alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-7005

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus JIMMY LEE SADLER, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (CR-93-160; CA-01-4326-HMH) Submitted: February 28, 2006 Decided: March 15, 2006 Before WILLIAMS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jimmy Lee Sadler, Appellant Pro Se. Kevin Frank McDonald, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Jimmy Lee Sadler, a federal prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion. It is apparent from the record that Sadler’s Rule 60(b) motion was an attempt to file a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000)motion. An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a postconviction proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). 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) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. SeeMiller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Sadler has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. In addition, we construe Sadler’s notice of appeal and informal brief on appeal as an application for authorization to file a successive § 2255 motion. See United States v. Winestock , 340 F.3d 200, 208 (4th Cir. 2003). In order to obtain- 3 - authorization to file a second § 2255 motion, a prisoner must assert claims based on either: (1) a new rule of constitutional law, previously unavailable, made retroactive by the Supreme Court to cases on collateral review; or (2) newly discovered evidence sufficient to establish that no reasonable fact finder would have found the petitioner guilty. 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b )(3)(C) (2000). Because Sadler asserts neither a new rule of constitutional law made retroactively applicable nor newly discovered evidence, we conclude that he has not demonstrated grounds on which to grant authorization under § 2244. We grant Sadler’s motion to supplement the record; however, we deny the request contained in that motion to vacate the district court’s order denying a certificate of appealability. 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
PUBLIC LAW 113–148—AUG. 8, 2014 128 STAT. 1805 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 1671: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 160 (2014): 

June 17, considered and passed House. 

Aug. 1, considered and passeed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 113–148 

113th Congress 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 6937 Village 

Parkway in Dublin, California, as the ‘‘James ‘Jim’ Kohnen Post Office’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. JAMES ‘‘JIM’’ KOHNEN POST OFFICE. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 6937 Village Parkway in Dublin, California, 

shall be known and designated as the ‘‘James ‘Jim’ Kohnen Post 

Office’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘James ‘Jim’ Kohnen Post Office’’. 

Approved August 8, 2014. 

Aug. 8, 2014 

[H.R. 1671] 


ccoleman on DSK8P6SHH1 with PUBLAWLAW
#### § 408.7 Terminal trusteeship financial report.

Each labor organization which has assumed trusteeship over a subordinate labor organization shall file within 90 days after the termination of such trusteeship on behalf of the subordinate labor organization a terminal financial report, and one copy, with the Office of Labor-Management Standards, on Form LM-2 and in conformance with the requirements of part 403 of this chapter.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### APPEAL 

### O F 

### F LORIDA 

### S ECOND 

### D ISTRICT

JAMES RENALDO , Appellant,

v. FINANCIAL PORTFOLIOS II, INC., as successor in interest to WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. f/k/a WACHOVIA; and CONSOLIDATED AMERICAN INDUSTRIES CORPORATION, Appellees. No. 2D20-3275
September 29, 2021 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Emmett Lamar Battles, Judge. Christine K. Sahyers of Law Offices of Christine K. Sahyers, Jacksonville, for Appellant. Robert J. Lindeman of Marcadis Singer P.A., Tampa, for Appellee Financial Portfolios II, Inc., as successor in interest to Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. f/k/a Wachovia. No appearance for Appellee Consolidated American Industries Corporation.
PER CURIAM. Affirmed.- 2 -

MORRIS, C.J., and KELLY and SMITH, JJ., Concur.
Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED AUGUST 27, 2024

NO. 03-23-00114-CR

Francisco Esquivel, III, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 207TH DISTRICT COURT OF COMAL COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES BAKER, TRIANA, AND SMITH

AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE SMITH

This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the trial court. Having reviewed 

the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in the 

trial court’s judgment of conviction. Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment of 

conviction. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication of costs 

is made.
§ 24.100 Purpose and scope. ( a ) This part implements procedures under the employee protection (or “whistleblower”) provisions for which the Secretary of Labor has been given responsibility pursuant to the following Federal statutes: Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. 300j-9(i); Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.C. 1367; Toxic Substances Control Act, 15 U.S.C. 2622; Solid Waste Disposal Act, 42 U.S.C. 6971; Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7622; Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, 42 U.S.C. 5851; and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, 42 U.S.C. 9610.
( b ) This part establishes procedures pursuant to the Federal statutory provisions listed in paragraph (a) of this section for the expeditious handling of retaliation complaints made by employees, or by persons acting on their behalf. These rules, together with those rules codified at 29 CFR part 18, set forth the procedures for submission of complaints under the Federal statutory provisions listed in paragraph (a) of this section, investigations, issuance of findings, objections to findings, litigation before administrative law judges (“ALJ”), issuance of decisions and orders, post-hearing administrative review, and withdrawals and settlements.
RO 11599 

9451.1991(03) 

OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE 

APR 16 1991 

Mr. Michael H. Oberg 

Chief Operating Officer 

United Marketing International, Inc. 

