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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-6534

TERRY E. COOK,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

ELLEN BLAIR, Dr.,

Defendant - Appellee,

and

ARTHUR F. BEELER; MEDICAL STAFF, FMC Butner,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief

District Judge. (CA-02-609-5-BO)

Submitted: August 5, 2003 Decided: November 20, 2003

Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Terry E. Cook, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant

United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
2

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Terry E. Cook appeals the district court’s order denying

relief on his action filed under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents

of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). We have reviewed

the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for

the reasons stated by the district court. See Cook v. Blair, No.

CA-02-609-5-BO (E.D.N.C. Mar. 25, 2003). 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
Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA-2015-1014 Directorate Identifier: 2015-NE-14-AD

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If 

they do not, click (or Tab) into and then out of the changed cell.

Estimated Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Do not include oncondition costs here

Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, 

propeller, appliance)

Work-hours

(include 

access, testing, 

and close-up)

Labor 

cost 

(@$85/h

our)

Parts Cost Total Costs 

(labor + 

parts)

Number of 

U.S. 

Registered 

Products

Total Cost 

for U.S. Fleet

Inspection 0.5 $ 42.50 $ 42.50 22 $ 935.00

HPT Stage 1 disc $ 0.00 $123,370 $123,370.00 22 $2,714,140.0

0

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

The known number of products in compliance: 0

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $2,715,075

Costs covered under warranty (if known) $0

On-Condition Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Work-hours 

(include access, 

testing, and closeup)

Labor cost 

(@$85/hour)

Parts Cost Cost per Product

0 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table 

that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs):
Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant? 

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain for 

either a Yes or No answer.

YES NO 

Explanation: 

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for 

aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation?

YES* NO 

*Explanation:
#### § 60-4.6 Goals and timetables.

The Director, from time to time, shall issue goals and timetables for minority and female utilization which shall be based on appropriate workforce, demographic or other relevant data and which shall cover construction projects or construction contracts performed in specific geographical areas. The goals, which shall be applicable to each construction trade in a covered contractor's or subcontractor's entire workforce which is working in the area covered by the goals and timetables, shall be published as notices in the Federal Register, and shall be inserted by the contracting officers and applicants, as applicable, in the Notice required by 41 CFR 60-4.2. Covered construction contractors performing construction work in geographical areas where they do not have a Federal or federally assisted construction contract shall apply the minority and female goals established for the geographical area where the work is being performed.

[45 FR 65978, Oct. 3, 1980]
#### § 50-204.70 Compressed gases.

The in-plant handling, storage, and utilization of all compressed gases in cylinders, portable tanks, rail tankcars, or motor vehicle cargo tanks shall be in accordance with Compressed Gas Association Pamphlet P-1-1965.

[35 FR 1015, Jan. 24, 1970]
#### § 105-64.103 What is GSA's policy on collecting and using information in a system of records?

System managers must collect information that is used to determine your rights, benefits, or privileges under GSA programs directly from you whenever practical, and use the information only for the intended purpose(s).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
REGISTRANT'S JUNE 30, 1999 UNAUDITED BALANCE SHEET, INCOME STATEMENT AND CASH
FLOW STATEMENT, AND NOTES THERETO, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                   14,780,221
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                          0
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                       1,642,583
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                       489,783
<OTHER-ASSETS>                               1,038,306
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              17,950,893
<COMMON>                                     2,508,379
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                            0
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                          5,323,588
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>               7,831,967
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                         4,418,000
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                   0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                   94,000
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>               5,606,926
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>               17,950,893
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                    2,241,078
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                           102,727
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                   1,712,123
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                   1,814,850
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                        426,228
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                             214,624
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                 640,852
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                       225,603
<NET-INCOME>                                   415,249
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                  415,249
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                       311,524
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                            0<F1>
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                     (1,237,178)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      .27
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .26
<FN>
<F1>Not reported on an interim basis
</FN>


