alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15**  **- 7**  **727**

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. DEMARIO COVINGTON, a/k/a Booger , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Florence

. Terry L. Wooten , Chief District Judge. ( 4 : 11

- cr
- 00 417

- TLW

- 1 )

Submitted : February 23, 2016 Decided: February 26, 2016

Before MOTZ and GREGORY , Circuit Judges , and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Demario Covington , Appellant Pro Se. Alfred William Walker Bethea, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina , for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Demario Covington appeals the district court ’ s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for reduction

of sentence . We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

error. A ccordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the

district court. United States v. Co vington , No. 4 : 11

- cr
- 00 417

-

TLW

- 1 (D. S.C

. Oct. 14 , 2015) . We dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented

in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid
the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
NotesFAQContact Us

Collection

Thesaurus
AdvancedSearch Tips

Collection

Thesaurus
BrowseThesaurus

 Download full text

**ERIC Number:**

**Record Type:**

**Publication Date:**

**Pages:**

**Abstractor:**

**ISBN:**

**ISSN:**

**EISSN:**

College Second Language ProgramsCommunity CollegesEnglish (Second Language)Program EffectivenessSecond Language InstructionSuccessTwo Year Colleges

**Publication Type:**

**Education Level:**

**Audience:**

**Language:**

**Sponsor:**

**Authoring Institution:**

**Grant or Contract Numbers:**

PrivacyCopyrightContact UsSelection PolicyAPI
JournalsNon-JournalsDownloadSubmitMultimediaWidget
# 5106.502-90 Supplementary information.

Command advocates for competition should provide supplementary information on items considered significant to the AAFC at any time during the fiscal year.

**Parent topic:**5106.502 Duties and responsibilities.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

TERRENCE F. PULLUM,

Petitioner

v.

JOHN A. VASKOV, ESQUIRE,

Respondent

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 43 MM 2019

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 8th day of May, 2019, the Application for Leave to File Original 

Process is GRANTED, and the Petition for Writ of Mandamus is DENIED.
Exhibit 32.1


Obagi Medical Products, Inc.





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 the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Obagi Medical Products, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Albert F. Hummel, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, 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; and





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





Date: March 10, 2011
By:
/s/Albert F. HummelAlbert F. HummelChief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)
§ 765.152 Types of payments. ( a ) *Regular payments.* Regular payments are derived from, but are not limited to: ( 1 ) The sale of normal income security;
( 2 ) The sale of farm products;
( 3 ) Lease income, including mineral lease signing bonus;
( 4 ) Program or disaster-related disbursements from USDA or crop insurance entities; and
( 5 ) Non-farm income.
( b ) *Extra payments.* Extra payments are derived from any of the following: ( 1 ) Sale of chattel security other than normal income security;
( 2 ) Sale of real estate security;
( 3 ) Refinancing of FLP debt;
( 4 ) Proceeds of insurance claims received on Agency security, if not being used to repair or replace the security;
( 5 ) Any transaction that results in a loss in the value of any Agency basic security;
( 6 ) Refunds of duplicate program benefits or assistance to be applied on CL or EM loans; or
( 7 ) Refunds of unused loan funds.
( c ) *Payments from sale of real estate.* Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, payments derived from the sale of real estate security will be treated as regular payments at the Agency's discretion, if the FLP loans will be adequately secured after the transaction.
[72 FR 63309, Nov. 8, 2007, as amended at 75 FR 54016, Sept. 3, 2010; 87 FR 13124, Mar. 9, 2022]
§ 65.400 Labeling. ( a ) Country of origin declarations can either be in the form of a placard, sign, label, sticker, band, twist tie, pin tag, or other format that allows consumers to identify the country of origin. The declaration of the country of origin of a product may be in the form of a statement such as “Product of USA,” “Produce of the USA”, or “Grown in Mexico,” may only contain the name of the country such as “USA” or “Mexico,” or may be in the form of a check box provided it is in conformance with other Federal labeling laws.
( b ) The declaration of the country of origin (e.g., placard, sign, label, sticker, band, twist tie, pin tag, or other display) must be legible and placed in a conspicuous location, so as to render it likely to be read and understood by a customer under normal conditions of purchase.
( c ) The declaration of country of origin may be typed, printed, or handwritten provided it is in conformance with other Federal labeling laws and does not obscure other labeling information required by other Federal regulations.
( d ) A bulk container (e.g., display case, shipper, bin, carton, and barrel) used at the retail level to present product to consumers, may contain a covered commodity from more than one country of origin provided all possible origins are listed.
( e ) In general, country abbreviations are not acceptable. Only those abbreviations approved for use under Customs and Border Protection rules, regulations, and policies, such as “U.K.” for “The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland”, “Luxemb” for Luxembourg, and “U.S. or USA” for the “United States of America” are acceptable. The adjectival form of the name of a country may be used as proper notification of the country of origin of imported commodities provided the adjectival form of the name does not appear with other words so as to refer to a kind or species of product. Symbols or flags alone may not be used to denote country of origin.
( f ) Domestic and imported perishable agricultural commodities, peanuts, pecans, macadamia nuts, and ginseng may use State, regional, or locality label designations in lieu of country of origin labeling. Abbreviations may be used for state, regional, or locality label designations for these commodities whether domestically harvested or imported using official United States Postal Service abbreviations or other abbreviations approved by CBP.
#### John McEncroe, Respondent, *v.*Johh White, Appellant.