P.O. Box 989 

Everett, WA 98206-0989 

Dear Mr. Oberg: 

Thank you for your letter dated February 19, 1991 concerning 

the Toxicity Characteristic (TC) rule and its relationship to 

used oil filter disposal as outlined in a October 30, 1990 

memorandum to Mr. Robert Duprey in EPA's Region 8 office. 

The TC rule was effective in all states on September 25, 

1990, regardless of the state's RCRA authorization status. The 

TC will be implemented and enforced by EPA's Regional Offices 

until such time as states are authorized to implement and enforce 

the TC. Please note that the compliance date for generators of 

small quantities (from 100 to 1000 kg of total hazardous waste in 

a calendar month) of TC-hazardous wastes was March 29, 1991. 

Small quantity generators (SQGs) were required to begin managing 

their TC-hazardous waste in accordance with all applicable 

hazardous waste regulations on that date. Of particular concern 

to the Agency is the proper management (e.g., storage, treatment, 

transportation and disposal) of these wastes. 

As a point of clarification, I would also note that under 

the TC rule, generators are not specifically required to test 

their waste. The regulations allow generators to use their 

knowledge of the waste and/or the process that generated it to 

determine if it is hazardous. They are, however, required to be 

correct in their determination. 

The Agency intends to fully enforce this rule. The Agency's 

enforcement policy clearly is designed to identify and prosecute 

violators and to deny any economic benefit resulting from 

violations. Civil and criminal penalties are also available as 

enforcement tools. 
 RO 11599 

Finally, the Office of Solid waste appreciates the 

information you provided pertaining to recently completed studies 

of used oil filters conducted by the University of Northern Iowa. 

This study addresses the Agency's recommended best operating 

practice contained in the October 30, 1990 memorandum which 

suggested both draining and crushing of the oil filter to ensure 

maximum removal of the oil. Of course, as discussed earlier, 

each hazardous waste generator is ultimately responsible for 

making their own determination as to whether their waste is 

hazardous under the TC rule for any waste stream generated. 

I hope this letter clarifies the nature of the Agency's 

implementation of the TC rule. If you have any additional 

questions, please feel free to contact Mr. Steve Cochran of my 

staff at (202) 382-4770 for general TC questions and Mr. Hugh 

Davis in the Office of Waste Programs Enforcement at (202) 475- 

9867, if you have TC enforcement questions. 

Sincerely, 

Original Document signed 

Sylvia K. Lowrance 

Director 

Office of Solid Waste
Exhibit 10.2

 

	
 
    	
Termination Agreement of the Lease Agreement
   for 1015 31st Street NW, Washington, DC
    


 

Cogent Communications, Inc. (Tenant) and Niobium LLC (Landlord) hereby agree to terminate the Lease Agreement between Landlord’s predecessor-in-interest 6715 Kenilworth Avenue Partnership and Cogent Communications, Inc. (Tenant) dated September 1, 2000, for premises at 1015 31st Street NW, Washington, DC as amended (Lease Agreement) and agree as follows:

 

The Lease Agreement shall terminate effective as of the later of (a) April 30, 2015; or (b) the date Tenant actually vacates the space leased pursuant to the Lease Agreement. Upon the effective date of any such termination Tenant shall no longer be obligated to pay rent or other charges and any advance rent payments or other charges shall be refunded to Tenant based on proration through the effective date of termination.

 

Executed as of the 16th day of April 2015.

