alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-6050
CURTIS LAKES, Petitioner - Appellant, versus S. R. WITKOWSKI; T. TRAVIS MEDLOCK, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District ofSouth Carolina, at Columbia. Matthew J. Perry, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-94-2971-3-OBC) Submitted: April 15, 1996 Decided: May 2, 1996 Before ERVIN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Curtis Lakes, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his motions for rehearing, properly construed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b), and for oral argument. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. See United States v. Williams , 674 F.2d 310, 312 (4th Cir. 1982). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of probable cause and dismiss on the reasoning of the district court. Lakes v. Witkowski , No. CA-94- 2971-3-OBC (D.S.C. Dec. 11, 1995). 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
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Public Launch of Sudan Conflict Observatory Monitoring Platform

# 									Public Launch of Sudan Conflict Observatory Monitoring Platform							

Media Note

Office of the Spokesperson

June 9, 2023

As the United States and our partners continue intense diplomatic efforts to end the fighting in Sudan, facilitate humanitarian assistance, and support the aspirations of the Sudanese people for a civilian government, we are monitoring the activities of the warring parties.  Through commercial satellite imagery and open-source data analysis, this monitoring has documented multiple serious violations by both sides of their obligations under the May 11 Jeddah Declaration of Commitment to Protect the Civilians of Sudan and subsequent ceasefires.

Today, the U.S. Department of State announced that some results of this monitoring will be released publicly via the Sudan Conflict Observatory platform.  This remote monitoring platform provides independent, expert reporting on conflict activity in Sudan, including damage to infrastructure committed by combatants, military equipment movements, and rapid population shifts.  Additional reports will be released periodically through the Sudan.ConflictObservatory.org website.  This effort is a collaboration among the geographic information systems companies Esri and PlanetScape Ai, as well as Yale University’s Humanitarian Research Lab.

The Sudan Conflict Observatory platform affirms the U.S. commitment to transparency as we work with partners to bring an end to the military conflict in Sudan; address human rights violations and abuses; and ensure immediate, safe, and unhindered humanitarian access for organizations providing life-saving assistance to the most vulnerable and those displaced due to the fighting.  The United States is unwavering in our support for the democratic aspirations of the Sudanese people and their demands for freedom, peace, and justice.

For more information, please contact csopublicaffairs1@state.gov.

Tags

Bureau of African AffairsBureau of Conflict and Stabilization OperationsConflictsOffice of the SpokespersonSudan

## Related Articles

-  											 									
Read more
 

Back to Top
----

            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 71/2005

of 17 January 2005         

fixing Community producer and import prices for carnations and roses with a view to the application of the arrangements governing imports of certain floricultural products originating in Cyprus, Israel, Jordan, Morocco and the West Bank and the Gaza Strip

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 4088/87 of 21 December 1987 fixing conditions for the application of preferential customs duties on imports of certain flowers originating in Cyprus, Israel, Jordan, Morocco and the West Bank and the Gaza Strip (1), and in particular Article 5(2)(a) thereof,

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The Community producer and import prices for uniflorous (bloom) carnations, multiflorous (spray) carnations, large-flowered roses and small-flowered roses as referred to in Article 1b of Regulation (EEC) No 700/88 for a fortnightly period shall be as set out in the Annex.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 18 January 2005.

It shall apply from 19 January to 1 February 2005.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 17 January 2005.

For the Commission

J. M. SILVA RODRÍGUEZ            

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

----

(1)OJ L 382, 31.12.1987, p. 22. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1300/97 (OJ L 177, 5.7.1997, p. 1).

(2)OJ L 72, 18.3.1988, p. 16. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2062/97 (OJ L 289, 22.10.1997, p. 1).

----

ANNEX

to the Commission Regulation of 17 January 2005 fixing Community producer and import prices for carnations and roses with a view to the application of the arrangements governing imports of certain floricultural products originating in Cyprus, Israel, Jordan, Morocco and the West Bank and the Gaza Strip

