alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.1


              CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                 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 IGENE Biotechnology, Inc. (the "Company")
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2010, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"),  I,
Stephen  F.  Hiu, President 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, to the best of my knowledge:

          (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.


Date: May 14, 2010                 By:  /S/ STEPHEN F. HIU
                                        _____________________________
                                            STEPHEN F. HIU
                                            President


A  signed original of this written statement required by Section  906
has  been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company
and  furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
#### § 18.451 Application.

Subpart F applies to health, and other social service programs or activities that receive Federal financial assistance from the Department of Veterans Affairs and to recipients that operate or receive Federal financial assistance for the operation of such programs or activities.

[45 FR 63268, Sept. 24, 1980, as amended at 68 FR 51370, Aug. 26, 2003]
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

NICHOLAS MARTIN,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 2 WAL 2020

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 2nd day of June, 2020, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

December 23, 2015

s1216 

# Order

Clerk December 23, 2015

150741

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 150741

COA: 323336

Saginaw CC: 2000

- 018443

- FH

DEDRICK LAMAR THOMAS

, Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 7 , 2014

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
# C_2022283EN.01000301.xml

| 25.7.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 283/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.7.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 283/3

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

22 July 2022

(2022/C 283/02)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,0190 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 139,51 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4443 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,85141 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,4328 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 0,9832 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 139,50 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 10,1498 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 24,514 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 398,30 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,7508 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,9321 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 18,0940 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4677 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3105 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 7,9985 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6265 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,4151 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 335,66 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 17,2009 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 6,8852 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5234 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 275,69 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,5366 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 57,240 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | |
| THB | Thai baht | 37,392 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 5,5821 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 20,9595 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 81,3840 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,0190

JPY

Japanese yen

139,51

DKK

Danish krone

7,4443

GBP

Pound sterling

0,85141

SEK

Swedish krona

10,4328

CHF

Swiss franc

0,9832

ISK

Iceland króna

139,50

NOK

Norwegian krone

10,1498

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

24,514

HUF

Hungarian forint

398,30

PLN

Polish zloty

4,7508

RON

Romanian leu

4,9321

TRY

Turkish lira

18,0940

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4677

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3105

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

7,9985

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6265

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,4151

KRW

South Korean won

1 335,66

ZAR

South African rand

17,2009

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

6,8852

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5234

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 275,69

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,5366

PHP

Philippine peso

57,240

RUB

Russian rouble

THB

Thai baht

37,392

BRL

Brazilian real

5,5821

MXN

Mexican peso

20,9595

INR

Indian rupee

81,3840

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

---
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D19-762

_____________________________

CHIEVY JONES,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Angela M. Cox, Judge.

October 3, 2019

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

RAY, C.J., and WOLF and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Chievy Jones, pro se, Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Holly N. Simcox, Assistant 

Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
#### SOUTHERN PACIFIC CO. v. UNITED STATES

*[60 C. Cls. 662; 270*U. S. *103]*

Judgment was rendered in the court below May 11, 1925, and plaintiff’s motion for new trial filed July 10, 1925, was denied October 26, 1925. On October 28, 1925, plaintiff made application for an appeal to the Supreme Court which was allowed by the Court of Claims November 2,1925. The appeal was *dismissed*and a writ of certiorari, having been applied for in due time, was granted, the Supreme Court deciding:

1. This court has no jurisdiction to consider an appeal from a judgment of the Court of Claims acquiring finality subsequently to the going into effect of the act of February 13, 1925, c. 229, 43 Stat. 936, which limited the method of review by this court of final judgments in the Court of Claims'to writs of certiorari.

2. A judgment of the Court of Claims, entered before May 13, 1925, the effective date of the above act, but suspended by a motion *751for new trial which was denied after that date, was not appealable.

Mr. Chief Justice Taft

delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court March *1,*1926.
#### § 1091.101 Definitions.

For the purposes of this part, the following definitions apply:

*Bureau, consumer, consumer financial product or service, and covered person* have the definitions in 12 U.S.C. 5481.

*Decisional employee* means an employee of the Bureau who has not engaged in assisting the initiating official in either determining whether to issue a Notice of Reasonable Cause, or presenting the initiating official's position in support of a Notice of Reasonable Cause, either in writing or in a supplemental oral response, to the Director.

