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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-6176

LARRY ARNOLD YOUNG,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

WARDEN, FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION,

Morgantown,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern

District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. Irene M. Keeley, Chief

District Judge. (3:06-cv-00020-IMK)

Submitted: July 24, 2007 Decided: July 30, 2007

Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Larry Arnold Young, Appellant Pro Se. Betsy S. Jividen, Assistant

United States Attorney, Alan Gordon McGonigal, OFFICE OF THE UNITED

STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Larry Arnold Young, a federal prisoner, appeals the

district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the

magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000)

petition. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the

district court. Young v. Warden, Fed. Corr. Inst., No. 3:06-cv00020-IMK (N.D.W. Va. Jan. 22, 2007). 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.

AFFIRMED
EXHIBIT 24.1


CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

North Shore Capital IV, Inc.
Dated: May 30, 2003


I hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in this Annual Report to
Shareholders on Form 10-KSB of my report dated May 30, 2003, appearing on page
F-2 of North Shore's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December
31, 2002. I also consent to the reference to me under the heading "Exhibits" in
such Registration Statement.



                                        DENNIS W. BERSCH, CPA

                                        /s/ Dennis W. Bersch
                                        ------------------------------------
                                        DENNIS BERSCH, CPA
Submitted on record and briefs January 6,

remanded with instructions April 26, 1995

#### STATE OF OREGON, *Respondent, v.*STEVEN R. STEVENS, *Appellant.*

(903215; CA A72419)

894 P2d 1217

Henry M. Silberblatt filed the brief for appellant.

Charles S. Crookham, Attorney General, Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, and Timothy A. Sylwester, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.

Before Warren, Presiding Judge, and Edmonds and Armstrong, Judges.

WARREN, P. J.

*3WARREN, P. J.

Defendant pleaded guilty to unlawful manufacture of a controlled substance. ORS 475.992(4)(A). The indictment included an allegation that defendant’s conduct “occurred as part of a drug manufacturing scheme. ’ ’ The trial court entered a judgment of conviction on October 16, 1990, and defendant appealed the sentence imposed on him. We affirmed the judgment. *State v. Stevens,*111 Or App 258, 826 P2d 12 (1992).

While that appeal was pending, however, defendant filed a petition for a writ of *habeas corpus*in Marion County Circuit Court, which was properly treated as a petition for post-conviction relief. The post-conviction court vacated the sentence, concluding that the trial court incorrectly used the scheme or network factor, and remanded for resentencing. *See State v. Moeller,*105 Or App 434, 806 P2d 1230, *rev dismissed*312 Or 76 (1991). On that remand, the trial court resentenced defendant on October 23, 1991. Defendant appeals from that judgment.

 Because defendant filed his petition while his direct appeal was pending, the post-conviction court did not have jurisdiction to hear his claim. ORS 138.550(1). Therefore, its order to the trial court to vacate the October 16, 1990, judgment was void. Similarly, when the trial court on remand resentenced defendant on October 23, 1991, defendant’s direct appeal was still pending. Because of that appeal, the court did.not have authority to resentence. *See*ORS 138.083; *Stevens,*111 Or App at 261 n 1. Accordingly, the judgment from which defendant now appeals had no effect and the original judgment entered October 16, 1990, stands.

Remanded with instructions to vacate judgment of October 23, 1991, and reinstate judgment of October 16, 1990.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

FORT LAUDERDALE DIVISION

CASE NO.: 0:22-CV-61842-AHS

DONALD J. TRUMP,

Plaintiff,

v.

CABLE NEWS NETWORK, INC.,

Defendant.

_____________________________________/

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE AND INCORPORATED

NOTICE OF DESIGNATION OF E-MAIL ADDRESSES FOR SERVICE

The law firm of Gunster, Yoakley & Stewart, P.A. and Eric C. Edison, Esq. hereby enters

their appearance as counsel for Defendant, CABLE NEWS NETWORK, INC. (“CNN”) in the 

above-styled cause, and requests that any and all pleadings or other matters pertaining to this cause 

be directed to the undersigned counsel.

CNN hereby files its Notice of Designation of E-Mail Addresses for service and requests 

that service of all pleadings and documents in the above-styled cause of action be sent to the 

undersigned via email or CM/ECF at the following e-mail addresses:

Primary: eedison@gunster.com

Secondary: dpeterson@gunster.com

Alternate: eservice@gunster.com

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been filed and 

served via the Court’s CM/ECF portal on this 21st day of October, 2022 to Lindsey Halligan, Esq., 

lindseyhalligan@outlook.com, Counsel for Plaintiff, 511 SE 5th Avenue, Fort Lauderdale, FL 

Case 0:22-cv-61842-AHS Document 11 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/21/2022 Page 1 of 2
2

33301; and James M. Trusty, Esq., jtrusty@ifrahlaw.com; Ifrah Law PLLC, Counsel for Plaintiff,

1717 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Suite 650, Washington, DC 20006.

