alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### *Bell v. The Commonwealth.

October Term, 1850,

Richmond.

(Absent Cabekl, P., and Bbooke, J.)

Appellate Jurisdiction—Criminal Cases—Writ of Error— Habeas Corpus.—The Court of appeals has no jurisdiction to grant a writ of error in a criminal case, or to a judgment upon an application for a writ of *habeas corpus.*

Bell being confined in the jail of the county of Buckingham under a charge of larceny, applied to the Judge of the Circuit court of that county for a habeas corpus, and asked for his discharge, on the ground that he had not been brought to trial for three terms of the Court after he had been sent on for trial by the examining Court. The Circuit Judge upon a hearing of the case, refused to discharge the prisoner; and he thereupon applied to this Court for a writ of error to the judgment of the Court below.

Irvine for the applicant.

*82ALLEN, J.,'

delivered the opinion of the Court.

The Court is of opinion, that as by the act concerning the writ of habeas corpus, ch. 156, page 613, Code of 1850, no provision is made giving to this Court jurisdiction to grant a writ of error to a judgment upon an application for a habeas corpus, and as by the act concerning appeals and writs of error and supersedeas, Code of 1850, p. 682, the jurisdiction to grant a writ of error or supersedeas is confined to judgments in civil cases, this Court has no jurisdiction to grant a writ of error in a criminal case.
#### § 102-36.435 How do we identify Munitions List Items (MLIs)/Commerce Control List Items (CCLIs) requiring demilitarization?

You identify MLIs/CCLIs requiring demilitarization by the demilitarization code that is assigned to each MLI or CCLI. The code indicates the type and scope of demilitarization and/or export controls that must be accomplished, when required, before issue to any non-DOD activity. For a listing of the codes and additional guidance on DEMIL procedures see DOD Demilitarization and Trade Security Control Manual, DOD 4160.21-M-1.
No. 10-1367.

#### Zahl *v.*New Jersey Board of Medical Examiners et al.

Super. Ct. N. J., App. Div. Certiorari denied.
Resumé 

Cover letter 

Confidence 

Job hunting? 

Now you can check your employment eligibility before your next employer does. 

Self Check gives you the confidence of knowing your records are in order. 

It’s fast. It’s easy. And it’s free.

VISIT USCIS.GOV/SELFCHECK. A SERVICE OF 
# Comments on: 22-1253: LKQ CORPORATION v. GM GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY OPERATIONS LLC [OPINION], Nonprecedential
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-7906

NICHOLAS WARNER JONES,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

WILLIAM L. SMITH, Warden; RICHARD A. LANHAM,

SR., Commissioner; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE

STATE OF MARYLAND,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-93-

2364-L)

Submitted: April 16, 1998 Decided: April 28, 1998

Before WILKINS and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Nicholas Warner Jones, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr.,

Attorney General, Diane Elizabeth Keller, Assistant Attorney

General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying

relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1994) (current

version at 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998)). We have

reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the

recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court.

Jones v. Smith, No. CA-93-2364-L (D. Md. Nov. 26, 1996). See Lindh

v. Murphy, 521 U.S. ___, 1997 WL 338568 (U.S. June 23, 1997) (No.

96-6298). 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
Ground Based Observation

Onslow County PIC will operate the DJI Inspire 1 using the C1remote control. This remote 

control is configured with an attached Apple iPad Air for visual reference. This platform gives 

the PIC the maximum viewing experience. The operating frequencies of this remote are listed 

below.

The PIC has a real time visual link to the UAS through the use of the Apple Ipad. Altitude, 

airspeed, direction, and location on a real time map are available to the PIC through this 

platform. 

Working in conjunction with an observer no less than .05 miles away and a site safety manager, 

the PIC is able to concentrate on the screen. The ground based safety team and observers will 

be in communication with each other through the use of cell phones. The safety manager will 

also have a two way radio and the frequencies for all of the local base operations and ATC 

towers in the area.

Operating Frequency

5.725~5.825 GHz

2.400~2.483 GHz
EXHIBIT
32.1




CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Emtec, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q
for the period ending February 28, 2009 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Dinesh R. Desai, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as
adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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 result of operations of the Company.




/s/
      Dinesh R. DesaiChief
      Executive OfficerApril
      14, 2009
No. 11-9416.

#### Vaughn *v.*United States.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
No. 11-8689.

#### Walker *v.*California.

Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.
#### § 102-82.20 To whom do “we,” “you,” and their variants refer?

