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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-6588

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

DUANE JELEAL OSBOURNE,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Richard L. Voorhees,

District Judge. (CR-95-178-V, CA-99-420-3)

No. 03-7214

In Re: DUANE JELEAL OSBOURNE,

Petitioner.

_______________

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

(CA-99-420-3, CR-95-178-V)

_______________

Submitted: October 23, 2003 Decided: October 30, 2003
2

Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

No. 03-6588 dismissed and No. 03-7214 petition denied by

unpublished per curiam opinion.

Duane Jeleal Osbourne, Appellant Pro Se. Gretchen C.F. Shappert,

Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
*

 We decline to address the issues Osbourne raises for the

first time on appeal. See Muth v. United States, 1 F.3d 246, 250

(4th Cir. 1993) (holding that claims raised for first time on

appeal will not be considered absent exceptional circumstances).

3

PER CURIAM:

In No. 03-6588, Duane Jeleal Osbourne, a federal prisoner,

seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying relief on his

motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000), and his motions to

amend. The orders are not appealable 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 his

constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive

procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or

wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, , 123 S. Ct.

1029, 1039 (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 Osbourne has

not made the requisite showing.* Accordingly, we deny a certificate

of appealability and dismiss the appeal in No. 03-6588.

In No. 03-7214, Osbourne petitions for a writ of mandamus,

asking this court to direct the district court to rule on his

request for a certificate of appealability. We have determined
4

that Osbourne has not made the requisite showing for a certificate

of appealability in Appeal No. 03-6588. Thus, although we grant

Osbourne leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the mandamus

petition as moot. 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.

No. 03-6588-DISMISSED

No. 03-7214-PETITION DENIED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 22-cv-22307-BLOOM/Otazo-Reyes

MARIA FERNANDA SOTO LEIGUE,

individually and on behalf of all others

similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

v.

EVERGLADES COLLEGE, INC.,

doing business as Keiser University,

Defendant.

________________________________/

ORDER ON EXPEDITED JOINT MOTION TO REMAND

THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiff and Defendant’s Expedited Joint Motion 

to Remand, ECF No. [74], filed on March 1, 2023. Plaintiff filed a Motion to Sever and Remand 

(ECF No. [67]) Count I of Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint, ECF No. [13], conceding the 

absence of an injury-in-fact. Defendant responded that if Count I were remanded based upon the

absence of an injury-in-fact, Count II of the First Amended Complaint should also be remanded 

because it is based on the same purported harm as Count I, and Count II likewise lacks an injuryin-fact. ECF No. [73]. The parties agree that the entire case should be remanded to the state court.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion, ECF No. [74], is 

GRANTED. This case is REMANDED to the Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit in 

and for Miami-Dade County, Florida. Plaintiff’s Motion to Sever and Remand, ECF No. [67], and 

Plaintiff’s Motion to Certify Class, ECF No. [70], are DENIED AS MOOT. The Clerk of Court 

is directed to CLOSE this case. 

Case 1:22-cv-22307-BB Document 75 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/03/2023 Page 1 of 2
Case No. 22-cv-22307-BLOOM/Otazo-Reyes

2

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, on March 2, 2023.

__________________________________

BETH BLOOM

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copies to:

Counsel of Record

Case 1:22-cv-22307-BB Document 75 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/03/2023 Page 2 of 2
#### § 80.1130 San Luis Obispo Bay, CA.

A line drawn from the southernmost extremity of Fossil Point to the seaward extremity of Whaler Island Breakwater.

[CGD 77-118a, 42 FR 35784, July 11, 1977. Redesignated by CGD 81-017, 46 FR 28154, May 26, 1981, and CGD 87-008b, 52 FR 25218, July 6, 1987]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                           4,222
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   80,191
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (130)
<INVENTORY>                                      3,808
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                88,597
<PP&E>                                          41,875
<DEPRECIATION>                                (25,398)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 106,734
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           80,954
<BONDS>                                          5,877
<COMMON>                                           420
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                      18,875
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   106,734
<SALES>                                      1,040,699
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,040,865
<CGS>                                        1,026,910
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,034,740
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 465
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,660
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,059
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,601
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,601
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .85
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .85
        

</TABLE>
# STATE OF LOUISIANA

COURTOFAPPEAL, Fl 11

# RSTCIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS TORONZO THOMPKINS NO. 2023 KW 0038 

### MARCH 13, 2023 In Re: Toronzo Thompkins, applying for supervisory writs,

17th Judicial District Court, Parish of Lafourche, No. 528713. BEFORE: THERIOT, CHUTZ, AND HESTER, 

# JJ.

WRIT DENIED.

