alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7180

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus BERNARD MIDDLETON, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CR-92-348-A, CA-96-1097-AM) Submitted: June 18, 1998 Decided: August 7, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN and WILKINS, Circuit Judges and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bernard Middleton, Appellant Pro Se. James L. Trump, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: Appellant appeals the district court’s order declining to grant relief under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) from the court’s order denying relief on Appellant’s motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998) . We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Middleton , Nos. CR-92-348-A; CA96-1097-AM (E.D. Va. June 9, 1997). We deny Middleton’s motion for release pending review of the appeal as moot and 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
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FIRST
QUARTER ENDED JULY 31, 2000 SYNTHETIC BLOOD INTERNATIONAL, INC.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             MAY-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-2000
<CASH>                                       5,569,914
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,616,147
<PP&E>                                         174,967
<DEPRECIATION>                                  45,973
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,991,162
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          338,298
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       857,350
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,795,514
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,991,162
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                90,935
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               343,810
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 808
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (253,683)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (253,683)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.003)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.003)


</TABLE>
- '09231676 COMPLAINT' of '24-00782-F San Francisco'
- '09231676 FINAL_SIGNED_-_NOT-LETTER___DR_-_Lammersville_USD2' of '24-00782-F San Francisco'
1816.506-70 NASA contract clause. Insert the clause at 1852.216-80, Task Ordering Procedure, in solicitations and contracts when an indefinite-delivery, task order contract is contemplated. The clause is applicable to both fixed-price and cost-reimbursement type contracts. The contracting officer shall use the clause with its— ( a ) Alternate I, if the cost type, fixed price with prospective price redetermination, or fixed-price incentive contract does not include a NASA Form 533M reporting requirements; or
( b ) Alternate II, if a fixed price contract is contemplated.
[83 FR 13115, Mar. 27, 2018]
#### Carol C. Johnson *v.*Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Branford et al.

*Carol C. Johnson,*pro se, in support of the motion.

Submitted December 13, 1974

decided January 9, 1975

The plaintiff’s motion for a review of the clerk’s taxation of costs in the appeal from the Superior Court in New Haven County is granted and the relief sought therein is denied.
#### 18.110 Soliciting from a single source.

For purchases not exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold, contracting officers may solicit from one source under certain circumstances. (See 13.106-1(b).)

[71 FR 38248, July 5, 2006. Redesignated at 72 FR 46344, Aug. 17, 2007]
Lewis I Williams 4th
                            157 North Gardner Street
                           Los Angeles, CA 90036-2719


01 November 2000



The Board of Directors
Central Capital Venture Corporation
2660 Townsgate Road. Suite 725
Westlake Village, CA 91361



Gentlemen:

Due  to  time  constraints,  other  personal  and  business  commitments,  and a
misunderstanding  with respect to the nature of the required commitment,  please
accept  this  letter as my Letter  of  Resignation  as  President  and/or  Chief
Executive  Officer of Central Capital Venture  Corporation  effective as of this
date.

Thank you for your prompt  attention to and  acceptance  of this action.  Please
feel free to contact me if there are any questions.

/s/ L. I. Williams
Lewis I. Williams IV




                               access2awe@bigfoot.com
                               ----------------------
323-938-3665 @ Telephone                              facsimile @ 323-936-3288










                                                                             21
                                       45
Exhibit 32.1





Certification of CEO and CFO

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

As Adopted Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002







In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Real Estate Associates Limited III (the "Partnership"), for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Martha L. Long, as the equivalent of the chief executive officer of the Partnership, and Stephen B. Waters, as the equivalent of the chief financial officer of the Partnership, each hereby certifies, 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 his knowledge:



(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 results of operations of the Partnership.



| |                        
| | -----------------------
| | /s/Martha L. Long      
| | Name: Martha L. Long   
| | Date: April 11, 2008   
| |                        
| | /s/Stephen B. Waters   
| | Name: Stephen B. Waters
| | Date: April 11, 2008   



This certification is furnished with this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Partnership for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

MARSHA A. TYLER, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) No. 11 C 9262

)

COMPREHENSIVE HEALTH MANAGEMENT )

INC., )

)

Defendant. )

MEMORANDUM ORDER

Pro se plaintiff Marsha Tyler (“Tyler”) has paid the filing

fee in her employment discrimination action against her former

employer Comprehensive Health Management Inc. (“Comprehensive”),

and she has also confirmed her willingness to pay the fee needed

to obtain service on Comprehensive, which her Complaint lists as

located in Tampa, Florida. In that respect Tyler seeks a

directive from this Court that service of process be handled by

the United States Marshal.