GUNSTER, YOAKLEY & STEWART, P.A.

450 East Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 1400 

Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301

Telephone: (954) 462-2000

By: /s/ Eric C. Edison, Esq.

George S. LeMieux, Esq.

Florida Bar No. 16403

Email: glemieux@gunster.com

Eric C. Edison, Esq. 

Florida Bar No. 010379

Email: eedison@gunster.com

Case 0:22-cv-61842-AHS Document 11 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/21/2022 Page 2 of 2
### Hydrology and digital simulation of the regional aquifer system, eastern Snake River Plain, Idaho

By: S. P. Garabedian

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1408F

#### Links

- More information:  **National Geologic Map Database Index Page**                            (html)
-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plates:                               - **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 2**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 3**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 4**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 5**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 6**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 7**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 8**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 9**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 10**                            (pdf) 
- Superseded Publications:
                                        Hydrology and digital simulation of the regional aquifer system, eastern Snake River Plain, Idaho(1989)                                    

- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

#### Study Area

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5425 Introduced in House (IH)]

  2d Session
                                H. R. 5425

  To amend the National and Community Service Act of 1990 to include 
participation in a volunteer firefighting agency as one of the national 
 service programs specifically authorized to receive assistance under 
                        the AmeriCorps program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 6, 2000

  Mr. Weldon of Pennsylvania introduced the following bill; which was 
          referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the National and Community Service Act of 1990 to include 
participation in a volunteer firefighting agency as one of the national 
 service programs specifically authorized to receive assistance under 
                        the AmeriCorps program.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SUPPORT FOR VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTING AGENCIES UNDER THE 
              AMERICORPS PROGRAM.

