alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### Appeal Ordered Withdrawn and Opinion issuedMay 11, 2000

In The 

## Court ofAppeal© ifftftlj Btstrttt of toas at Dallas No. 05-00-00210-CR JERRAL WAYNE JONES, Appellant V. STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

### On Appealfrom the County Criminal CourtNo. 4 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. MB99-30714-E OPINION PER CURIAM Before ChiefJustice Thomas and Justices Kinkeade and O'Neill 

### Appellant has filed a motion to withdraw the appeal. Appellant's counsel has approved the motion. 

### This Court hereby GRANTS the motion and ORDERSthe appeal withdrawn and that this decision be certified below for observance. See TEX.R. App. P. 42.2(a). PER CURIAM Do Not Publish Tex. R. App. P. 47
§ 334.100 Atlantic Ocean off Cape May, N.J.; Coast Guard Rifle Range. ( a ) *The danger zone.* The waters of the Atlantic Ocean within an area described as follows: Beginning at Cape May West Jetty Light; thence 180° true, 800 yards; thence 250° true, 1,325 yards; and thence 335° true to the shore line.
( b ) *The regulations.* ( 1 ) No person or vessel shall enter or remain in the danger area between sunrise and sunset daily, except as authorized by the enforcing agency.
( 2 ) The regulations in this section shall be enforced by the Commander, Third Coast Guard District, or his authorized representative.
[25 FR 12244, Nov. 30, 1960. Redesignated at 50 FR 42696, Oct. 22, 1985, as amended at 62 FR 17552, Apr. 10, 1997]
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24-1300

ZACHARY KNOTTS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

KEITH WHITE, Esq.; HONORABLE THOMAS A. BEDELL,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at 

Clarksburg. Thomas S. Kleeh, Chief District Judge. (1:23-cv-00028-TSK-MJA)

Submitted: September 19, 2024 Decided: September 23, 2024

Before NIEMEYER, RICHARDSON, and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Zachary Knotts, Appellant Pro Se. Alex Scott Blevins, Mark Richard Simonton, OFFUTT 

SIMMONS SIMONTON, PLLC, Huntington, West Virginia; Dallas Floyd Kratzer, III, 

STEPTOE LLP, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 24-1300 Doc: 25 Filed: 09/23/2024 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Zachary Knotts appeals the district court’s order accepting in part the 

recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing for lack of subject matter 

jurisdiction Knotts’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint.*

 We have reviewed the record and find 

no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Knotts v. White, 

No. 1:23-cv-00028-TSK-MJA (N.D. W. Va. Feb. 15, 2024). We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

* Knotts also seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 

59(e) motion to reconsider. Because Knotts did not file an amended notice of appeal after 

the entry of that order, it is not properly before us. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4)(B)(ii).

USCA4 Appeal: 24-1300 Doc: 25 Filed: 09/23/2024 Pg: 2 of 2
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03
- 21
- 00384
- CV

Kirsten Hanna; Upside Up Properties, LLC; and Upside Up Ventures, Inc. , Appellant s

v. M. Matthew Williams; David Howell; Law Firm of M. Matthew Williams; and Leighton, Michaux, Adk i nson & Brown, PLLC , Appellee s

FROM THE 53RD DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY NO. D
- 1
- GN
- 21
- 000957 , THE HONORABLE KARIN CRUMP , JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
On December 3, 2021, we granted appellants ’ unopposed motion to abate t he ir appeal so that they could cure a “ potential jurisdictional impediment ” by having the trial
court sever appellees ’ counterc laim from the und erlying proceeding. See Hanna v. Williams , No. 03

- 21

- 00384

- CV, 2021 WL 5750189, at *1 (Tex. App.

— Austin Dec. 3, 2 021, no pet. ) (per curiam) (mem. op.)

. A ppellant s ha ve now filed both a status report stating that the trial court denied their motion to sever and an unoppose d moti on to dismiss this appeal. Accordingly, we reinstate the appe al, g rant appellant s ’ moti on , and dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App.
P. 42.1(a)

.2 __________________________________________ Melissa Good win , Justice Before Justices Goodwin, Baker, and Triana Dis missed on Appellant s ’ Motion Filed: January 26, 2022
EXHIBIT 32.2





CERTIFICATION





Certification
Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Subsections (a) and
(b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)




Pursuant
to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of
section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of the
undersigned officers of China Marine Food Group Limited, a Nevada corporation
(the "Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge,
that:




The
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 (the
"Form 10-K") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained
in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.




