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

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 152 (Thursday, August 7, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 46248]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-18696]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS

Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the West Virginia Advisory 
Committee

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and 
regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the 
Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), that a planning meeting of the 
West Virginia Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene at 
10:00 a.m. (EDT), on Monday, August 25, 2014, in the Board Room of the 
WV Human Rights Commission, 1321 Plaza East, Room 108 A, Charleston, WV 
2530. The purpose of the meeting is to select the topic of the 
Committee's civil rights project and discuss and plan the future public 
briefing meeting on the topic.
    Members of the public are entitled to submit written comments. The 
comments must be received in the regional office by Wednesday, 
September 24, 2014. Written comments may be mailed to the Eastern 
Regional Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1331 Pennsylvania 
Avenue, Suite 1150, Washington, DC 20425, faxed to (202) 376-7548, or 
emailed to Evelyn Bohor at ero@usccr.gov. Persons who desire additional 
information may contact the Eastern Regional Office at 202-376-7533.
    Persons needing accessibility services should contact the Eastern 
Regional Office at least 10 working days before the scheduled date of 
the meeting.
    Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced 
at the Eastern Regional Office, as they become available, both before 
and after the meeting. Persons interested in the work of this advisory 
committee are advised to go to the Commission's Web site, 
www.usccr.gov, or to contact the Eastern Regional Office at the above 
phone number, email or street address.
    The meetings will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the 
rules and regulations of the Commission and FACA.

    Dated August 4, 2014.
David Mussatt,
Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
[FR Doc. 2014-18696 Filed 8-6-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
```
#### In the Matter of the Mortgage Commission of the State of New York, Respondent, Relative to Mortgage on 1175 Evergreen Avenue in the City of New York. William Lauro et al., Appellants.

(Submitted July 8, 1936;

decided July 8, 1936.)

Motion to amend remittitur granted. Return of remittitur requested and when returned it will be amended by adding thereto the following: “A question under the Federal Constitution was presented and necessarily passed upon by this court. It was contended that chapter 19 of the Laws of 1935 of the State of New York is repugnant to article I, section 10, of the Constitution of the United States and the Fourteenth Amendment thereto. This court held such law not repugnant to any provision of the Constitution of the United States.” (See 270 N. Y. 436.)
<PAGE>
EXHIBIT 31.1

                            SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION

I, Alton L. Boynton, certify that:

(1) I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Northwest
Biotherapeutics, Inc.;

(2) Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of
a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were
made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

(3) Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

(4) I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the
registrant and have:

      (a)   Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
            disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
            supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
            registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known
            to us by others within those entities, particularly during the
            period in which this report is being prepared;

      (b)   Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
            and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about
            the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of
            the end of the period covered by this report based on such
            evaluation; and

      (c)   Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
            control over financial reporting that occurred during the
            registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth
            fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
            affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
            registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

(5) I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control
over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee
of the registrant's Board of Directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):

      (a)   All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
            or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
            reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to
            record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

      (b)   Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
            other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's
            internal control over financial reporting.

Date: August 14, 2006

By: /s/ Alton L. Boynton
    ----------------------------------
    Alton L. Boynton
    President (Principal Executive, Financial and Accounting Officer)
13312

#### AUSTIN v. GODDARD *ET AL.*

(161 S. E., *767)*

*24
      *Messrs. B. P. Martin*and *D. R. Cain-iov*appellant,

*Messrs. Plodges & Leatherwood*for respondents,

*25December 31, 1931.

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Acting Associate Justice John I. Cosgrove.

Appeal from Greenville County. Action in the nature of a creditor’s bill brought for the purpose of setting aside a certain deed of conveyance of real property in the City of Greenville from J. W. Goddard to his wife. The transfer was attacked as invalid and fraudulent under the Statute of Elizabeth (Section 5218, Civil Code 1922), as well as in violation of the statute against assignments (Section 5511, Civil Code 1922).

The property in question was sold under mortgage foreclosure proceedings while this action was pending. This controversy involves the surplus proceeds of that sale, amounting to approximately $2,300.00.

