal to the Staff Secretary of the NSC. The letter must be received within thirty days from the date of the Staff Secretary's notice of denial and, at a minimum, should identify the following: ( 1 ) The records involved;
( 2 ) The dates of the initial request and subsequent NSC determination; and
( 3 ) A brief statement of the reasons supporting the request for reversal of the adverse determination.
( b ) Within thirty working days (excluding Saturdays, Sundays and legal Federal holidays) of the date of receipt of the letter of appeal, the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (hereinafter the “Assistant”), or the Deputy Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (hereinafter the “Deputy Assistant”), acting in his name, shall issue a determination on the appeal. In the event that a final determination cannot be made within this time period, the requestor will be informed of the delay, the reasons therefor and the date on which a final response is expected.
( c ) If the original request was for access and the initial determination is reversed, a copy of the records sought will be sent to the individual. If the initial determination is upheld, the requestor will be so advised and informed of the right to judicial review pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(g).
( d ) If the initial denial of a request to amend a record is reversed, the records will be corrected and a copy of the amended record will be sent to the individual. In the event the original decision is upheld by the Assistant to the President, the requestor will be so advised and informed in writing of his or her right to seek judicial review of the final agency determination, pursuant to section 552a(g) of title 5, U.S.C. In addition, the requestor will be advised of his right to have a concise statement of the reasons for disagreeing with the final determination appended to the disputed records. This statement should be mailed to the Staff Secretary within ten working days (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal Federal Holidays) of the date of the requestor's receipt of the final determination.
Medicine-Bow

Thunder Basin

National Grassland

Yoder

Glendo

Casper

Douglas

Guernsey

Wheatland

Chugwater

Torrington

Fort Laramie

CARBON

NATRONA CONVERSE

WESTON

ALBANY

PLATTE

GOSHEN

NIOBRARA

CAMPBELL

CROOK

LARAMIE

FREMONT

SWEETWATER

£¤20

£¤16

£¤18

£¤26

£¤85

£¤30

£¤287

£¤16

£¤85

£¤20

£¤85

¬«59

¬«34

¬«487

¬«387

¬«220

¬«130

§ ̈¦25

§ ̈¦90

§ ̈¦80

0 10 20 40

Miles

0 20 40 10

Kilometers

Wyoming Sage-Grouse 

Land Use Plan Amendments

o

NO WARRANTY IS MADE BY THE BLM FOR USE OF 

THE DATA FOR PURPOSES NOT INTENDED BY BLM.

LUP Amendments Planning Area

BLM Field Office Boundary

Forest Service Planning Unit Boundary

Casper Grazing Allotments

Counties

Water

Interstate

State / US Hwy

Cities

Map 3-2: Livestock 

Grazing Allotments

Casper Field Office
Exhibit   21.01








Subsidiaries
of the Registrant








CommunityOne
Bank, National Association -


National
banking association headquartered in the State of North Carolina





First
National Investor Services, Inc. -


A North
Carolina corporation and operating subsidiary





Premier
Investment Services, Inc. –


A North
Carolina corporation and operating subsidiary





Dover
Mortgage Company –


A North
Carolina corporation and operating subsidiary





FNB
United Statutory Trust I –


A
Connecticut statutory business trust





FNB
United Statutory Trust II –


A
Delaware statutory business trust





Catawba
Valley Capital Trust II –


A
Delaware statutory business trust














89
FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTH CI RCUI T MAR 13, 2009 THOMAS K. KAH

N CL ERK [ D O N O T P U B L I S H ]

I N T H E U N I T E D S T A T E S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S

F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C I R C U I T

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ N o

. 0 8

- 1 3 7 9 7 N o n
- A r g u m e n t C a l e n d a r

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ D

. C

. D o c k e t N o

. 0 7

- 0 0 4 7 5

- C R

- R D P

- T M P

U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A ,

P l a i n t i f f

- A p p e l l e e ,

v e r s u s

T Y R O N E D E X T E R H A M I L T O N ,
D e f e n d a n t

- A p p e l l a n t

.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A p p e a l f r o m t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s D i s t r i c t C o u r t f o r t h e N o r t h e r n D i s t r i c t o f A l a b a m a

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ( M a r c h 1 3 , 2 0 0 9 )

B e f o r e T J O F L A T , D U B I N A a n d P R Y O R , C i r c u i t J u d g e s

.
P E R C U R I A M :