A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
China Marine Food Group Limited and will be retained by China Marine Food Group
Limited and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.





Date:
      July 7, 2010
            /s/ Marco Hon Wai
  KuMarco
      Hon Wai Ku, Chief Financial
Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 7
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM ACCEL INTERNATIONAL
CORPORATION'S JUNE 30, 1999 FORM 10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                            27,994
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                           0
<MORTGAGE>                                           0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                  34,593
<CASH>                                               0
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                                   0
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                           1,928
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  81,680
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                 48,115
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                              8,415
<POLICY-OTHER>                                       0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                                0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           947
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    81,680
<PREMIUMS>                                      12,342
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                                941
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                                   1
<OTHER-INCOME>                                    (90)
<BENEFITS>                                      11,469
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                        874
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                             6,950
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (6,164)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (6,164)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,164)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.72)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.72)
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                       0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                  0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                    0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                   0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                     0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                      0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0


</TABLE>
§ 187.101 What information must be collected to identify a vessel owner? ( a ) A participating State must collect the following information for a vessel it has numbered or titled when an individual owns the vessel and make it available to VIS: ( 1 ) Names of all owners.
( 2 ) Principal residence of one owner.
( 3 ) Mailing Address, if different from the address in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
( 4 ) Owner identifier, which must be the owner's tax identification number, date of birth together with driver's license number, or date of birth together with other unique number.
( b ) A participating State must collect the following information for a vessel that it has numbered or titled when the vessel's owner is not an individual, but a business or other type of organization: ( 1 ) Names of all businesses or organizations that own the vessel.
( 2 ) Principal address of one business or organization.
( 3 ) Mailing address, if different from the address in paragraph (b)(2) of this section.
( 4 ) Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN) for the principal business or organization.
( 5 ) If the TIN for the principal business or organization is not available, one of the following unique identifiers for a corporate officer, a partner, or the individual who signed the application for numbering: ( i ) Owner identifier, which must be the owner's tax identification number, date of birth together with driver's license number, or date of birth together with other unique number.
( ii ) [Reserved]
[USCG-1999-6420, 66 FR 15630, Mar. 20, 2001, as amended by USCG-2003-14963, 77 FR 18703, Mar. 28, 2012]
President’s Committee for People with

Intellectual Disabilities (PCPID)

Page 1 of 2

PCPID Agenda

May 1, 2023

12:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m., EST

Virtual Meeting 

12:00 p.m. – 12:10 p.m. Call to Order, Welcoming Remarks, Meeting Overview

Jim Brett 

PCPID Chair 

12:10 p.m. – 12:20 p.m. Welcoming Remarks from Administration for Community Living

Alison Barkoff 

Acting Administrator

Jill Jacobs

Commissioner, Administration on Disabilities (AoD)

12:20 p.m. – 12:25 p.m. Summary of Public Comments Received 

David Jones

Director, Office of Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities 

Administration for Community Living 

12:25 p.m. – 1:25 p.m. HCBS / Direct Support Professionals 

PCPID Workgroup Co-Chairs: Nicole Jorwic, Joe Macbeth, Tia Nelis

1:25 p.m. – 1:35 p.m. Break

1:35 p.m. – 2:35 p.m. HCBS / Employment 

PCPID Workgroup Co-Chairs: Eva Bunnell and Gabriel Martinez

2:35 p.m. – 2:45 p.m. Break

2:45 p.m. – 3:45 p.m. HCBS / Community Living 

PCPID Workgroup Co-Chairs: Santa Perez and James Trout 
Page 2 of 2

3:45 p.m. – 3:55 p.m. Break

3:55 p.m. – 4:55 p.m. HCBS / Federal Support Programs

PCPID Workgroup Co-Chairs: Shawn Aleong and Paul Aronsohn

4:55 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. Closing Remarks / Next Steps