*Director* means the Director of the Bureau or his or her designee. If there is no Director, the term means a person authorized to perform the functions of the Director under this part, or his or her designee. For purposes of when the Director receives, files, or serves documents, the Director includes an employee acting on behalf of the Director.

*Initiating official* means the Supervision Director or another Bureau employee designated by the Director. For purposes of receiving, filing, and serving documents or participating in a supplemental oral response, the initiating official includes an employee acting on behalf of the initiating official.

*Nonbank covered person* means a covered person, except for persons described in 12 U.S.C. 5515(a) and 5516(a).

*Notice of Reasonable Cause* and *Notice* mean a Notice issued under § 1091.202.

*Person* has the definition in 12 U.S.C. 5481.

*Respondent* means a person who has been issued a Notice of Reasonable Cause under § 1091.202 or who has entered into a consent agreement under § 1091.201.

*State* has the definition in 12 U.S.C. 5481.
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1
 
                               REPORT ON SCHEDULE
                                      AND
                        CONSENT OF KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP
 
     The audits referred to in our report dated January 28, 1998, included the
related financial statement schedule for the year ended December 31, 1997,
included in the annual report on Form 10-K of Advanced Fibre Communications,
Inc. This financial statement schedule is the responsibility of the Company's
management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on this financial
statement schedule based on our audits. In our opinion, such financial statement
schedule, when considered in relation to the basic consolidated financial
statements taken as a whole, presents fairly in all material respects the
information set forth therein.
 
     We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements
(No.s 333-15651 and 333-44645) on Form S-8 of Advanced Fibre Communications,
Inc. of our reports dated January 28, 1998, relating to the consolidated balance
sheets of Advanced Fibre Communications, Inc. as of December 31, 1997 and 1996,
and the related consolidated statements of operations, redeemable convertible
preferred stock and stockholders' equity (deficit) and cash flows for each of
the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 1997, and the related
schedule, which reports appear, or are incorporated by reference, in the
December 31, 1997 annual report on Form 10-K of Advanced Fibre Communications,
Inc.
 
                                          KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP
 
San Francisco, California
March 23, 1998
 


                                       1
# C_2022278EN.01000501.xml

| 20.7.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 278/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.7.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 278/5

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

19 July 2022

(2022/C 278/04)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,0245 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 141,01 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4449 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,85303 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,4964 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 0,9918 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 138,90 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 10,1760 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 24,555 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 397,45 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,7598 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,9395 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 18,0180 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4869 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3264 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,0423 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6456 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,4269 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 340,33 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 17,4570 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 6,9064 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5093 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 344,49 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,5590 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 57,583 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | |
| THB | Thai baht | 37,492 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 5,5454 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 20,8552 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 81,8980 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,0245

JPY

Japanese yen

141,01

DKK

Danish krone

7,4449

GBP

Pound sterling

0,85303

SEK

Swedish krona

10,4964

CHF

Swiss franc

0,9918

ISK

Iceland króna

138,90

NOK

Norwegian krone

10,1760

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

24,555

HUF

Hungarian forint

397,45

PLN

Polish zloty

4,7598

RON

Romanian leu

4,9395

TRY

Turkish lira

18,0180

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4869

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3264

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,0423

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6456

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,4269

KRW

South Korean won

1 340,33

ZAR

South African rand

17,4570

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

6,9064

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5093

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 344,49

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,5590

PHP

Philippine peso

57,583

RUB

Russian rouble

THB

Thai baht

37,492

BRL

Brazilian real

5,5454

MXN

Mexican peso

20,8552

INR

Indian rupee

81,8980

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

---
#### Jerry Edward AUSTIN *v.*STATE of Arkansas

CR 75-41

524 S.W. 2d 622

Opinion delivered June 23, 1975

*Vincent E. Skillman Jr, Skillman, Durrett & Davis,*for appellant.

*Jim Guy Tucker,*Atty. Gen., by: *Gary Isbell,*Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

George Rose Smith, Justice.