 

	
Tenant:
    	
 
    
	
Cogent Communications, Inc.
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
/s/ Thaddeus G. Weed
    	
 
    
	
Thaddeus Weed
    	
 
    
	
Chief Financial Officer
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
Landlord:   Niobium LLC
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
/s/   Dave Schaeffer
    	
 
    
	
Dave   Schaeffer
    	
 
    
	
Managing   Member
§ 4047.4 Payment of premiums. ( a ) *General.* Upon restoration of a plan pursuant to ERISA section 4047, the obligation to pay PBGC premiums pursuant to ERISA section 4007 is reinstated as of the date on which the plan was trusteed under section 4042 of ERISA. Except as otherwise specifically provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, the amount of the outstanding premiums owed shall be computed and paid by the plan administrator in accordance with part 4006 of this chapter (Premium Rates) and the forms and instructions issued pursuant thereto, as in effect for the plan years for which premiums are owed.
( b ) *Notification of premiums owed.* Whenever the PBGC issues or has issued a plan restoration order, it shall send a written notice to the plan administrator of the restored plan advising the plan administrator of the plan year(s) for which premiums are owed. PBGC will include with the notice the necessary premium payment forms and instructions. The notice shall prescribe the payment due dates for the outstanding premiums.
( c ) *Methods for determining variable rate portion of the premium.* In general, the variable rate portion of the outstanding premiums shall be determined in accordance with the premium regulation and forms, as provided in paragraph (a) of this section, except that for any plan year following a plan year for which Form 5500, Schedule B was not filed because the plan was terminated, the alternative calculation method may not be used.
[61 FR 34073, July 1, 1996, as amended at 79 FR 13562, Mar. 11, 2014]
IIA 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. J. RES. 16 

Approving the renewal of import restrictions contained in the Burmese 

Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 14, 2007 

Mr. MCCONNELL (for himself, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, Mr. MCCAIN, Mr. ALEXANDER, Mr. ALLARD, Mr. BENNETT, Mr. BIDEN, Mr. BINGAMAN, Mrs. 

BOXER, Mr. BROWN, Mr. BROWNBACK, Mr. BUNNING, Mr. BURR, Ms. 

CANTWELL, Mr. CHAMBLISS, Mrs. CLINTON, Mr. COBURN, Mr. COCHRAN, Mr. COLEMAN, Ms. COLLINS, Mr. CORNYN, Mrs. DOLE, Mr. 

DOMENICI, Mr. DURBIN, Mr. ENSIGN, Mr. FEINGOLD, Mr. HAGEL, Mr. 

HARKIN, Mrs. HUTCHISON, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. KERRY, Ms. 

KLOBUCHAR, Mr. KOHL, Ms. LANDRIEU, Mr. LAUTENBERG, Mr. LEAHY, 

Mr. LIEBERMAN, Mr. LOTT, Mr. LUGAR, Mr. MARTINEZ, Mrs. 

MCCASKILL, Mr. MENENDEZ, Ms. MIKULSKI, Ms. MURKOWSKI, Mrs. 

MURRAY, Mr. OBAMA, Mr. REID, Mr. SALAZAR, Mr. SANDERS, Mr. 

SCHUMER, Mr. SMITH, Ms. SNOWE, Mr. SPECTER, Ms. STABENOW, Mr. 

STEVENS, Mr. SUNUNU, Mr. VOINOVICH, Mr. WHITEHOUSE, and Mr. 

WYDEN) introduced the following joint resolution; which was read twice 

and referred to the Committee on Finance 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Approving the renewal of import restrictions contained in 

the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003. 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 That Congress approves the renewal of the import restricVerDate Aug 31 2005 23:38 Jun 14, 2007 Jkt 059200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\SJ16.IS SJ16

hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
2 

•SJ 16 IS 

1 tions contained in section 3(a)(1) of the Burmese Freedom 

2 and Democracy Act of 2003. 

Æ 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
CITY OF 

FORT LAUDERDALE ' i \J SPOHI^ 

FLORIDA 

'Venice of Armrica 

John P. "Jack" Seller 

MAYOR 

100 NORTH ANDREWS AVENU E 

(954J 828-500 3 

(954 ) 828-566 7 FAX 

jack.seiler@fortlauderdale.gov 

www.fortlauderdale.gov 

33301 

on 

February 25, 2010 

ACTIO N 

The Honorable Ray LaHood 

Secretary 

United States Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

S10-f00304-02 70( 9 

Re: Haneda Combination Services Allocation Proceeding DOT-OST-2010-0018 

Dear Secretary LaHood: 

I applaud your efforts on the recent historic open skies agreement with Japan. Recognizing that the 

wide ranging opportunities made possible by the agreement includes new air service to Tokyo 

Haneda airport, I wanted you to know that I fully support Continental Airlines' application to provide 

daily nonstop service from New York/Newark to Tokyo Haneda. 