    Section 122(a) of the National and Community Service Act of 1990 
(42 U.S.C. 12572(a)) is amended--
            (1) by redesignating paragraph (15) as paragraph (16); and
            (2) by inserting after paragraph (14) the following new 
        paragraph:
            ``(15) A program to provide incentives for the recruitment 
        and retention of volunteer firefighting personnel for volunteer 
        firefighting agencies and other firefighting agencies that 
        utilize volunteers.''.
                                 <all>
```
UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION

CASE NO. 22-80180-CR-CANNON

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

DOYLE CLEARE,

a/k/a/ “Rickie Williams,”

Defendant.

/

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation entered by 

Magistrate Judge Bruce E. Reinhart Following Change of Plea Hearing [ECF No. 22]. On March

3, 2023, Magistrate Judge Reinhart held a Change of Plea hearing [ECF No. 20] during which 

Defendant pled guilty to Counts 1 and 7 of the Indictment [ECF No. 8] pursuant to a plea 

agreement and stipulated factual basis [ECF No. 21]. Magistrate Judge Reinhart thereafter issued 

a Report recommending that the Court accept Defendant’s guilty plea to Counts 1 and 7 of the 

Indictment, that the Court find Defendant to have freely and voluntarily entered his guilty plea, 

and that the Court adjudicate him guilty of Counts 1 and 7 [ECF No. 8]. No objections to the 

Report have been filed, and the time to do so has expired.

The Court has conducted a review of the record and finds no error in the Report. Therefore, 

it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. The Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 22] is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED. 

2. The guilty plea entered into by Defendant Doyle Cleare as to Counts 1 and 7 of the 

Indictment is ACCEPTED.

Case 9:22-cr-80180-AMC Document 34 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/20/2023 Page 1 of 2
CASE NO. 22-80180-CR-CANNON

3. Defendant Doyle Cleare is adjudicated guilty of Counts 1 and 7 of the Indictment. 

Count 1 charges him with knowingly encouraging and inducing an alien to enter the 

United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv) and (a)(1)(B)(iii) and 18 

U.S.C. § 2. Count 7 charges him with attempted reentry into the United States by a 

previously deported aggravated felon, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2) 

[ECF No. 8]. 

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Pierce, Florida, this 20th day of March

2023.

________________________________

AILEEN M. CANNON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

cc: counsel of record

Case 9:22-cr-80180-AMC Document 34 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/20/2023 Page 2 of 2
#### § 102-118.265 What is a prepayment audit?

Prepayment audit means a review of transportation documentation before payment to determine their validity, propriety, and conformity of rates with tariffs, quotations, agreements, contracts, or tenders. Prepayment auditing by your agency will detect and eliminate billing errors before payment (31 U.S.C. 3726).
#### JEHIEL GRIFFIN, Respondent, *v.*LEONARD P. WINNE, Appellant.

*Chitting timiber*— Injunction *to restrain*— not *granted for mere threats, unaccompanied try acts.*

Appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, entered upon the trial of this action by the court without a jury.

The action was brought to restrain the defendant from removing trees and cutting timber growing on lands owned by him, which the plaintiff claimed to be entitled to remove, by virtue of an agreement made with the defendant’s grantors.

The court at General Term said: “ The plaintiff claims a right to cut down timber on land now belonging to the defendant. By the judgment in this action the defendant is enjoined from cutting down such'timber himself. It does not appear that the defendant had, previously to the commencement of the action, cut any of this timber. If, as it would seem, he had drawn away timber cut by the plaintiff, there was a sufficient remedy by action at law. The defendant had *572threatened to sue the plaintiff if he should cut this timber. But as a general rule mere threats, unaccompanied by acts, do not warrant the extraordinary remedy of injunction.

There has been a tendency of late, as has been remarked in other cases decided in this court, to extend the remedy by injunction, and to apply it where the ordinary remedy of an action for damages was ample. We see no reason, in the present instance, if the plaintiff should be prevented from cutting the timber which he claims, or should in any way be deprived of it, why he might not be compensated sufficiently by an action for damages. There would be no difficulty in ascertaining the damages, and the defendant is shown to be responsible.

Furthermore, the plaintiff may, perhaps, hereafter, by some neglect, forfeit his rights under the contract. This might be a defense in the future to the defendant, if the plaintiff should attempt to cut the timber.

It is suggested that the action should be maintained to prevent a great number of actions for trespass. No action of that kind has yet been commenced. If such an action should be commenced, the parties might rest satisfied with the result and no similar action might ever be brought. There is no evidence, therefore, that numerous actions will be commenced.

For these reasons, we think the judgment should be reversed and a new trial granted, costs to abide the event.”

*J. W.*Ba/rmim, for the appellant. *BwrdÁtt & Brooks,*for the respondent.

Opinion

*per Cwriam.*

Present — Learned, P. J., and Bookes, J.; Boardman, J., not acting.

Judgment reversed, new trial granted, costs to abide event.
EXHIBIT 32.1


                        C.E.O. CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                   EXCHANGE ACT RULES 13a-14(b) AND 15d-14(b)


     In  connection  with  the Quarterly Report of American Consumers, Inc. (the
"Company")  on  Form  10-Q for the period ending February 25, 2006 as filed with
the  Securities  and  Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned  hereby  certifies,  pursuant  to  Exchange  Act Rules 13a-14(b) and
15d-14(b)  and  18  U.S.C.  Sec.  1350  (as  adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of  2002)  that  he  is  the Chief Executive Officer of the