The cause was heard by E. Inman, Esq., able Master of Greenville County, who reported and recommended both on the law and the facts that plaintiffs were not entitled to have the deed in question set aside. Numerous exceptions to this report and its conclusions were taken and fully argued before Hon. T. J. Mauldin, Circuit Judge. He concurred in and confirmed the report of the Master in his findings of fact and his conclusions of law. This appeal, upon a number of exceptions, is from that decree.

It is the settled law of this State that in an equity case findings of fact by a Master concurred in by a Circuit Judge will not be disturbed on appeal unless it is shown that such findings are without any evidence to support them or are against the clear preponderance of the evidence. *Youmans v.*Youmans, 128 S. C., 31, 121 S. E., 674; *Cohen v. Goldberg,*144 S. C., 70, 142 S. E., 36. and *26
      *Kaminski Hardware Co. v. Holden Trunk & Bag Co.,*150 S. C., 244, 147 S. E., 874.

The Master in this cause saw and heard the witnesses. The Circuit Judge, after extensive arguments and a careful consideration and study of the testimony, records, and exhibits, concurred in those findings. The issues are close. We cannot say, however, that these conclusions are without evidence to support them or are against the clear preponderance of the evidence.

Counsel for appellants have earnestly and ably argued their view of the law and the facts of this case, and we have been seriously impressed by them. Were this matter before us on a trial *de novo*and we were free to draw original conclusions from the testimony, their view would have great weight. All of their exceptions herein have been given careful consideration. We think, however, that, under the decisions of this Court, it is our duty to sustain the decree appealed from.

• It is the judgment of this Court that the decree of Circuit Judge Mauldin herein be affirmed.

Mr. Chiee Justice Brease and Messrs. Justices StabEEr and Carter concur.

Mr. Justice Cothran did not participate.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

CARMELITA CORPUZ FELISCO,

Petitioner,

 v.

JEFF B. SESSIONS, Attorney General, 

Respondent.

No. 14-71520

Agency No. A200-401-772

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted February 14, 2017** 

Before: GOODWIN, FARRIS, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.

Carmelita Corpuz Felisco, a native and citizen of the Philippines, petitions

for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from

an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) discretionary denial of adjustment of status and a

waiver of fraud or misrepresentation under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(i). Our jurisdiction is

FILED

FEB 22 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

*

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as

provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo constitutional claims and

questions of law. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005). 

We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

Corpuz Felisco contends the agency violated due process in admitting,

considering, and mischaracterizing evidence. However, her alleged due process

claims fail because she has not established error and prejudice. See Lata v. INS,

204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (a valid due process claim in the removal

context requires a showing of both “error and substantial prejudice”). 

The record does not support Corpuz Felisco’s contention that the IJ revealed

a personal bias against her such that she was denied a full and fair hearing. See

Vargas-Hernandez v. Gonzales, 497 F.3d 919, 926 (9th Cir. 2007) (allegations of

bias were undermined by the IJ’s professional behavior and the IJ’s decision

considered all issues raised by alien). 

To the extent Corpuz Felisco contends the agency abused its discretion in

denying adjustment of status and a waiver, we lack jurisdiction to review that

discretionary determination. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i), (D).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

2 14-71520
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

January 9, 2009 

1215 

Order 

 

January 9, 2009 

137375 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 137375 

 COA: 278799 

Kent CC: 06-009771-FH 

TERRELL VASHAWN ROSS, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 26, 2008 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

 HATHAWAY, J., not participating.