That request reflects a misunderstanding on Tyler’s part as

to the service of process in federal cases. Fed. R. Civ. P.

(“Rule”) 4(c)(3) does require courts to order service by the

United States Marshal or a deputy marshal if a plaintiff is

proceeding in forma pauperis, while it permits but does not

require the issuance of such an order in other cases. But the

limited staffing in the Marshal’s office, coupled with the many

mandatory responsibilities imposed on federal marshals, has

essentially taken them out of the business of service of process
except in the in forma pauperis situation.

Instead Rule 4(c)(2) permits anyone “who is at least 18

years old and not a party” to serve the summons and Complaint. 

Moreover, the fact that Tyler was employed by Comprehensive at

200 West Adams Street in Chicago (Complaint ¶4) would appear to

indicate that Comprehensive must be registered to do business

here, in which event service on its registered agent (or perhaps

someone at its Chicago location who is authorized to accept

service) would pose a far less burdensome alternative for

obtaining service.

Finally, this District Court maintains a Help Desk to assist

pro se litigants. If Tyler wishes assistance on the subject of

service of process, she would do well to consult that Help Desk

service (312-435-5691).

In sum, Tyler’s request is denied. But as this Court has

sought to make clear here, that denial should pose no problems

for her.

________________________________________

Milton I. Shadur

Senior United States District Judge

Date: January 17, 2012

2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from 
National Property Investors 4 1997 Year-End 10-KSB and is qualified
in its entirety by reference to such 10-KSB filing.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000318508         
<NAME> National Property Investors 4
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000     
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997   
<CASH>                                           3,048
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      663
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                          26,047
<DEPRECIATION>                                  17,946   
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  13,061   
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                         19,300     
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0     
<PREFERRED>                                          0  
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     (6,951)    
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    13,061    
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 6,646    
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 5,723    
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,487    
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       923     
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    15.23<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Registrant has an unclassified balance sheet.
<F2>Multiplier is 1.
</FN>
        


</TABLE>
Exhibit 10.02

                                LETTER AGREEMENT
                            ASSET TRANSFER AGREEMENT

      Hispano  Television  Ventures,  Inc.  (HTV) does hereby agree to pay the
following obligations of American Independent Network, Inc. (AIN):

1.    $30,000.00 to Data Sales for the June and July equipment payments.
2.    $30,000.00 to Miralite for the July satellite payment.
3.    $20,000.00  to the Holland  Company for May  (partial),  June,  July,  &
         August rent.
4.    $2,500.00 to Bank One Escrow account.

5.    $82,500.00:  Total

      In consideration for these payments, AIN does hereby agree to pay to HTV
$82,500.00 on or before August 20, 1999. In addition, AIN will provide HTV with
eight months of free uplink use of the equipment and satellite transponder
through AIN.

TRANSFER IN EVENT OF DEFAULT:

      Should the above terms not be met, AIN shall immediately transfer and
assign their equipment lease with Data Sales, Inc. Satellite lease with
Miralite, and transfer the FCC Earth Station License to HTV. HTV would then
allow AIN to continue their feed for a fee of $22,500.00 per month starting
September 1, 1999 with one month free usage of the feed if needed with the
payment for use starting in that contingency on or about October 1, 1999.

American Independent Network, Inc.        Hispano Television
                                          Ventures, Inc.

By:  /S/ KRIS LEMANS                      By:  /S/ BOB J. BRYANT
    --------------------------------          ----------------------------
    Kris Lemans                               Bob J. Bryant
    CEO                                       Director


Data Sales, Co.                           Miralite Corporation

By:  /S/ RAYMOND MARR                     By:   /S/ NANCY EDILENOUR
   ---------------------------------          ---------------------------
   Raymond Marr                               Nancy Edilenour
   Vice President                             Director of Finance
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.29


                   L. DONALD SPEER, II AND KELLY JACOBS SPEER
                                P.O. BOX 5005-131
                        RANCHO SANTA FE, CALIFORNIA 92067


April 30, 1999


Inland Entertainment Corporation
16868 Via Del Campo Court
Suite 200
San Diego, California 92127

Attn: Andrew B. Laub, Executive Vice President,
      Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer

         Re: LOAN AND SECURITY AGREEMENT

Ladies and Gentlemen:

         Reference is made to that certain Loan and Security Agreement (the
"Agreement"), dated April 22, 1999, by and among Inland Entertainment
Corporation, a Utah corporation, L. Donald Speer, II, and Kelly Jacobs Speer.