Company  and  that:  (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 results of operations of the Company as of and for
the  periods  covered  in  the  Report.

/s/  Michael A. Richardson
-----------------------------------
Michael A. Richardson
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
American Consumers, Inc.


Date:  April 7, 2006
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 22-61668-CIV-SMITH

CAMDEN SUMMIT 

PARTNERSHIP, LP, 

Plaintiff,

vs. 

TANIFFA JEANLOUIS, 

 Defendant.

__________________________________/ 

ORDER AFFIRMING AND ADOPTING

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO DISTRICT JUDGE

This matter is before the Court on the United States Magistrate Judge’s Report [DE 4], in 

which the Magistrate Judge recommends that Defendant’s Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma 

Pauperis be denied and that the case be remanded to state court [DE 3]. No objections have been 

filed. Therefore, after reviewing the Report and Recommendation, the record, and given that 

neither party objects, it is 

ORDERED that: 

1. The Report and Recommendation to District Judge [DE 4] is AFFIRMED and

ADOPTED and incorporated by reference into this Court’s Order 

2. Defendant’s Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis [DE 3] is DENIED.

3. The case is REMANDED to the County Court of the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit

Florida. 

Case 0:22-cv-61668-RS Document 5 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2022 Page 1 of 2
2

4. This case is CLOSED.

DONE AND ORDERED in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, this 16th day of November 2022.

cc: Counsel of record

Case 0:22-cv-61668-RS Document 5 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2022 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 10.1


AMENDMENT TO “APPENDIX A” OF THE
ASTEC INDUSTRIES, INC.
SUPPLEMENTAL EXECUTIVE RETIREMENT PLAN




THIS AMENDMENT to “Appendix A” of the Astec Industries, Inc. Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan, as amended and restated as of January 1, 2008 (the “Plan”), is adopted by Astec Industries, Inc. (the “Company”), effective as of October 24, 2019.


WHEREAS, Article 2 of the Plan permits the Board of Directors of the Company (the “Board”) to designate participants in the Plan from time to time, whose names and effective dates of participation shall be set forth on Exhibit A to the Plan;


NOW, THEREFORE, the Company hereby amends “Appendix A” of the Plan in the form attached hereto, to update the same for changes in Plan participation approved by the Board, by action taken on October 24, 2019.


Except as amended herein, the Plan shall continue in full force and effect.


ASTEC INDUSTRIES, INC.


Date: October 24, 2019
By:/s/ Stephen C. Anderson
Name: Stephen C. Anderson
Title:   Secretary







	“Appendix A”

	Each Participant’s Date of Participation

	 	 
	Name of Participant
	Effective Dates of Participation

	Tim Gonigam
	August 1, 2000

	Stephen C. Anderson
	January 1, 2003

	David C. Silvious
	July 1, 2005

	Neil Peterson
	January 1, 2008

	Joe Cline
	February 1, 2008

	Chris Colwell
	May 31, 2011

	Robin Leffew
	August 1, 2011

	Matthew B. Haven
	January 1, 2013

	Jeff May
	October 1, 2013

	Tom Wilkey
	January 1, 2014

	Jeff Schwarz
	July 1, 2014

	John Irvine
	April 28, 2016

	Jaco Van Der Merwe
	October 1, 2016

	Scott Barker
	April 3, 2017

	Neil Whitworth
	May 30, 2017

	Michael G. Anderson
	July 7, 2017

	Jody Volner
	November 1, 2017

	Michael Norris
	January 1, 2018

	Robert Kilgore
	August 2, 2018

	Greg Renegar
	January 1, 2019

	Vince Trotta
	April 15, 2019

	Barry Ruffalo
	August 12, 2019

	Matthew Litchfield
	October 1, 2019

	Greg Oswald
	October 29, 2019
Reduced state funding for Lane Regional Air Protection Agency

Since mid

‐ way through the 2007

‐ 2009 biennium, revenues to the General Fund of the State of Oregon

have declined. In response, the state has reduced agency budgets through a variety of measures

including across the board mandatory unpaid furlough leave for state employees, wage and spending

freezes, eliminating normal budget increases for inflation and identifying specific work and associated

spending cuts to agency budgets. Below is a link to the analysis of the Oregon 2011

‐ 2013 Legislatively

Adopted budget published by the Legislative Fiscal Office: http://www.leg.state.or.us/comm/lfo/2011

‐

13%20LAB.pdf

For the 2011

‐ 2013 biennial budget, DEQ was required to provide the Legislature with General Fund cut

options. The Legislature reduced agency General Fund by approximately 24 percent overall. No

particular program was singled out for reductions. Air Quality’s General Fund was cut by 31 percent,

Water Quality’s by 31 percent and Land Quality by 44 percent, while General Fund for debt service

increased to meet debt repayment obligations. Attachment A provides a summary of the DEQ 2011

‐

2013 Legislatively Adopted Budget by program by fund type.

The DEQ Air Quality budget includes state General Fund support for LRAPA as a separate item, Special

Payments, in its biennial budget. As Air Quality is required to offer General Fund reductions in the

budget development process, a similar percentage of LRAPA General funding is also offered as a

reduction. Attachment B is the General Fund reduction list that DEQ submitted to the legislature.

Reduction #3 on the Attachment B list ($112,544 for the biennium), is a 31% reduction to LRAPA General

Fund support. Attachment C is the official Air Quality program budget for 2011

‐ 2013. The amounts that

affect LRAPA are highlighted in yellow.

DEQ’s budget also includes General Fund support for current and former communities that violate

National Ambient Air Quality Standards for particulate. The funding helps the communities to

implement woodstove curtailment efforts to attain and maintain compliance with national standards.

LRAPA receives a small amount of state General Fund from this funding; however, it is embedded in the

Air Quality Services and Supplies budget and cannot be identified separately. Reduction #4 in

Attachment B is a reduction of $76,105 to the $246,720 biennial funding for this work statewide.

Attachment D provides a summary of the amount of reduced state General Fund support for LRAPA in

fiscal year 2012. In total, DEQ reduced General Fund support to LRAPA by $66,601, $58,981 from direct

General Fund support and $7,620 from woodstove curtailment.