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

DEPUTY CLERK OF COURT

FOR THE COURT MRT WRC CHH
§ 334.1370 Pacific Ocean at Keahi Point, Island of Oahu, Hawaii; danger zone. ( a ) *The danger zone.* The waters within an area beginning at a point in latitude 21°18′21.4′′ N., longitude 157°59′14.2′′ W.; thence to latitude 21°18′11′′ N., longitude 158°00′17.5′′ W.; thence to latitude 21°17′11.8′′ N., longitude 158°00′06.5′′ W.; and thence to latitude 21°17′22.5′′ N., longitude 157°59′03.1′′ W.
( b ) *The regulations.* ( 1 ) The area is closed to all surface craft, swimmers, divers, and fishermen except to craft and personnel authorized by the enforcing agency.
( 2 ) The regulations in this section shall be enforced by the Commanding Officer, Explosive Ordnance Disposal Training and Evaluation Unit One, Barbers Point, Hawaii 96862-5600.
[31 FR 12437, Sept. 20, 1966, as amended at 45 FR 57126, Aug. 27, 1980. Redesignated at 50 FR 42696, Oct. 22, 1985, and amended at 58 FR 53427, Oct. 15, 1993]
**Exhibit32.2**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2004**

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Bally Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q forthe fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert C. Caller,Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the Company,certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C.Section 1350 that, to my knowledge:
| 1. |   | The Report 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 the Report fairly  presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of  operations of the Company. |

Date:  December21, 2006
| /s/                                                              | Robert C. Caller |   |   |   |
|------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------|--------|--------|--------|
| Robert C. Caller                                                 |             |
| Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer  and Treasurer |             |
| (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)                     |             |

 

----
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NC 27711 

February 10,2016 

Mr. Oliver A. Potts, Director 

Office ofthe Federal Register (NF) 

National Archives and Records Administration 

8601 Adelphi Road 

College Park, Maryland 20740-6001 

Dear Mr. Potts: 

OFFICE OF 

AIR QUALITY PLANNING 

AND STANDARDS 

In accordance with 1 CFR part 51, we request that you approve the incorporation by reference 

(IBR) of the material listed below into title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at parts 

51 and 60. A copy of the material is enclosed. 

List of incorporation by reference. 

Material Publisher IBR in 40 CFR Parts 51 and 

60 

ASTM D6911-15, Available for purchase from Part 60, Appendix A-8, 

Standard Guide for American Society for Testing and Method 30B, §8.3.3.8 

Packaging and Shipping Materials (ASTM), 100 Barr Harbor 

Environmental Samples Drive, Post Office Box C700, West 

for Laboratory Analysis Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. 

ASTM E617-13, Standard Available for purchase from Part 51, Appendix M, Method 

Specification for American Society for Testing and 202; §§10.3 and 10.4; 

Laboratory Weights and Materials (ASTM), 100 Barr Harbor Part 60, Appendix A-3; 

Precision Mass Standards Drive, Post Office Box C700, West Method 4, §10.3; 

Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. Part 60, Appendix A-3, 

Method 5, §§10.7 and 10.8; 

Part 60, Appendix A-3, 

Method 5H, §§ 10.4 and 1 0.5, 

Part 60, Appendix A-3 , 

Method 51, §§10.1 and 10.2; 

and 

Part 60, Appendix A-8, 

Method 29, §§ 10.4 and 10.5 

Internet Address (URL) • http://www.epa.gov 

Recycled/Recyclable • Printed w~h Vegetable Oil Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 25% Post consumer) 
We have also enclosed a draft of the final preamble and rule that incorporates the 

material into the CFR. 

If you have any questions, please contact Lula Melton at (919) 541-2910 or 

melton.lula@epa.gov. Thank you very much for your attention to this matter. 

incerely 

Steffan Johnson, Group Leader 

Measurement Technology Group
§ 50.5 Action by the Board. ( a ) After a complete and thorough review of the evidence before it the Board will, in closed session, deliberate and make its decision affirming or reversing the findings and decision of the retiring board being reviewed.
( b ) If the Board reverses the findings of the retiring board being reviewed, it will make complete findings, including: ( 1 ) Whether the applicant was incapacitated for active service;
( 2 ) If so, the disability causing the incapacity;
( 3 ) Whether the incapacity is permanent;
( 4 ) Whether the incapacity was the result of an incident of service or incurred in the line of duty;
( 5 ) Whether the incapacity was the result of the applicant's own vicious habits;
( 6 ) In the case of a member or former member who was in the Reserve or who served under a temporary appointment, when the physical disability was incurred.
( c ) The findings and decision of a majority of the Board will constitute the findings and decision of the Board Members who do not concur with the majority may file a minority report.
( d ) When the Board has concluded its proceedings in any case the Recorder will prepare a complete record thereof including ( 1 ) the application for review
( 2 ) a transcript of the hearing, if any
( 3 ) affidavits, briefs, and written agreements filed in the case,
( 4 ) the findings and decision of the Board, and
( 5 ) all other papers and documents necessary to reflect a true and complete record of the proceedings. This complete record will be transmitted to the Commandant for appropriate action.
[10 FR 5650, May 17, 1945. Redesignated at 13 FR 7303, Nov. 30, 1948, and amended at CGFR 53-12, 18 FR 2953, May 22, 1953; USCG-2015-0433, 80 FR 44279, July 27, 2015]
Argued and submitted February 24,