Unless otherwise indicated, use of pronouns “we,” “you,” and their variants throughout this part refer to an Executive agency. Refer to part 102-71 of this chapter for the definition of Executive agency.
238P15

#### State v. Grady Lee Nicholson

1. Def’s *Pro Se*Motion for PDR

1. Denied

2. Defs *Pro Se*Petition for *Writ of Certiorari*to Review Decision of COA

2. Denied

3. Defs *Pro Se*Motion to Proceed *In Forma Pauperis*

3. Allowed

4. Defs Pro *Se*Motion to Appoint Counsel

4. Dismissed as moot
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-7906
NICHOLAS WARNER JONES, Petitioner - Appellant, versus WILLIAM L. SMITH, Warden; RICHARD A. LANHAM, SR., Commissioner; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-93- 2364-L) Submitted: April 16, 1998 Decided: April 28, 1998 Before WILKINS and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Nicholas Warner Jones, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Diane Elizabeth Keller, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1994) (current version at 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998)). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate j udge and find no reversibleerror. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Jones v. Smith , No. CA-93-2364-L (D. Md. Nov. 26, 1996). See Lindh v. Murphy , 521 U.S. ___, 1997 WL 338568 (U.S. June 23, 1997) (No. 96-6298). 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
<PAGE>


                                                                   EXHIBIT 24.13


                                POWER OF ATTORNEY



         KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned hereby constitutes
and appoints Mark A. Kopser and John J. Wellik, and each of them, his true and
lawful attorneys-in-fact, with full power of substitution and resubstitution,
for him and in his name, place and stead, to sign on his behalf, as a director
or officer, or both, as the case may be, of United Surgical Partners
International, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Corporation"), the
Corporation's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003,
and to sign any or all amendments to such Form 10-K, and to file the same, with
all exhibits thereto, and other documents in connection therewith, with the
Securities and Exchange Commission, granting unto said attorneys-in-fact, and
each of them with or without the others, full power and authority to do and
perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in and
about the premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as he might or could do
in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that each of said
attorneys-in-fact or its substitute or substitutes may lawfully do or cause to
be done by virtue hereof.




                                                /s/ Joel T. Allison
                                                --------------------------------
                                                Joel T. Allison

                                                February 18, 2004
#### § 102-81.5 What does this part cover?

This part covers physical security in and at nonmilitary federally owned and leased facilities and grounds under the jurisdiction, custody, or control of the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA), including those facilities and grounds that have been delegated by the Administrator of General Services. *Federal facility* means all or any part of any federally owned or leased building, physical structure or associated support infrastructure (*e.g.,* parking facilities and utilities) that is under the jurisdiction, custody, or control of GSA. *Federal grounds* mean all or any part of any area outside a Federal facility that is under the jurisdiction, custody, or control of GSA.
Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 120 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/10/2023 Page 1 of 1
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 3 (Wednesday, January 5, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 547]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-160]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Office of the Secretary


Aviation Proceedings, Agreements filed during the week ending 
December 24, 1999

    The following Agreements were filed with the Department of 
Transportation under the provisions of 49 U.S.C. Sections 412 and 414. 
Answers may be filed within 21 days of date of filing.
    Docket Number: OST-99-6694.
    Date Filed: December 21, 1999.
    Parties: Members of the International Air Transport Association.
    Subject:
PSC/Reso/101 dated November 17, 1999
Expedited Resos and Recommended Practices r1-11
Intended effective date: as early as December 31, 1999.
Andrea M. Jenkins,
Federal Register Liaison.
[FR Doc. 00-160 Filed 1-4-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-62-P
# Comments on: 2017-2537: United Technologies Corp. v. General Electric Company
#### § 102-75.685 Who is responsible for enforcing compliance with the terms and conditions of the transfer of property used for public park or recreation purposes?

The Secretary of the Interior is responsible for enforcing compliance with the terms and conditions of transfer. The Secretary of the Interior is also responsible for reforming, correcting, or amending any transfer instrument; granting releases; and for recapturing any property following the provisions of 40 U.S.C. 550(b). These actions are subject to the approval of the head of the disposal agency. DOI must notify the head of the disposal agency of its intent to take or recapture the property. The notice must identify the property affected and describe in detail the proposed action, including the reasons for the proposed action.
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18. U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Patapsco Bancorp, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), the undersigned certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as added by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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
period covered by the Report.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



By:

/s/ Michael J. DeeName:

Michael J. DeeTitle:

President and Chief Executive OfficerBy:

/s/ William C. Wiedel, Jr.Name:

William C. Wiedel, Jr.Title:

Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer


Date: September 28, 2010
§ 241.2 Stations and branches. ( a ) *Description.* ( 1 ) Stations are established within the corporate limits or boundary, and branches are established outside the corporate limits or boundary of the city, town, or village in which the main post office is located. Stations and branches may be designated by number, letter or name. As a general rule, branches are named.
( 2 ) Stations and branches transact registry and money order business, sell postage supplies, and accept matter for mailing. Delivery service, post office boxes, and other services may be provided when directed by the postmaster.
( 3 ) Stations and branches, except nonpersonnel rural stations and branches, are designated as independent when registered and other mail is received or dispatched without passing through the main office.
( b ) *Classification* — ( 1 ) *Classified.* Operated by postal employees in quarters provided by the Federal Government.
( 2 ) *Contract.* Operated under contract by persons who are not Federal Government employees. Persons operating contract stations and branches are independent contractors and neither the contractors nor any person employed by them to assist in the conduct of contract stations or branches shall be employees of the Federal Government for any purpose whatsoever.
(39 U.S.C. 401)
[36 FR 4764, Mar. 12, 1971]
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-22-00347-CV

Y. A., Appellant

v.

Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, Appellee

FROM THE 345TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY 

NO. D-1-GM-20-002618, THE HONORABLE CATHERINE MAUZY, JUDGE PRESIDING

O R D E R

PER CURIAM

The reporter’s record in this appeal was originally due to be filed on June 16, 

2022. To date, the reporter’s record has not been filed.

Any extensions of time granted for the filing of the reporters’ records may not 

exceed 30 days cumulatively. See Tex. R. App. P. 28.4(b)(2). Accordingly, Leah Hayes is 

hereby ordered to file the reporter’s record in this case on or before July 18, 2022. If the record 

is not filed by that date, Hayes may be required to show cause why she should not be held in 

contempt of court.

It is ordered on July 14, 2022.

Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Triana and Smith
15 December 2015

247P15

#### The Estate of Robert Eugene Tipton, Jr., by and through his Ancillary Administrator Deborah Dunklin Tipton v. High Point University, Delta Sigma Phi Fraternity, Inc., Jeffrey A. Karpovich, Michael Qubein, and Marshall Jefferson

1. Pit’s PDR under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31 (COA14-1286)

1. Denied

2. Motion to Admit Douglas G. Fierberg *Pro Hoc Vice*

2. Allowed

3. Motion to Admit Douglas C. Melcher *Pro Hoc Vice*

3. Allowed

Martin, C.J.,

recused
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. RP00-310-001]

Take notice that on June 14, 2000, Discovery Gas Transmission LLC (Discovery) tendered for filing a Request for Waiver of section 4 of its FT-1, FT-2, and IT Rate Schedules related to the recovery mechanism for lost and unaccounted for gas.

Discovery states that the request for a waiver is intended to supplement Discovery's May 31, 2000, filing in this proceeding to retain a .5 percent retention rate for lost and unaccounted for gas during the one-year period commencing July 1, 2000.

Any person desiring to protest said filing should file a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Section 385.211 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests must be filed on or before June 28, 2000. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www/​ferc.fed.us/​online/​rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-16130  Filed 6-26-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Record of Di scussion Docket No . FAA- Dir ectorat e Id en tifi er: - AD With whom outside the FAA has this AD action been discussed (i.e., Design Approval Holder, manufacturer, ATA, NBAA, RAA, AOPA, ALPA, GAMA, etc)?

ORGANIZATION PERSON CONTAC TED DATE TOP I CS DISCUSSED Cess na Engineering 9 /2/20 15 En gineering evaluati ons, need for ICA , completion date for r epair of aft canted bulkh ead

Othe r / Additional Information: FAA ACO Airframe g r oup has been work in g w i th Cessna eng ineerin g s in ce 9 Oct 20 14 .
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-25-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-26-1996
<CASH>                                           20577
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    45055
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     558727
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                639979
<PP&E>                                           91597
<DEPRECIATION>                                   27919
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  708449
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           526544
<BONDS>                                          39565
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           205
<OTHER-SE>                                       81035
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    708449
<SALES>                                        1454650
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               1475111
<CGS>                                          1056299
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  1056299
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                406874
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               15318
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (2933)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (870)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (2063)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (2063)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.10)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.10)
        

</TABLE>
§ 302-12.2 Under what conditions may I participate in my agency's homesale program? You may participate in your agency's homesale program, through its RSC contract, blanket purchase agreement, task order, or other formal arrangement (for the remainder of this part, all of these will be referred to as the contract with the RSC) provided you meet all of the following conditions: ( a ) You are authorized to relocate;
( b ) Your relocation includes at least one residence transaction;
( c ) You have signed a relocation service agreement;
( d ) Your agency authorizes you to use a RSC with which your agency has a contract;
( e ) Your residence is within RSC contract scope for type, size, condition, and other contractual requirements;
( f ) You meet all conditions established by this Chapter for the services that the RSC will provide to you; and
( g ) You have signed an agreement with your agency to enter the agency's homesale program and to abide by all terms of the agency's contract with the RSC (*see* § 302-12.4 for contract term examples).
[FTR Amdt. 2011-01, 76 FR 18343, Apr. 1, 2011]
§ 105-8.171 Complaints against an occupant agency. ( a ) Upon notification by an occupant agency that it has received a complete complaint alleging that the agency's program is inaccessible because existing facilities under GSA's control are not accessible and usable by individuals with handicaps, GSA shall be jointly responsible with the agency for resolving the complaint and shall participate in making findings of fact and conclusions of law in prescribing and implementing appropriate remedies for each violation found.
( b ) GSA shall make reasonable efforts to follow the time frames for complaint resolution that go into effect under the notifying occupant agency's compliance procedures when it receives a complete complaint.
( c ) Receipt of a copy of the complete complaint by GSA shall constitute notification to GSA for purposes of § 105-8.171(a).
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

October 4, 2016

No. 04-15-00698-CR

James GLESSNER,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 25th Judicial District Court, Guadalupe County, Texas

Trial Court No. 13-1379-CR-C

The Honorable William Old, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Appellant’s pro se motion for access to appellate record is hereby granted. 

_________________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

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

court on this 4th day of October, 2016.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court