(Argued April 29, 1884;

decided May 6, 1884.)

*Miehael H. Gardozo*for appellant.

*L. Lafivn Kellogg*for respondent.

Agree to dismiss appeal; no opinion.

All concur.

Appeal dismissed.
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2991 

To suspend temporarily the duty on epoxy curing agents. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 23, 2006 

Mr. SANTORUM introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on epoxy curing agents. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SUSPENSION OF DUTY ON EPODIL L DILUENT. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new headings: 

‘‘ 9902.39.09 Aqueous emulsion of a modified aliphatic 

amine mixture of: Decanedioic acid, compounds with 1,3-benzenedimethanaminebisphenol A-bisphenol A diglycidyl etherdiethylenetriamine glycidyl phenyl ether 

reaction product-epichlorohydrin-formaldehyde-propylene oxidetriethylenetetramine polymer (CAS No. 

260549–92–6) and water (CAS No. 

7732–18–5) ............................................. Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2009 ....


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
2 

•S 2991 IS 

‘‘ 9902.39.10 Modified aliphatic amine mixture of Benzyl alcohol (CAS No. 100–51–6), Reaction product of tris-(2,4,6- 

dimethylaminomethyl)phenol and metaxylenediamine (CAS No. 57214–10–5), 

Benzene-1,3-dimethaneamine (MXDA) 

(CAS No. 1477–55–0), Pheno 4,4′- 

(methyl 1-ethylidene)bis-, polymer with 

(chloromethyl)oxirane, reaction products 

with ethylenediamine (CAS No. 72480– 

18–3), and Ethylenediamine (CAS No. 

107–15–3) (provided for in subheading 

3909.30.00) ............................................. Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2009 ....

‘‘ 9902.39.11 Polymide Mixture of C18-unsaturated 

fatty acid dimers, polymer with tall-oil 

fatty acid, Bisphenol a diglycidyl ether, 

diethylenetetramine, formaldehyde, 

phenyl glycidyl ether and 

polyethylenepolyamines (CAS No. 

128824–26–0), Tall oil fatty acid, reaction products with 

Tetraethylenepentamine (CAS No. 

68953–36–6), Benzyl alcohol (CAS No. 

100–51–6), Aminopropylmorpholine, 4- 

(CAS No. 123–00–2), Poly (oxy (methyl1,2-ethanediyl), alpha-(2- 

aminomethylethyl)-omega-(2- 

aminomethylethoxy) (CAS No. 9046–10– 

0), Xylene (CAS No. 1330–20–7), 

Tetraethylenepentamine (CAS No. 112– 

57–2), Triethylenetetramine (CAS No. 

112–24–3) and Diethylenetriamine 

(DETA) CAS No. 111–40–0) (provided 

for in subheading 3909.30.00) ................ Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2009 ’’. 

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

GEORGE PARKER, #140922, )

 )

 Plaintiff, )

 )

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:06-CV-649-WHA

 )

GWENDOLYN GIVENS, et al., )

 )

Defendants. )

O R D E R

Upon review of the file in this case, and for good cause, it is

ORDERED that on or before October 19, 2006 the plaintiff may file any documents he

deems necessary in opposition to the defendants' special report. 

Done this 4th day of October, 2006.

/s/ Vanzetta Penn McPherson

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00649-WHA-WC Document 21 Filed 10/04/2006 Page 1 of 1
§ 614.15 Implementation of final NAD determinations. ( a ) No later than 30 days after a NAD determination becomes a final administrative decision of USDA, NRCS will implement the determination.
( b ) Biannually, NRCS must file a report on the status of implementation of final administrative determinations in accordance with section 14009 of the 2008 Farm Bill.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 307 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 307

 To amend the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 to extend 
                  national dairy market loss payments.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            February 7, 2005

 Mr. Santorum introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
   referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 to extend 
                  national dairy market loss payments.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``MILC Extension Act''.

SEC. 2. NATIONAL DAIRY MARKET LOSS PAYMENTS.