Continental Airlines is committed to the Asian region and to nonstop Tokyo Haneda service. The 

gateway at Continental's Newark Liberty hub allows an easy, one-airline connection between Tokyo 

Haneda and the Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport. Because Continental has the 

largest hub in the New York/Newark region capable of cormecting destinations across the U.S. with 

Tokyo Haneda, Continental's proposal at Liberty offers the Fort Lauderdale region a connecting 

gateway. The individual economies in the region and the millions of U.S. consumers here will benefit 

from Continental's proposed service, and will combine to make this new Tokyo Haneda service from 

Newark Liberty a real success. 

For the benefits that their application brings to my community and to so many others throughout the 

Florida region, I urge that you to award Tokyo Haneda rights to Continental Airlines at Newark 

Liberty International Airport. 

Thank you for your serious consideration and best wishes for 

health. 

success, happiness, and good 

'ours, y | 

p. "JACK" SEILER 

R 

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER ^ #
§ 2571.8 Summary decision. For section 521 proceedings, this section shall apply in lieu of § 18.41 of this title: ( a ) *No genuine issue of material fact.* Where the administrative law judge finds that no issue of a material fact has been raised, he or she may issue a decision which, in the absence of an appeal, pursuant to §§ 2571.10 through 2571.12, shall become a final agency action within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. 704.
( b ) A decision made under this section, shall include a statement of: ( 1 ) Findings of fact and conclusions of law, and the reasons thereof, on all issues presented; and
( 2 ) Any terms and conditions of the ruling.
( c ) A copy of any decision under this section shall be served on each party.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                        (37,522)
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,034,868
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    154,592
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,489,452
<PP&E>                                         426,577
<DEPRECIATION>                                (62,695)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,663,872
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,119,319
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     3,064,622
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,663,872
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                45,979
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,107,738
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              63,832
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,125,591)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,125,591)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.007)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.005)


</TABLE>
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 17

- 00310

- CR

C RISTI J EANETTE S NOW

, Appellant

V

.

T HE S TATE OF T EXAS §

§

§

§

§ On Appeal from Criminal District

Court No. 1

of Tarrant County (1445315D)

January 17, 2019

Opinion by Justice Bassel

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there

was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the t rial

court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By /s/ Dabney Bassel

Justice Dabney Bassel
Exhibit 10.25


 





AMENDMENT TO INTERIM CHIEF OPERATING
OFFICER AGREEMENT


 


THIS AMENDMENT TO INTERIM
CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER AGREEMENT (this “Amendment”), is made this 15th day of January, 2015 (the “Effective
Date”), by and among AmpliPhi Biosciences, a Washington corporation (the “Company”) and Wendy S. Johnson
(the “Consultant”).


 


WHEREAS, the Consultant
and the Company are a party to that certain Interim Chief Operating Officer Agreement, dated as of September 18, 2014 (the “Agreement”);


 


WHEREAS, the Company
and Consultant desire to amend the Agreement on the terms and conditions set forth herein.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in
consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the parties agree to amend the Agreement as follows:


 


1.Paragraph
6(a) of the Agreement is hereby amended by replacing the reference to “December 31, 2014” with “March 31,
2015.”


 


2.Section 2(A)
of Exhibit A is hereby amended and restated in its entirety as follows:


 


“2. Compensation


 


A.The
Company will compensate Consultant at a rate of $20,000 per month, payable on in equal parts on the 1st and 15th
of each month (or the next business day if such day is a weekend or holiday), during the term of this Agreement.”


 


3.This Amendment
represents the complete and total understanding of the parties with respect to the content thereof, and cannot be modified or altered
except if done so in writing, executed by all parties.


 


4.This Amendment
shall in no way modify, alter, change or otherwise delete any provision of the Agreement, unless specifically done so by the terms
of this Amendment, and all the remaining provisions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. This Amendment may
be executed in two (2) or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, but all of which together shall constitute
one and the same instrument.


 


[Remainder of page intentionally left blank]


 


 


 


 


 




    	 



    	 



    

 


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
the parties hereto have executed this Amendment on the date written below and upon full execution by all parties, this Amendment
shall be effective as set forth in Section 1 above.


 


 


 


 


 


CONSULTANT:


 


/s/ Wendy S. Johnson__________________


 


Name: Wendy S. Johnson


 


 


 


 


 


COMPANY:


 


AMPLIPHI BIOSCIENCES CORPORATION, a Washington
corporation


 


 


 


By: /s/ Jeremy Curnock Cook_________


 


Name: Jeremy Curnock Cook


 


		Title:	Chairman and Interim Chief Executive Officer



 


 






    	2