reversed and remanded March 22, 1995

#### In the Matter of Charles Scoggins, Alleged to be a Mentally Ill Person. STATE OF OREGON, *Respondent, v.*CHARLES SCOGGINS, *Appellant.*

(940796711; CA A85135)

891 P2d 1383

Thomas A. Coleman argued the cause and filed the brief for appellant.

Kristin N. Preston, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent. With her on the brief were Theodore R. Kulongoski, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General.

Before Deits, Presiding Judge, and De Muniz and Haselton, Judges.

PER CURIAM

Reversed and remanded. *State v. Allison,*129 Or App 47, 877 P2d 660 (1994); *State v. Tardanico,*132 Or App 230, 888 P2d 15 (1994).
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 111 (Thursday, June 8, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 36471]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-14468]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-37,261, and TA-W-37,261A)


Ithaca Industries, Inc., Glennville, Georgia; Corporate 
Headquarters, Wilkesboro, North Carolina; Amended Certification 
Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance

    In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 
2273) the Department of Labor issued a Notice of Certification 
Regarding Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance on 
February 29, 2000, applicable to workers of Ithaca Industries, Inc., 
Glennville, Georgia. The notice was published in the Federal Register 
on March 17, 2000 (65 FR 14627).
    At the request of the company, the Department reviewed the 
certification for workers of the subject firm. New information shows 
that worker separations occurred at the Corporate Office, Wilkesboro, 
North Carolina location of Ithaca Industries, Inc. The Corporate Office 
provides administration and support function services for Ithaca's 
manufacturing plants located throughout North Carolina and Georgia.
    The intent of the Department's certification is to include all 
workers of Ithaca Industries, Inc. who were adversely affected by 
increased imports. Accordingly, the Department is amending the worker 
certification to cover the workers of Ithaca Industries, Inc., 
Corporate Office, Wilkesboro, North Carolina.
    The amended notice applicable to TA-W-37,261 is hereby issued as 
follows:

    ``All workers of Ithaca Industries, Inc., Glennville, Georgia 
(TA-W-37,261), and Corporate Office, Wilkesboro, North Carolina (TA-
W-37,261A) who became totally or partially separated from employment 
on or after January 6, 1999 through March 1, 2002 are eligible to 
apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act 
of 1974.''

    Signed at Washington D.C. this 1st day of June, 2000.
Grant D. Beale,
Program Manager, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 00-14468 Filed 6-7-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
#### WILLIAM B. WAIT, Respondent, *v.*AUGUSTUS N. WELLER, Appellant.

*Injunction.*

In 1870 the W. and F. R. R. Co. executed a mortgage upon their road for $125,000 to the Union Trust Company, as trustee. In 1872, desiring to increase their funded debt, another mortgage for $175,000, described as a first mortgage, was executed to the appellant, the company intending to take up the $125,000 mortgage. This project failed, as some of the holders of the first bonds refused to surrender them. Subsequently the property of the road was sold under a judgment and a new company organized. An action was then commenced by the appellant, the trustee of the second mortgage, to foreclose *it, the new*road and the Union Trust Company being made parties to the suit. The plaintiff, the holder of some of the bonds issued under the second mortgage, applied for and obtained an injunction restraining the appellant from proceeding in that action until he procured the surrender of all the bonds issued under the first mortgage. *Held,*that the injunction was improperly granted and should be vacated.

*627Appeal from an order made at the Special Term continuing an injunction restraining the appellant from foreclosing a mortgage until the conditions on which the bonds were issued should be fulfilled.

*H. J. Schenck,*for the appellant.

*Waldo Hutchins,*for the respondent.

Opinion by

Davis, P. J.

Brady and Daniels, JJ., concurred.