----
§ 495.110 Preclusion on administrative and judicial review. There is no administrative or judicial review under sections 1869 or 1878 of the Act, or otherwise, of the following: ( a ) For EPs— ( 1 ) The methodology and standards for determining EP incentive payment amounts;
( 2 ) The methodology and standards for determining the payment adjustments that apply to EPs beginning with 2015;
( 3 ) The methodology and standards for determining whether an EP is a meaningful EHR user, including— ( i ) The selection of clinical quality measures; and
( ii ) The means of demonstrating meaningful EHR use.
( 4 ) The methodology and standards for determining the hardship exception to the payment adjustments;
( 5 ) The methodology and standards for determining whether an EP is hospital-based; and
( 6 ) The specification of the EHR reporting period, as well as whether payment will be made only once, in a single consolidated payment, or in periodic installments.
( b ) For eligible hospitals— ( 1 ) The methodology and standards for determining the incentive payment amounts made to eligible hospitals, including— ( i ) The estimates or proxies for determining discharges, inpatient-bed-days, hospital charges, charity charges, and Medicare share; and
( ii ) The period used to determine such estimate or proxy;
( 2 ) The methodology and standards for determining the payment adjustments that apply to eligible hospitals beginning with FY 2015;
( 3 ) The methodology and standards for determining whether an eligible hospital is a meaningful EHR user, including— ( i ) The selection of clinical quality measures; and
( ii ) The means of demonstrating meaningful EHR use.
( 4 ) The methodology and standards for determining the hardship exception to the payment adjustments; and
( 5 ) The specification of the EHR reporting period, as well as whether payment will be made only once, in a single consolidated payment, or in periodic installments.
****

This chart presents 1996 Oklahoma exports to the New Independent States of the former SovietUnion.  Data used to create the chart were collected by the **Bureau of the Census, U.S. Department of Commerce**, With further analysis by the **University of Massachusetts,Massachusetts Institute for Social and Economic Research** (MISER).  For more informationcall Pat Sweeney at **BISNIS**, at (202)482-4655x20.
'95 export data for Oklahoma
Return to USA Export Map
Return to BISNIS Home Page
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS SUBMITTED IN THIS QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-QSB FOR THE
QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1998, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                         676,793
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    298,848
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,104,579
<PP&E>                                         829,104
<DEPRECIATION>                                (792,998)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,140,685
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          398,939
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     1,181,701
<OTHER-SE>                                    (439,955)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,140,685
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               514,314
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (13,403)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (500,911)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (500,911)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.11)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 35.1





SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT



Re: Daimler Truck Financial Services USA LLC,
as servicer (the “Servicer”) under the Sale and Servicing Agreement, dated as of March 1, 2020, among the Daimler Trucks
Retail Trust 2020-1, as issuer, Daimler Trucks Retail Receivables LLC (as successor to Daimler Retail Receivables LLC), as depositor, Mercedes-Benz
Financial Services USA LLC, as seller, and Daimler Truck Financial Services USA LLC (as successor to Mercedes-Benz Financial Services USA LLC) as
servicer (the “Servicing Agreement”), for the period from December 1, 2021, to December 31, 2021 (the “Reporting
Period”).



I, Gianni P. Gatto, certify that:



| | (a) | A review of the Servicer’s activities during the Reporting Period and of its performance under the Servicing Agreement
has been made under my supervision.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (b) | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Servicing Agreement
in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated: March 17, 2022



| | /s/ Gianni P. Gatto                    | 
| | -------------------------------------- | 
| | Name: Gianni P. Gatto                 
| | Title: Head of Finance and Controlling
I

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3571

To amend title 18, United States Code, to protect the sanctity of religious

communications.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 4, 1996

Mr. KING introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on the Judiciary

A BILL

To amend title 18, United States Code, to protect the

sanctity of religious communications.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Religious Communica5 tion Sanctity Act of 1996’’.

6 SEC. 2. PROTECTION OF SANCTITY OF RELIGIOUS COMMU7 NICATIONS.

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 13 of title 18, United

9 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the follow10 ing:
2

•HR 3571 IH

1 ‘‘§ 249. Protection of sanctity of religious communica2 tions

3 ‘‘(a) Whoever, under color of governmental authority,

4 surreptitiously listens to or records in any manner, any

5 communication that is privileged, because of its religious

6 character, under Federal law or under the non-Federal

7 law of the place where such communication takes place,

8 shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than

9 5 years, or both.

10 ‘‘(b) Any person aggrieved by a violation of this sec11 tion consisting of the recording of a communication may,

12 in a civil action, obtain the prompt destruction of that re13 cording and any copies or transcripts made from that re14 cording.’’.

15 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections

16 at the beginning of chapter 13 of title 18, United States

17 Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new

18 item:

‘‘249. Protection of sanctity of religious communications.’’.

Æ
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-6970

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,

v. MARVIN HAROLD WITHERSPOON, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L.Voorhees, District Judge. (5:07-cv-00021-RLV; 5:04-cr-00005-RLVDCK-1)

Submitted: October 29, 2009 Decided: November 24, 2009

Before MOTZ and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Marvin Harold Witherspoon, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.PER CURIAM: Marvin Harold Witherspoon seeks to appeal the district court’s orders treating his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motions as successive 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2009) motions, and dismissing them on that basis and denying his motion to alter or amend the judgment. The orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006); Reid v. Angelone , 369 F.3d 363, 369 (4th Cir. 2004). 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) (2006). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000);

Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Witherspoon has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. Additionally, we construe Witherspoon’s notice of appeal and informal brief as an application to file a second or successive motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255. United States v.