G

. A l l e n M e i g h e n , a p p o i n t e d c o u n s e l f o r T y r o n e D e x t e r H a m i l t o n , h a sm o v e d t o w i t h d r a w f r o m f u r t h e r r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e a p p e l l a n t a n d f i l e d a b r i e f

p u r s u a n t t o A n d e r s v
. C a l i f o r n i a , 3 8 6 U

. S

. 7 3 8 , 8 7 S

. C t

. 1 3 9 6 , 1 8 L

. E d

. 2 d 4 9 3
( 1 9 6 7 )

. O u r i n d e p e n d e n t r e v i e w o f t h e e n t i r e r e c o r d r e v e a l s t h a t c o u n s e l ’ s

a s s e s s m e n t o f t h e r e l a t i v e m e r i t o f t h e a p p e a l i s c o r r e c t

. B e c a u s e i n d e p e n d e n t

e x a m i n a t i o n o f t h e e n t i r e r e c o r d r e v e a l s n o a r g u a b l e i s s u e s o f m e r i t , c o u n s e l ’ s

m o t i o n t o w i t h d r a w i s G R A N T E D , a n d H a m i l t o n ’ s c o n v i c t i o n a n d s e n t e n c e a r e

A F F I R M E D

.

2
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      Exhibit 22

                           SUBSIDIARIES OF REGISTRANT

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                              JURISDICTION
SUBSIDIARY                                                                  OF INCORPORATION
========================================================              ===========================
<S>                                                                        <C>
GENICOM International Holdings Corporation                                      Delaware

GENICOM International Sales Corporation                                         Delaware

Enterprising Service Solutions Corporation                                      Delaware

Delmarva Technologies Corporation                                               Delaware

Rastek Corporation                                                              Delaware

Rastek Japan Ltd.                                                                 Japan

Printer Systems Corporation                                                     Virginia

Printer Connection, Inc.                                                        Virginia

Printer Systems International, Inc.                                             Virginia

GENICOM Canada, Inc.                                                             Canada

GENICOM Foreign Sales Corporation                                          U.S. Virgin Islands

GENICOM Euro Holdings B.V.                                                   The Netherlands

GENICOM Belgium                                                                  Belgium

GENICOM International Limited                                                    England

GENICOM (No. 1) Limited                                                          England

GENICOM Ltd.                                                                     England

GENICOM S.A.R.L.                                                                 France

GENICOM S.A.                                                                     France

GENICOM GmbH                                                                     Germany

GENICOM S.p.A.                                                                    Italy

GENICOM (Australia) PTY LTD.                                                    Australia

GENICOM Pty Limited                                                             Australia

GENICOM Sweden AB                                                                Sweden
</TABLE>

                                      E-20
#### National Tile and Marble Corp. v. Bernard Fread.

Application denied, with $10 costs. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Rabin, Valente and Bergan, JJ.
IV 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 1136 

Expressing support for designation of the month of April 2024 as 

‘‘Parkinson’s Awareness Month’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 11, 2024 

Ms. WEXTON (for herself, Mrs. KIGGANS of Virginia, Mr. BILIRAKIS, Mr. 

JOHNSON of Georgia, Mr. TONKO, Mrs. DINGELL, Ms. NORTON, Mr. 

CLEAVER, Ms. WILD, Mr. FITZPATRICK, Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi, 

Ms. BARRAGA ́N, Ms. MCCLELLAN, Ms. STEVENS, Mr. BEYER, Mr. 

TRONE, Mr. BACON, and Mr. LAWLER) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing support for designation of the month of April 

2024 as ‘‘Parkinson’s Awareness Month’’. 

Whereas Parkinson’s disease— 

(1) affects over 1,000,000 individuals in the United 

States with nearly 90,000 individuals diagnosed each 

year; 

(2) is the fastest-growing and second most common 

neurodegenerative disease in the world; 

(3) is believed to be caused by a combination of genetic and environmental factors, but the exact cause in 

most individuals is still unknown; and 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HRES 1136 IH 

(4) is the 15th leading cause of death in the United 

States, according to the Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention; 

Whereas it is estimated that, by the year 2037, the number 

of individuals with Parkinson’s disease in the United 

States will nearly double, and the disease will cost the 

United States at least $80,000,000,000 annually; 

Whereas the symptoms of Parkinson’s disease can include dementia and cognitive impairment, tremors, slowness of 

movement and rigidity, gait and balance difficulties, 

speech and swallowing difficulties, depression, and a variety of other symptoms; 

Whereas there are millions of family caregivers, friends, and 

loved ones whose lives are greatly affected by Parkinson’s 

disease; and 

Whereas more research, education, and community support 

services are needed to— 

(1) find better treatments and a cure for Parkinson’s disease; and 

(2) maintain dignity for those living with the disease 

today: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) supports the designation of ‘‘Parkinson’s 