Order reversed with ten dollars costs, besides disbursements, and motion for injunction denied, with ten dollars costs.
# s~**~** 

# s ( 

# 8--lz 

# Re 1

# '-"-~ 

# s1

A 

# V EXPRESSJET-

July 2, 2012 Kevin Adams EAS & Domestic Analysis Division Office ofAviation Analysis Department ofTransportation 400 7m Street, S
.W. Washington, DC 20590 

### Re: Docket DOT-OST-2008-0112 Dear Mr. Adams: As you are aware, the subsidy contract for ExpressJet Airline's (dba Delta Connection) Essential Air Service at Meridian, MS expired onJune 30, 2012. ExpressJet Airlines elected not to bid on continuing this service and we understand that we will beheld in until such time that a replacement carrier is determined and is ready to take over this service. Given that the current subsidy rate ended on June 30th and considering that fuel prices have risen since this rate was established two years ago, we are proposing a new interim rate based on the 13 weekly nonstops currently being operated from Atlanta. The proposed new interim rate is outlined on the following page. Thank you in advance for your consideration ofthis revised rate. We look forward to continuing to provide convenient and reliable Delta Connection service between Atlanta and Meridian until such time that service can be transitioned to a replacement carrier
. Respectfully submitted,

# r~ Jon Lindlief Director

- Planning & DevelopmentEAS service proposal for service to Meridian, Mississippi · 13 weekly nonstop flights
EAS Station Docket Number Hub Round trips per week Completion Factor Total Passengers Total Block Hours Total Departures Passenger Revenue Other Revenue Total Revenue
Pilots Fuel Maintenance Aircraft Total Directs

. 

### ' Total Indirects
Total Operating Profit@ 5% Economic Cost Required Annual Subsidy Rate . .

5.0% MEl DOT-OST-2008-0112 ATL 13 98% 30,638

1,531 1,330 $3,824,848

$484,315 $4,309,163

$570,577 $1 ,594,252

$791,818 $755,154 $3,711,801 $1,993,933 $5,705,733

$285,287 $5,991,020
$1,681,857 . ... _ ;,..:_
§ 154.1220 Response plan submission requirements. ( a ) The owner or operator of an MTR facility identified in § 154.1216 as a substantial harm facility, shall prepare and submit to the cognizant COTP a response plan that complies with this subpart and all sections of subpart F of this part, as appropriate, except §§ 154.1015, 154.1016, 154.1017, 154.1028, 154.1045 and 154.1047.
( b ) The owner or operator of an MTR facility classified by the COTP under § 154.1216(b) as a significant and substantial harm facility, shall prepare and submit for review and approval of the cognizant COTP a response plan that complies with this subpart and all sections of subpart F of this part, as appropriate, except §§ 154.1015, 154.1016, 154.1017, 154.1028, 154.1045 and 154.1047.
( c ) In addition to the requirements in paragraph (a) of this section, the response plan for a mobile MTR facility must meet the requirements of § 154.1041 subpart F.
[USCG-1999-5149, 65 FR 40825, June 30, 2000]
#### § 334.960 Pacific Ocean, San Clemente Island, Calif.; naval danger zone off West Cove.

(a) *The danger zone.* The waters of the Pacific Ocean in an area about one-half mile off the west coast of San Clemente Island basically outlined as follows:

| Latitude | Longitude |
| --- | --- |
| 33°00′40′′ | 118°35′45′′ |
| 32°57′40′′ | 118°34′25′′ |
| 32°57′10′′ | 118°35′40′′ |
| 33°00′10′′ | 118°37′00′′ |
| 33°00′40′′ | 118°35′45′′ |

(b) *The regulations.*

(1) Intermittent firing may take place in the danger zone on any day from 8:00 a.m. until 1:00 p.m.

(2) Except as otherwise provided in this section, the danger zone will be open to fishing and general navigation.

(3) The operations officer, Naval Ordnance Test Station, Pasadena Annex, Pasadena, California, will announce firing schedules. Each week, public notices will be issued giving advance firing schedules. Such notices will appear in the local newspapers and in local “Notice to Mariners” and “Notice to Airmen.” For the benefit of the fishermen and small-craft operators, announcements will be made on the marine radio.

(4) When a scheduled firing is about to be undertaken, fishing boats and other small craft will be contacted by surface patrol boats or aircraft equipped with a loudspeaker system. When so notified, all persons and vessels shall leave the area immediately by the shortest route. Upon completion of firing or if the scheduled firing is cancelled for any reason, fishermen and small-boat operators will be notified as far in advance as possible by Marine Radio Broadcast.

(5) The regulations in this section shall be enforced by security personnel attached to the Naval Ordnance Test Station, Pasadena Annex, and by such agencies as may be designated by the Commandant, Eleventh Naval District, San Diego.

[27 FR 6829, July 19, 1962. Redesignated at 50 FR 42696, Oct. 22, 1985, as amended at 62 FR 17557, Apr. 10, 1997; 62 FR 24034, May 2, 1997]