    (a) In General.--Subsections (f) and (g)(1) of section 1502 of the 
Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 7982) are 
amended by striking ``2005'' each place it appears and inserting 
``2007''.
    (b) Period of Effectiveness.--Notwithstanding section 257 of the 
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (2 U.S.C. 
907), the amendment made by subsection (a) shall be effective only 
during the period beginning on the first day of the first month 
beginning after the date of enactment of this Act and ending September 
30, 2007.
                                 <all>
```
(May 20, 1980)

#### Glorie Feintuch et al., Respondents, v Bernard Jacobs et al., Appellants.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered September 10, 1979, granting reargument of oral decision, and upon such reargument adhering to decision marking action "off calendar,” is unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, without costs, to the extent that defendants’ motions to dismiss the action are granted. This is a medical malpractice action. The alleged medical malpractice is said to have occurred in 1969. This action was commenced in January, 1972. After considerable difficulties in obtaining disclosure from plaintiff, the action was finally placed on the calendar in October, 1977. A medical malpractice panel issued a finding of no liability. The case was set down for trial on April 18, 1979. On that date, plaintiffs’ application for an adjournment was granted on a commitment from plaintiffs to proceed on April 20, 1979 and the case was marked "one juror deemed selected,” so that as the Trial Judge said, "everyone would realize that they were actually on trial”. On April 20, 1979, plaintiffs stated that "unfortunately due to circumstances not under our control,” plaintiffs were unable to go forward that day and asked for "a minimum of ten days to two weeks to overcome the difficulty, if that is possible.” Although the defendants requested that the action be dismissed, the court merely marked the action "off calendar” with a proviso that it could only be restored on a motion which would explain the reason for the delay in bringing the case on for trial and contain an affidavit of merit. Rule 660.5 (subd [c], par [3]) of the Rules of the Supreme Court, Bronx and New York Counties (22 NYCRR 660.5 [c] [3]), provides in part: "(3) No application for a postponement of the trial of a cause shall be entertained after the cause has been sent to a part for trial * * * If after a cause has been assigned either party is not actually ready for trial, a default shall be noted and the complaint dismissed or an inquest taken.” (22 NYCRR 660.5 [c] [3].) While the court has discretion in a proper case to mark a case off the calendar or to impose terms rather .than dismiss the complaint, some reason must be shown why the rule should not be applied and "the complaint dismissed or an inquest taken.” The bald statement "circumstances not under our control” amounts to no statement of reason for not complying with the rule. In the circumstances, it was an improvident exercise of discretion for the trial court not to dismiss the complaint in this very old and delayed action. (Our check with the calendar clerk’s office of the *771Supreme Court indicates that the action had still not been restored to the calendar at the time of the consideration of this appeal, more than a year after the case had been marked off the calendar.) Concur—Murphy, P. J., Kupferman, Birns, Ross and Silverman, JJ.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

EASTERN DIVISION

VFS LEASING CO., )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:06cv638-SRW

)

G. F. KELLY, INC. D/b/a KELLY )

TRUCKING, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

ORDER

Upon consideration of the motion to strike filed by plaintiff on April 30, 2007 (Doc.

# 29), it is

ORDERED that defendants may respond to the motion on or before May 7, 2007.

Done, this 2nd day of May, 2007.

/s/ Susan Russ Walker 

SUSAN RUSS WALKER

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-00638-SRW Document 30 Filed 05/02/2007 Page 1 of 1
Case 1:06-cv-00634-WKW-WC Document 2-2 Filed 07/18/2006 Page 1 of 24
Case 1:06-cv-00634-WKW-WC Document 2-2 Filed 07/18/2006 Page 2 of 24
Case 1:06-cv-00634-WKW-WC Document 2-2 Filed 07/18/2006 Page 3 of 24
Case 1:06-cv-00634-WKW-WC Document 2-2 Filed 07/18/2006 Page 4 of 24
Case 1:06-cv-00634-WKW-WC Document 2-2 Filed 07/18/2006 Page 5 of 24
Case 1:06-cv-00634-WKW-WC Document 2-2 Filed 07/18/2006 Page 6 of 24
Case 1:06-cv-00634-WKW-WC Document 2-2 Filed 07/18/2006 Page 7 of 24
Case 1:06-cv-00634-WKW-WC Document 2-2 Filed 07/18/2006 Page 8 of 24
Case 1:06-cv-00634-WKW-WC Document 2-2 Filed 07/18/2006 Page 9 of 24
Case 1:06-cv-00634-WKW-WC Document 2-2 Filed 07/18/2006 Page 10 of 24
Case 1:06-cv-00634-WKW-WC Document 2-2 Filed 07/18/2006 Page 11 of 24
Case 1:06-cv-00634-WKW-WC Document 2-2 Filed 07/18/2006 Page 12 of 24
Case 1:06-cv-00634-WKW-WC Document 2-2 Filed 07/18/2006 Page 13 of 24
Case 1:06-cv-00634-WKW-WC Document 2-2 Filed 07/18/2006 Page 14 of 24