         In order to clarify certain terms of the Agreement, the undersigned
wish to amend the Agreement as follows:

         1. Section 2 of the Agreement is hereby amended and restated in its
entirety to read as follows:

             "1. Obligation to Pay. The Debtors agree to repay the loan's
         principal amount on or before July 22, 1999 (the "Due Date"), in
         accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement or as may be
         modified from time to time in writing by the parties hereto, by wire
         transfer of immediately available funds to an account specified by
         Lender. The loan shall bear simple interest at the rate of seven (7)
         percent per annum, to accrue from the date hereof until the loan is
         paid in full, and payable within ninety (90) days from the Due Date, in
         cash or by a personal check."

         2. Section 3 of the Agreement is hereby amended by adding the following
sentence at the end:

          "The Debtors represent and warrant to Lender that the Debtors' equity
          in the collateral is equal to or greater than the full amount of
          principal and interest due to the Company pursuant to the Agreement."



<PAGE>   2

         Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the respective
meanings given to such terms in the Agreement.

                                                   Very truly yours,

                                                   L. DONALD SPEER, II

                                                   /s/ L. DONALD SPEER, II
                                                   -----------------------------
                                                       L. Donald Speer, II


                                                   KELLY JACOBS SPEER

                                                   /s/ KELLY JACOBS SPEER
                                                   -----------------------------
                                                       Kelly Jacobs Speer

cc: Christopher Wm. Voisin,
    Corporate Secretary
    Inland Entertainment Corporation



Accepted and Agreed to this 4th day of May, 1999.

INLAND ENTERTAINMENT CORPORATION


By: /s/ ANDREW B. LAUB
    ---------------------------------
        Andrew B. Laub
        Executive Vice President,
        Chief Financial Officer
        and Treasurer


                                      2
### Concepts for a National Water-Quality Assessment Program

By: Robert M. Hirsch**William M. AlleyWilliam G. Wilber

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/cir1021

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
#### (A) Albert Valicenti et al., Appellants, v. Anne Schultz et al., Respondents. (B) Village of Larchmont, Respondent, v. Anne J. Levine et al., Doing Business as Larchmont Lodge, Appellants. (C) Stratos Realty Corp., Appellant, v. S. A. Healy Co., Respondent.

[In each action] Motion by respondent to dismiss appeal granted, with $10 costs; appeal dismissed. Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Kleinfeld, Brennan and Hill, JJ., concur.
#### 1517.204 Contracts.

The SCM may approve a contract with a base contract period and option periods which total in excess of five (5) years, unless otherwise prohibited by statute.

[60 FR 12713, Mar. 8, 1995, as amended at 67 FR 5072, Feb. 4, 2002]
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Ernest Page, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County, dated June 16, 1960, denying, after a hearing, his *coram nobis*application to vacate a judgment of said court rendered May 17, 1930, convicting him, on his plea of guilty, of burglary in the third degree and petit larceny. Order affirmed. There was no direct, affirmative testimony to contradict the defendant’s testimony that he was not advised of his right to counsel. With respect to one accused of crime who was not represented by counsel, the then court Clerk’s testimony was to the effect that it was always the court’s procedure to inquire of such accused person whether he desired the court to assign an attorney to represent him. Upon consent, an affidavit of the then District Attorney was received in evidence which in substance corroborated the testimony of the court Clerk as to the procedure then adopted. After hearing the evidence, the court refused to consider as credible the defendant’s contention that he was not afforded an opportunity to have counsel and found that he had not sustained the burden of proof of establishing that he was deprived of his rights. Considering the frailties of memory; the absence, in and about the year 1930, of written records as to whether a defendant was advised of his right to counsel; the length of time between 1930 and the time when the *coram nobis*application was made; the testimony as to the court’s general procedure in and about that year; and the interests of the defendant, the trier of the facts was justified in refusing to credit his testimony even though it was not directly contradicted (see, e.g., *People*v. *Chait,*7 A D 2d 399, affd. 6 N Y 2d 855; *People ex rel. Kruger*v. *Hunt,*257 App. Div. 917; *People*v. *Lensky,*1 A D 2d 831). The court was not required to vacate the conviction of long standing on the basis of the defendant’s unsubstantiated testimony. Basie policy consideration requires much stronger evidence than was presented in the proceeding at bar before a conviction of such long standing is vacated *(People*v. *Chait, supra).*Beldock, Acting P. J., Ughetta, Kleinfeld, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.