This is a petition for post-conviction relief under Criminal Procedure Rule 1. The petitioner was convicted of first degree murder in September, 1972. He now alleges that extensive pretrial publicity about the case deprived him of his constitutional right to a fair trial. The trial judge, after a hearing, denied the petition. We uphold his decision.

Some fourteen months elapsed between the filing of the information in 1971 and the trial in 1972. It is shown by the petitioner’s proof that during that interval four different “detective magazines” published illustrated articles, of a sensational nature, purporting to narrate facts about the crime. There is no proof that any of the magazines had a substantial circulation in Crittenden county or that any member of the trial jury every read any of the articles. There was also in*320troduced a front-page article that appeared in a Memphis newspaper, the Press-Scimitar, on the day of the petitioner’s, arrest, but we find nothing in the article at odds with restrained and accurate reporting.

The petitioner’s argument rests essentially upon the Supreme Court’s decision in *Sheppard*v. *Maxwell,*384 U.S. 333 (1966), but there is no similarity between that case and this one. The facts in the *Sheppard*case showed that the accused was examined for more than five hours, without counsel, in a televised inquest, that newspapers published the names and addresses of prospective jurors, who received letters and telephone calls about the case, that newsmen took over almost the entire courtroom, that the jurors had access to all news media, that pretrial publicity included incriminating matter not introduced at the trial, that the trial judge took no effective measures either to curb the massive publicity or to control the conduct of the trial, and other circumstances that we need not detail.

We perceive no resemblance between the *Sheppard*case and the case at hand. The isolated publicity that attended the petitioner’s arrest and subsequent trial was in no respect comparable to the reporting of the *Sheppard*case. The record before us includes the voir dire proceeding by which the prospective jurors were questioned and eventually accepted by counsel. In our opinion the record is devoid of proof that the pretrial publicity attending the petitioner’s trial violated in any respect his undoubted constitutional right to a fair and impartial trial.

Affirmed.

Fogleman, J., not participating.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE MILES JAGGER, Respondent Below, Appellant,

v. STATE OF DELAWARE, Petitioner Below, Appellee. § § No. 526, 2019 § § § § Court Below–Superior Court § of the State of Delaware § § C.A. No. 17I-01117 § §

Submitted: December 26, 2019 Decided: December 30, 2019

Before SEITZ , Chief Justice; VAUGHN , and TRAYNOR , Justices.

ORDER Upon consideration of the notice to show cause and the appellant’s response, it appears to the Court that: (1) On December 9, 2019, the appellant , Miles Jagger, filed a notice of appeal from a Superior Court Commissi oner’s order, dated November 22, 2019, which mandated that Jagger receive i nvoluntary outpatient treatment over his objection. The Senior Court Clerk issued a notice directing Jagger to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed fo r this Court’s lack of jurisdiction to consider an appeal directly from a S uperior Court Commissioner’s order.2 (2) Jagger filed a response to the no tice to show cause on December 26, 2019. In his response, Jagge r argues he is entitled to re lief from the Superior Court Commissioner’s order. He does not, however , address the jurisdictional issue raised

in the notice to show cause. (3) The right of review of a Superior Court Commissioner’s order is to a judge of the Superior Court. 1 In the absence of intermediate review by a Superior Court judge, this Court is without jurisd iction to hear an appeal from any action taken by a Commissioner. 2

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, under Supreme Court Rule 29(b), that the appeal is DISMISSED.