Jim Brett 

PCPID Chair 

5:00 p.m. Meeting Adjourns
**-  Northern Plains  
-  Cheyenne, WY / Ft Collins, CO (RRRU) 
Printable VersionE-mail this pageThis site onlyAll ARS Advanced SearchPrograms and ProjectsFACE Project UBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">	You are here: 					Research /							**Research Project:**Implications of Global Change for Rangeland Management
**Location: Cheyenne, WY / Ft Collins, CO (RRRU)**
**2005 Annual Report**
**4d.Progress report.**								This report documents research conducted under Specific Cooperative Agreement 5409-11000-003-05S between ARS and the Department of Renewable Resources, University of Wyoming, entitled “Implications of global change for rangeland management”. Additional details of research can be found in the report for the parent project 5409-11000-003-00D titled "GLOBAL CHANGE: Responses and Management Strategies for Semi-arid Rangelands." 
This past year was spent revising an experimental plan for new collaborative research on a new Free Air CO2 Enrichment (FACE) experiment, installing instrumentation for the newly designed experiment, and taking baseline measurements of site vegetation and soils. As noted in our other sibling report (CRIS 5409-11000-003-05S; High plains free air CO2 enrichment study), we significantly changed our experimental design of this field CO2 enrichment experiment to.1)implement CO2 enrichment via rings rather than the proposed  gradient FACE system,.2)remove legumes from the CO2 enrichment experiment,.3)and add warming and water treatments to the CO2 treatments. The addition of the warming treatments and removal of legumes was by recommended of an Expert Panel which reviewed the Rangeland Resources Research Unit along with three other ARS units in March, 2005. The same Expert Panel suggested we implement a separate legume experiment to evaluate how different legume species cycled N, and also any weed problems that might result from inter-seeding legumes into rangelands. Plans for these two later experiments are underway. Thirty rings were established for the FACE Experiment in June, 2005, and soil and plant samples taken in July to characterize the site. Installation of the field plots is continuing through the summer of 2005, and the global change treatments of the experiment are expected to commence in Spring, 2006.
    Project TeamMorgan, Jack  Williams David - Associate Professor  
Project Annual Reports FY 2005 
Related National Programs Rangeland, Pasture, and Forages(205) Global Change(204)  							Last Modified: 09/29/2006 		ARS Home |USDA.gov |Site Map |Policies and Links FOIA |Accessibility Statement |Privacy Policy |Nondiscrimination Statement |Information Quality |FirstGov |White House

**
Editorial Note on Part 157
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 157 appear by USCG-2008-0179, 73 FR 35015, June 19, 2008.

§ 157.164 Use of inert gas system. ( a ) The master of a tank vessel having a COW system under § 157.10(e), § 157.10a(a)(2), or § 157.10c(b)(2) shall ensure the following: ( 1 ) Before each cargo tank is crude oil washed, the oxygen content in the tank is measured at each of the following locations in the tank: ( i ) One meter from the deck.
( ii ) In the center of the ullage space.
( 2 ) Before each cargo tank with partial bulkheads is crude oil washed, each area of that tank formed by each partial bulkhead is measured in accordance with paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
( 3 ) Before each cargo tank is crude oil washed, the oxygen content in that tank is 8 percent or less by volume at the locations under paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
( 4 ) During COW operations, the following are maintained in each cargo tank being crude oil washed: ( i ) A gas or a mixture of gases with an oxygen content of 8 percent or less by volume.
( ii ) A positive atmospheric pressure.
( 5 ) During COW operations, a crew member monitors the instrumentation under 46 CFR 32.53-60(a)(1), except if that instrumentation has an alarm that sounds in the cargo control room when the oxygen content exceeds 8 percent by volume.
( b ) Crude oil washing of the cargo tanks must be terminated when paragraph (a)(4) of this section is not met and crude oil washing of that tank may not be resumed until the requirements of paragraph (a)(4) of this section are met.
[CGD 77-058b, 45 FR 43709, June 30, 1980, as amended by CGD 82-28, 50 FR 11628, Mar. 22, 1985]
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

**PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

**(Subsection (a) and (b) of Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code)**

 

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code), the undersigned officer of Alexander’s, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge, that:

 

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2008**(the “Report”) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 

|           |   |   |
|----------------|--------|--------|
| August 4, 2008 |   |   |  |
|           |   | Name:  | Joseph Macnow |
|           |   | Title: | Chief Financial Officer |
|                |        |        |  |  |
#### § 183.21 Applicability.