viii

Abbreviations 

CB Communications Branch 

CIA Central Intelligence Agency 

CO Commanding Officer 

COI Coordinator of Information 

Commo Communications 

CW Continuous [Electromagnetic] Wave of Constant Frequency 

DCI Director of Central Intelligence 

FBI Federal Bureau of Investigation 

FNB Federal Bureau of Narcotics 

G-2 Army Intelligence 

HQ Headquarters 

JCS Joint Chiefs of Staff 

MO Morale Operations Branch 

MIS Military Intelligence Service 

MU Maritime Unit 

NPS National Park Service 

OG Operational Group 

ONI Office of Naval Intelligence 

OSS Office of Strategic Services 

R&A Research and Analysis Branch 

R&D Research and Development Branch 

RG Record Group of Documents in National Archives II 

SI Secret Intelligence Branch 

SIS Secret Intelligence Service, MI-6, British 

SO Special Operations Branch 

SOE Special Operations Executive, British 

S&T Schools and Training Branch 

WJD William J. Donovan 

W/T Wireless Telegraphy 

X-2 Counter-Intelligence Branch
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

June 26, 2024

No. 04-23-00428-CR

EX PARTE Carlos Fabian BERNAL VAZQUEZ

From the County Court, Kinney County, Texas

Trial Court No. 11176CR

Honorable Susan D. Reed, Judge Presiding

ORDER

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS Carlos Fabian Bernal 

Vazquez’s appeal of the denial of his application for pretrial writ of habeas corpus for want of 

jurisdiction. We further consider Bernal Vazquez’s appeal as a petition for writ of mandamus and 

DENY his request for mandamus relief WITHOUT PREJUDICE. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a).

It is so ORDERED on June 26, 2024.

_____________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 26th day of June, 2024.

_____________________________

Luz Estrada, Chief Deputy Clerk
EXHIBIT 99.1

                            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 of Lil Marc, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB/A (Amendment No. 2) for the year ended December 31,
2001 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, Keith M. Rosenbloom, principal executive officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

      (1)   I have reviewed the Report;

      (2)   Based on my knowledge, the Report does not contain any untrue
            statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact
            necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances
            under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect
            to the period covered by the Report; and

      (3)   Based on my knowledge, the financial statements and other financial
            information included in the Report fairly present, in all material
            respects, the financial condition, results of operations and cash
            flows of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in the
            Report.

September 30, 2002


                                                         /s/ Keith M. Rosenbloom
                                                         -----------------------
                                                         Keith M. Rosenbloom
                                                         President
#### STATE of Arkansas *v.*William COSENTINO

5690

477 S.W. 2d 460

Opinion delivered March 13, 1972

*69
      *Ray Thornton,*Atty. Gen., by *John D. Bridgeforth,*Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellant.

*Paul Johnson*and *Louis Art Dodrill,*for appellee.

George Rose Smith, Justice.

The appellee was charged by information with the unlawful possession of marihuana, an offense described in the information as a felony. The appellee demurred to the information, on the ground that the asserted offense is only a misdemeanor under Article IV, § 1, of Act 590 of 1971, the Uniform Controlled Substances Act. Ark. Stat. Ann. § 82-2617 (Supp. 1971). This appeal is from an order sustaining the demurrer.

The trial court correctly held the offense to be a misdemeanor, for the reasons stated in *Bennett*v. *State,*also decided today. 252 Ark. 128, 477 S.W. 2d 497. That holding, however, requires that the present appeal be dismissed, for in a misdemeanor case the State cannot appeal from an interlocutory order, such as the one sustaining a demurrer. *State*v. *Langstaff,*231 Ark. 736, 332 S.W. 2d 614 (1960). Without deciding the point, we call attention to the possibility that the State’s privilege of appealing from interlocutory orders in felony cases, under Ark. Stat. Ann. § 43-2706 (Repl. 1964), may have been abrogated by §§ 13 and 14 of Act 333 of 1971. See Ark. Stat. Ann. §§ 43-2706 and -2720.1 (Supp. 1971).

Appeal dismissed.

Fogleman, J., concurs:

*70John A. Fogleman, Justice,

concurring. I agree that the appeal should be dismissed.1 I do not agree that the offense charged was only a misdemeanor for the reasons stated in my opinion in *Bennett*v. *State,*252 Ark. 128 477 S.W. 2d 597.