BY THE COURT: /s/ Collins J. Seitz, Jr. Chief Justice

1 Del. Super. Ct. Ci v. R. 132(a)(4)(ii). 2 Johnson v. State , 884 A.2d 475, 479 (Del. 2005).
§ 1261.3 General provisions. ( a ) *Board size and composition.* Annually, the FHFA Director will determine the size of the board of directors for each Bank and will designate at least a majority, but no more than 60 percent, of the directorships as member directorships and the remainder as independent directorships. Annually, the board of directors of each Bank shall determine how many, if any, of the independent directorships with terms beginning the following January 1 shall be public interest directorships, ensuring that at all times the Bank will have at least two public interest independent directorships.
( b ) *Term of directorships.* The term of office of each directorship shall be four years, except as adjusted pursuant to section 7(d) of the Bank Act (12 U.S.C 1427(d)) to achieve a staggered board, and shall commence on January 1 of the calendar year so designated by FHFA.
( c ) *Annual elections.* Each Bank annually shall conduct an election the purpose of which is to fill all directorships designated by FHFA as commencing on January 1 of the calendar year immediately following the year in which such election is commenced. Subject to the provisions of the Bank Act and in accordance with the requirements of this subpart, the disinterested members of the board of directors of each Bank, or a committee of disinterested directors, shall administer and conduct the annual election of directors. In so doing, the disinterested directors may use Bank staff or independent contractors to perform ministerial and administrative functions concerning the elections process.
( d ) *Location of members.* In accordance with section 7(c) of the Bank Act (12 U.S.C 1427(c)), for purposes of the election of member directors, a member is deemed to be located in its voting state, unless otherwise designated by the Director.
( e ) *Dates.* If any date specified in this subpart for action by a Bank, or specified by a Bank pursuant to this subpart, falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, the relevant time period is deemed to be extended to the next calendar day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday.
[73 FR 55715, Sept. 26, 2008, as amended at 74 FR 51460, Oct. 7, 2009. Redesignated at 75 FR 17039, Apr. 5, 2010; 81 FR 76296, Nov. 2, 2016]
# C_2023072EN.01004001.xml

| 28.2.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 72/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.2.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 72/40

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

27 February 2023

(2023/C 72/04)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,0554 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 143,88 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4426 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,88073 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 11,0595 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 0,9929 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 152,30 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 10,9635 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 23,619 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 379,93 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,7160 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,9198 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 19,9324 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5739 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4334 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,2818 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7185 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,4246 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 396,00 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 19,4574 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,3378 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 16 119,69 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,7266 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 58,596 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | |
| THB | Thai baht | 37,045 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 5,4848 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 19,3777 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 87,3360 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,0554

JPY

Japanese yen

143,88

DKK

Danish krone

7,4426

GBP

Pound sterling

0,88073

SEK

Swedish krona

11,0595

CHF

Swiss franc

0,9929

ISK

Iceland króna

152,30

NOK

Norwegian krone

10,9635

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

23,619

HUF

Hungarian forint

379,93

PLN

Polish zloty

4,7160

RON

Romanian leu

4,9198

TRY

Turkish lira

19,9324

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5739

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4334

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,2818

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7185

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,4246

KRW

South Korean won

1 396,00

ZAR

South African rand

19,4574

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,3378

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

16 119,69

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,7266

PHP

Philippine peso

58,596

RUB

Russian rouble

THB

Thai baht

37,045

BRL

Brazilian real

5,4848

MXN

Mexican peso

19,3777

INR

Indian rupee

87,3360

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

---
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13

- 10995 Summary Calendar

JAMES BELL MCCOY, SR. ,
P etitioner

- Appellant

v. WILLIAM STEPHENS, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION , Respondent

- Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:09

- CV

- 405

Before BARKSDALE, HAYNES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * James Bell McCoy, Sr., Texas prisoner # 1299701, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis , appeals the d enial of his motion to recuse the d istrict j udge who presided over two matters in which McCoy challenged a state

- court conviction. The court denied the motion because the case was closed and on

app eal to this court.

* Pursuant to 5th Cir

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 th Cir

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED April 10, 2014 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 13-10995 Document: 00512591729 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/10/2014No. 13

- 10995

“[T]he filing of a valid notice of appeal from a final order of the district court divests that court of jurisdiction to act on the matters involved in the appeal, except to aid the appeal, correct clerical errors, or enforce its judgment ”. Ross v. Marshall , 426 F.3d 745, 751 (5th Cir. 200 5) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). McCoy filed his motion to recuse after filing notices of appeal from the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition and the
denial of his motion filed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)

. Acc ordingly, the district court lacked jurisdiction to rule on the recusal motion.
AFFIRMED.

2 Case: 13-10995 Document: 00512591729 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/10/2014
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Yves A. Eliscar, :

Petitioner :

:

v. : No. 157 C.D. 2017

:

Unemployment Compensation :

Board of Review, :

Respondent :

O R D E R

NOW, December 8, 2017, upon consideration of petitioner’s

application for reconsideration, the application is denied.

 MARY HANNAH LEAVITT,

 President Judge