This subpart applies to monohull boats less than 20 feet in length, except sailboats, canoes, kayaks, and inflatable boats.
Exhibit 32(a)
                                  CERTIFICATION

                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                    AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of The
Southern Company for the quarter ended March 31, 2004, we, the undersigned,
hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of our individual
knowledge and belief, that:

(1)           such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of The Southern Company for the
              quarter ended March 31, 2004, which this statement accompanies,
              fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
              the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)           the information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of
              The Southern Company for the quarter ended March 31, 2004, fairly
              presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
              results of operations of The Southern Company.



                              /s/H. Allen Franklin
                                 Allen Franklin
                      Chairman and Chief Executive Officer



                              /s/Thomas A. Fanning
                                Thomas A. Fanning
                            Executive Vice President,
                      Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer

Date:  May 6, 2004
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk February 7, 2011

s0131 

# Order

February 7, 2011

141590

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 141590 COA: 296914 Wayne CC: 05-007110 NIGEL LEE WHITTAKER, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the July 22, 2010 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, a nd it is DENIED, because the defendant has
failed to meet the burden of establishi ng entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
# Cover

# Part A B Survey

# Part A B Graphs

Age

Age Ranges

Numer of Respondents

How do you participate in the meals? 

What is the main reason you participate in the meal program? 

Program Satisfaction: Elders

Program Participation

Interest in Activities & Trainings

# Part C Survey

# Part C Graphs

What types of information or services do you receive through the Senior Center program? 

I am the primary caregiver for... 

Interest in Services

Program Satisfaction: Caregivers

# Part A B Calcs

# Part C Calcs

# image1.tmp
The Honorable Jimm Larry Hendren, United States District

1

Judge for the Western District of Arkansas.

___________

No. 96-3191

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

*

v. * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the 

Rory Allen Gregory, also known * Western District of Arkansas.

as Roy Allen, also known as Roy *

Gregory, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellant. *

___________

 Submitted: January 3, 1997

 Filed: January 10, 1997

___________

Before BOWMAN, MAGILL, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Rory Allen Gregory pleaded guilty to attempting to manufacture

methcathinone, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846. The

district court sentenced him to 155 months' imprisonment. Gregory

1

appeals, and we affirm.

Gregory challenges the district court’s drug-quantity findings. We

conclude, however, that the district court did not clearly err in adopting

the presentence report's conservative approximations of the amount of drugs

Gregory could have produced from the precursor chemicals found at his

clandestine drug laboratory. See U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual §

2D1.1,
-2-

comment. (n.12) (1995) (where there is no drug seizure, court shall

approximate quantity of controlled substance; court may consider, among

other things, size or capability of any laboratory involved); United States

v. Scott, 91 F.3d 1058, 1062 (8th Cir. 1996) (standard of review).

Gregory’s argument that such an approximation is proper only when all the

necessary precursor chemicals are present is without merit. See United

States v. Beshore, 961 F.2d 1380, 1383-84 (8th Cir.) (even in absence of

necessary precursor chemical, district court could properly approximate

amount of controlled substance that could have been produced), cert.

denied, 506 U.S. 884 (1992); United States v. Havens, 910 F.2d 703, 705

(10th Cir. 1990) (quantity of drugs should equal amount of drugs producible

if chemicals possessed by defendant were combined with proportionate

amounts of missing ingredients), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 1030 (1991).

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
§ 329.5 General scope of determination. The several factors which must be examined when making a determination whether a waterbody is a navigable water of the United States are discussed in detail below. Generally, the following conditions must be satisfied: ( a ) Past, present, or potential presence of interstate or foreign commerce;
( b ) Physical capabilities for use by commerce as in paragraph (a) of this section; and
( c ) Defined geographic limits of the waterbody.
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

 

STATEMENT REQUIREDBY 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT

TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connectionwith the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Worlds Inc. (the "Company") for the three months ended March 31, 2011, asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Thomas Kidrin, Chief ExecutiveOfficer of the Company, certify that:

 

* the Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

* informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

/s/ ThomasKidrin

Thomas Kidrin

Chief ExecutiveOfficer

 

 

Date: May 11,2011

 

 

This certificationaccompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent requiredby the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, as amended.

****

****
#### § 20.401 Initiation of administrative proceedings.

An administrative proceeding commences when the Coast Guard representative files the complaint with the Hearing Docket Clerk and serves a copy of it on the respondent.