3 Awareness Month’’; 

4 (2) supports the goals and ideals of Parkinson’s 

5 Awareness Month; 

6 (3) continues to support research to find better 

7 treatments and a cure for Parkinson’s disease; 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•HRES 1136 IH 

1 (4) recognizes the individuals living with Par2 kinson’s disease who participate in vital clinical 

3 trials to advance the knowledge of the disease; and 

4 (5) commends the dedication of organizations, 

5 volunteers, researchers, and millions of individuals 

6 across the country working to improve the quality of 

7 life of people living with Parkinson’s disease and 

8 their families. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
#### May King Perry *vs.*Jane H. W. Reynolds.

May 21, 1889.

Pleading — Construction of Complaint. — A statement in the complaint, in an action to recover an alleged surplus arising by reason of a sale under a power contained in a real-estate mortgage, as to the amount due upon the day of sale, should not be allowed to control, when other facts appear in the pleading from which the conclusion stated may be questionable.

Same — Frivolous *Demurrer.*— Morton v. *Jackson,*2 Minn. 180, (219;) *Hurlburt*v. *Schulenburg,*17 Minn. 5, (22,) — followed, as to the rule for determining the frivolousness of a demurrer.

In this action, brought in the district court for Grant county, defendant’s demurrer was, by order of *C. L. Brown,*J., stricken out as frivolous, and judgment for failure to answer was entered for plaintiff. The defendant moved that the judgment be vacated and for leave to serve a proposed answer, which motion was denied, the court holding that it had no power to grant it. Defendant appeals from the judgment.

*A. G. Brown,*for appellant.

*C: M. Stevens,*for respondent.

Collins, J.1

Action to recover an alleged surplus arising by reason of a sale under a power contained in a mortgage upon real estate. The plaintiff is the mortgagor; the defendant, the mortgagee by as*500signment, and also purchaser at the sale, at which, it is averred, no money was actually paid to the sheriff. To an amended complaint the defendant interposed a general demurrer, which was stricken out as frivolous in the court below. This complaint set forth in detail the date and amount of the note secured by the mortgage and of each interest coupon attached, and that certain sums of money had been paid thereon upon days named, from which a computation of the amount due when the sale took place could easily be made. It also contained an averment that upon said day there was due, as principal and interest upon the note and coupons, a specified sum, and no more. This general statement, which at best .is but a conclusion to be determined by calculation, cannot be allowed to control, when other facts appear from which it may be questionable. *Bailey*v. *Merritt,*7 Minn. 102, (159.) If, by a computation of principal and interest, based upon the allegations as to date and amount of the note and its coupons, in connection with the admitted payments, there appears to be an error in the conclusion, the latter must yield. We do not wish to be understood as holding that'there was error in this instance, for it is a debatable question, depending upon the rule of law applicable to the facts. And for this reason the demurrer was not frivolous. Its frivolousness must be determined by a mere inspection of it and the complaint to which it was interposed, without argument. *Morton*v. *Jackson,*2 Minn. 180, (219;) *Hurlburt*v. *Schulenburg,*17 Minn. 5, (22.) Applying the rule laid down in each of these cases, the demurrer should not have been stricken out.

Judgment reversed.

1

 Gilfillan, C. J., absent because of illness, took no part in the hearing or determination of this case.
#### § 174.8 Screening for properties covered by the Base Closure Community Redevelopment and Homeless Assistance Act of 1994, cross-reference.

The Departments of Defense and Housing and Urban Development have promulgated regulations to address state and local screening and approval of redevelopment plans for installations covered by the Base Closure Community Redevelopment and Homeless Assistance Act of 1994 (Pub. L. 103-421). The Department of Defense regulations can be found at part 176 of this title. The Department of Housing and Urban Development regulations can be found at 24 CFR part 586.
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed November 17, 2021.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D21-752

Lower Tribunal No. 20-62

________________

S.Z., a Juvenile,

Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida,

Appellee.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Dawn 

Denaro, Judge.

Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Shannon Hemmendinger, 

Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Brian H. Zack, Assistant 

Attorney General, for appellee.

Before FERNANDEZ, C.J., and EMAS, and BOKOR, JJ. 

PER CURIAM.
2

Affirmed. Jacobs v. State, 396 So. 2d 713, 716 (Fla. 1981) (“One who 

participates with another in a common criminal scheme is guilty of all crimes 

committed in furtherance of that scheme regardless of whether he or she 

physically participates in that crime.”).