Ark. Stat. Ann. § 43-2706 (Repl. 1964) allowing interlocutory appeals by the State was repealed by Act 333 of 1941.
Editorial Note on Part 139
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 139 appear at 69 FR 24069, May 3, 2004.

§ 139.403 Airport Safety Management System implementation. ( a ) Each certificate holder required to develop, implement, maintain, and adhere to an Airport Safety Management System under this subpart must submit an Implementation Plan to the FAA for approval according to the following schedule: ( 1 ) For certificate holders identified under § 139.401(a)(1), on or before April 24, 2024;
( 2 ) For certificate holders identified under § 139.401(a)(2), on or before October 24, 2024;
( 3 ) For certificate holders identified under § 139.401(a)(3), on or before April 24, 2025.
( 4 ) For a certificate holder that qualifies under § 139.401(a) after April 24, 2023, on or before 18 months after the certificate holder receives notification from the Regional Airports Division Manager of the change in its status.
( b ) An Implementation Plan must provide: ( 1 ) A detailed proposal on how the certificate holder will meet the requirements prescribed in this subpart.
( 2 ) A schedule for implementing SMS components and elements prescribed in § 139.402. The schedule must include timelines for the following requirements: ( i ) Developing the safety policy statement as prescribed in § 139.402(a)(2) and when it will be made available to all employees and tenants as prescribed in § 139.402(a)(3);
( ii ) Identifying and communicating the safety organizational structure as prescribed in § 139.402(a)(4);
( iii ) Establishing a system for identifying operational safety issues as prescribed in § 139.402(b)(1);
( iv ) Establishing a safety reporting system as prescribed in § 139.402(c)(2);
( v ) Developing, providing, and maintaining safety awareness orientation materials as prescribed in § 139.402(d)(1);
( vi ) Providing SMS-specific training to employees with responsibilities under the certificate holder's SMS as prescribed in § 139.402(d)(3); and
( vii ) Developing, implementing, and maintaining formal means for communicating important safety information as prescribed in § 139.402(d)(5).
( 3 ) A description of any existing programs, policies, or procedures that the certificate holder intends to use to meet the requirements of this subpart.
( c ) Each certificate holder required to develop, implement, maintain, and adhere to an Airport Safety Management System under this subpart must submit its amended Airport Certification Manual and Airport Safety Management System Manual, if applicable, to the FAA in accordance with its Implementation Plan but not later than 12 months after receiving FAA approval of the certificate holder's Implementation Plan.
( d ) A certificate holder that qualifies under § 139.401(a) must fully implement its Airport Safety Management System no later than 36 months after the approval of its Implementation Plan.
§ 417.109 Ground safety. ( a ) Ground safety requirements apply to launch processing and post-launch operations at a launch site in the United States.
( b ) A launch operator must protect the public from adverse effects of hazardous operations and systems associated with preparing a launch vehicle for flight at a launch site.
( c ) §§ 417.111(c), 417.113(b), and 417.115(c), and subpart E of this part provide launch operator ground safety requirements.
**Exhibit 32.1**

** **

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,asAdopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of NSP Holdings L.L.C. (the “Registrant”)on Form 10-Q for the period ended April 2, 2005, as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert A. Peterson, Chief ExecutiveOfficer of the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)           TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 
| Dated:  May 11, 2005 | By:    | /s/  ROBERT A. PETERSON                         |   |
|---------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                      |   | Robert  A. Peterson                             |
|                      |   | President,  Chief Executive Officer and Manager |
|                      |   | (Chief Executive Officer)                       |

 

 

**A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906has been provided to the Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.**

 

----
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 99.2


                                  CERTIFICATION

  Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code

       I certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2002 (the "10-Q") of GEO Specialty
Chemicals, Inc. ("GEO") fully complies with the requirements of Section 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the information contained in the
10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of GEO as of the dates and for the periods covered by the
10-Q.

                                              /s/ William P. Eckman
                                              ---------------------
                                              William P. Eckman
                                              Executive Vice President and Chief
                                              Financial Officer
                                              August 5, 2002