23 Winestock , 340 F.3d 200, 208 (4th Cir. 2003). In order to obtain authorization to file a successive § 2255 motion, a prisoner must assert claims based on either: (1) newly discovered evidence, not previously discoverable by due diligence, that would be sufficient to establish by clear and convincing evidence that, but for constitutional error, no reasonable factfinder would have found the movant guilty of the offense; or (2) a new rule of constitutional law, previously unavailable, made retroactive by the Supreme Court to cases on collateral review. 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255(h) (West Supp. 2009). Witherspoon’s claims do not satisfy either of these criteria. Therefore, we deny authorization to file a successive § 2255

motion. 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
****

----

| **Secondary MarketReport** | **March1998**
TABLE 3 Effective FHAPrimary Rates**"Dominant" Contract Rate                ------------------------------                Mar'98      Feb'98     Mar'97United States      7.50%      7.00%      8.00%                         Average Points                 ----------------------------Northeast          0.00       2.00       0.69Middle Atlantic    0.17       2.75       1.60Southeast          0.00       0.23       0.14North Central      0.00       0.25       0.40Southwest          0.00       0.00       0.00West               0.14       0.39       0.29United States      0.08       0.40       0.46                         Effective Rate                  ----------------------------Northeast          7.50%      7.27%      8.10%Middle Atlantic    7.52%      7.37%      8.22%Southeast          7.50%      7.03%      8.02%North Central      7.50%      7.03%      8.06%Southwest          7.50%      7.00%      8.00%West               7.52%      7.05%      8.04%United States      7.51%      7.05%      8.06%    Data as of: Mar 1, 1998             HFEP: 3-01-98***HSG/FHA Home Page | Reports Menu | Email Us***** |
|----------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
§ 57.1503 Eligibility. ( a ) *Eligible applicants.* In order to be eligible for a loan guarantee or interest subsidy under this subpart, the applicant shall: ( 1 ) Be a nonprofit private school of medicine, dentistry, osteopathy, pharmacy, optometry, podiatry, veterinary medicine, or public health, or any combination of such schools, or a nonprofit private affiliated hospital or affiliated outpatient facility: *Provided, however,* That in the case of an affiliated hospital or affiliated outpatient facility, an application which is approved by the school of medicine, osteopathy or dentistry with which the hospital or outpatient facility is affiliated and which otherwise complies with the requirements of subpart B of this part may be filed by any nonprofit private entity qualified to file an application under section 605 of the Act; and
( 2 ) Otherwise meet the applicable requirements set forth in section 721(b) of the Act and § 57.103 with respect to eligiblity for grants for construction of teaching facilities for health professions personnel.
( b ) *Eligible loans.* Subject to the provisions of this subpart, the Secretary may guarantee payment, when due, of principal and interest on, or may pay interest subsidies with respect to, or may both guarantee and pay interest subsidies with respect to any loan or portion thereof made to an eligible applicant by a non-Federal lender: *Provided,* That no such guarantee or interest subsidy shall apply to any loan the interest on which is exempt from Federal income taxation.
§ 57.303 Application by school. ( a ) Each school seeking a Federal capital contribution must submit an application at the time and in the form and manner that the Secretary may require. The application must be signed by an individual authorized to act for the applicant and to assume on behalf of the applicant the obligations imposed by the statute, the regulations of this subpart, and the terms and conditions of the award.
( b ) Each application will be reviewed to determine eligibility and the reasonableness of the amount of Federal support requested. The Secretary may require the applicant to submit additional data for this purpose.
( c ) An application will not be approved unless an agreement between the Secretary and the applicant school for a Federal capital contribution under section 835 of the Act is reached.
[50 FR 34434, Aug. 23, 1985, as amended at 56 FR 13771, Apr. 4, 1991; 57 FR 45735, Oct. 5, 1992]
#### § 51.8 Annual reports.

By January 1 of each year, a report shall be submitted, pursuant to section 105(a)(7) of the Act (42 U.S.C. 10805(a)(7)), to the Secretary which is in the format designated by the Secretary.

[62 FR 53564, Oct. 15, 1997]
#### § 51b.102 Definitions.

As used in these regulations:

*Act* means the Public Health Service Act, as amended.

*Secretary* means the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) or any other officer or employee of that Department to whom the authority involved has been delegated.

*State* means one of the 50 States, the District of Columbia, Guam, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Northern Mariana Islands, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands.
**����**