Case 1:06-cv-00634-WKW-WC Document 2-2 Filed 07/18/2006 Page 15 of 24
Case 1:06-cv-00634-WKW-WC Document 2-2 Filed 07/18/2006 Page 16 of 24
Case 1:06-cv-00634-WKW-WC Document 2-2 Filed 07/18/2006 Page 17 of 24
Case 1:06-cv-00634-WKW-WC Document 2-2 Filed 07/18/2006 Page 18 of 24
Case 1:06-cv-00634-WKW-WC Document 2-2 Filed 07/18/2006 Page 19 of 24
Case 1:06-cv-00634-WKW-WC Document 2-2 Filed 07/18/2006 Page 20 of 24
Case 1:06-cv-00634-WKW-WC Document 2-2 Filed 07/18/2006 Page 21 of 24
Case 1:06-cv-00634-WKW-WC Document 2-2 Filed 07/18/2006 Page 22 of 24
Case 1:06-cv-00634-WKW-WC Document 2-2 Filed 07/18/2006 Page 23 of 24
Case 1:06-cv-00634-WKW-WC Document 2-2 Filed 07/18/2006 Page 24 of 24
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. George Whitmore, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered on resentence on June 3, 1966, convicting him of attempted rape in the first degree and assault in the second degree with intent *940to commit rape, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment reversed, on the law, and new trial ordered. No questions of fact have been considered. In our opinion, under the peculiar facts of this ease, it was prejudicial error for the trial court to refuse to allow cross-examination with reference to all of defendant’s statements to the police. Prom the proof presented by the People, it appeared that, when apprehended, defendant was not only interrogated by police officers with respect to the facts involved in the instant indictment arising from the accusations made by complainant Borrero, but was also further and successively questioned by the same police officers with respect to other offenses, identifiable as the Edmonds case and the Wylie-Hoffert case. Defendant’s trial counsel urged that he be permitted to cross-examine with respect to the voluntariness and truth of defendant’s statements as to all three offenses covered in this interrogation. The learned trial Justice ruled that while defendant could take the stand and testify as to any and all transactions occurring at his questioning, on cross-examination the defense could not probe into defendant’s statements on the Edmonds and Wylie-Hoffert matters which were later in time to his Borrero statements, absent proof that the subsequent statements were intertwined with the Borrero statements. In our view, this ruling left defendant at a disadvantage in that he was not free to develop his claim that whatever infirmities of compulsion and lack of truth were developed in connection with the Edmonds and Wylie-Hoffert matters likewise applied to his admissions as to the instant Borrero matter on trial. In view of the fact that defendant’s statements on all three matters were made in the course of continuous responses to police questions, the entire statement may he regarded as one paper, and all part of the *res gestae.*Under the circumstances, it was for the jury to say whether defendant’s admissions as to the Borrero matter were voluntary and truthful even though they were to find that his statements as to the other matters were lacking in these qualities. The issue should not have been resolved as a matter of law by the trial court. Brennan, Acting P. J., Rabin, Hopkins, Benjamin and Munder, JJ., concur.
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2869 

To suspend temporarily the duty on Clothianidin. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 19, 2006 

Mr. BURR introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to 

the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on Clothianidin. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. CLOTHIANIDIN. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.10.84 (E)-1-(2-Chloro-1,3-thiazol5-ylmethyl)-3-methyl-2- 

nitroguanidine (Clothianidin) 

(CAS No. 210880–92–5) 

(provided for in subheading 

2934.10.90) ......................... 5.4% No change No change On or before 

12/31/2009 ’’. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
2 

•S 2869 IS 

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
#### ALBERTSON, Respondent, v. ALBERTSON et al., Appellants.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

June 15, 1906.)

Action by Edward Albertson against Anna Albertson, impleaded with others.

No opinion. Order of the county judge of Nassau county affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

DEBRA BEYAH, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:06cv659-CSC

)

WAL-MART STORES, INC., )

)

Defendant. )

ORDER

Now pending before the court is the January 31, 2007, motion to continue the trial and

all pretrial deadlines (doc. # 21) filed by the defendant. The defendant asserts that a

continuance is necessary because trial counsel will be in a lengthy trial beginning on

February 12, 2007. This case is set for trial beginning on October 1, 2007. Accordingly,

upon consideration of the motion, it is

ORDERED that the motion to continue (doc. # 21) be and is hereby DENIED.

Done this 31 day of January, 2007. st

 /s/Charles S. Coody 

CHARLES S. COODY

CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00659-CSC Document 22 Filed 01/31/2007 Page 1 of 1