</TABLE>
050P16

#### State *ex rel.*Rebecca Aguirre v. Courts of Wilmington, North Carolina

Petitioner’s *Pro Se*Motion for Petition Requesting Supervisory Control Over the Inferior Courts of North Carolina by the North Carolina Supreme Court

Dismissed
Exhibit 13.1





CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Patrick Evans, Chief Executive Officer of Mountain Province Diamonds Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:





1.
the Annual Report on Form 20-F/A of the Company for the nine months ended December 31, 2009 (the “Annual Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





2.
the information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





By:
/s/ Patrick EvansName:
Patrick EvansTitle:
Chief Executive OfficerDate:
April 6, 2010








This written statement is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 20-F. A signed original of this statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.





This certification accompanies this Annual Report on Form 20-F pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"). Such
certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.
Agenda Pio Pico Energy Center Modeling Call

Cleveland Holladay to: Steve Hill, Roger Kohn, Gerardo Rios, 

Julie Walters

11/02/2011 11:51 AM

Bcc: Cleveland.Holladay

Here is the Agenda for today's Modeling Call. AgendaPioPico110211 o110211.docx

Thanks,

Cleve Holladay

Phone 415-947-4140

U.S. EPA, Region 9, Air Quality Analysis Office (AIR-7) | 75 Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, DC

Anoka Air, Inc., et al Complainant,


### v. FAADocketNo.16-11-12 Metropolitan Airports Commission Respondent.

NOTICE OF EXTENSION OF TIME
This matter is before the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) based on the abovereferenced complaint, filed in accordance with FAA Rules of Practicefor Federally-Assisted AirportEnforcementProceedings, 14 CFR, part 16. Pursuant to 14 CFR, part 16, subpart B, the date bywhich the Director's Determinationwill be issued in this matter is hereby extended to October 14, 2016 An extension oftime is necessary and appropriate for a fair and complete determination in this case.

illis, Director Airpo Compliance and

Management Analysis ATE 1CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFYthat onAugust 22,2016, I caused to be placed inthe United States mail (first class mail, postage paid) a true copy ofthe Notice ofExtension ofTime addressed to:
Counsel for Complainant: Steven M. Taber, Esq. Taber Law Group 13 Atlanta Irvine, CA 92620 Facsimile: (714) 707-4282 Counsel for Respondent: Thomas W. Anderson, Esq. General Counsel Metropolitan Airports Commission 6040 28thAvenue South Minneapolis, MN 55450 Facsimile: (612) 726-5306 Pablo 0. Niiesch, Esq. Spiegel & McDiannid LLP 1333 NewHampshire Ave., NW Washington, DC 20036 Facsimile: (202) 393-2866 Copy to: FAA Part 16 Airport Proceedings Docket FAA Office ofAirport Compliance and Management Analysis, AC0-100

audia Roberts Office ofAirport Compliance

and Management Analysis
No. 11-62.

#### Cazares et al. *v.*Cosby.

Ct. App. Utah. Certio-rari denied.
399P15

#### State v. Devon Armond Gayles

1. Def’s *Pro Se*Petition for *Writ of Certiorari*to Review Order of Superior Court of Buncombe County

1. Dismissed

2. Def’s *Pro Se*Motion to Appoint Counsel

2. Dismissed as moot
EXHIBIT 11



                                    KSW, INC.
                     STATEMENT REGARDING COMPUTATION OF NET
                            EARNINGS (LOSS) PER SHARE

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                         Year Ended                Year Ended                Year Ended
                                                      December 31, 2003         December 31, 2002         December 31, 2001
                                                      -----------------         -----------------         -----------------
<S>                                                  <C>                       <C>                       <C>
Net earnings (loss)                                      $  815,000               $(2,265,000)               $(1,477,000)
                                                         ==========               ============               ============

Earnings (loss) per share - basic:
   Weighted average shares outstanding
   during the year                                        5,470,311                  5,470,311                  5,470,311
                                                         ==========               ============               ============

Earnings (loss) per common share - basic                 $      .15               $      (.41)               $      (.27)
                                                         ==========               ============               ============

Earnings (loss) per share - diluted:
  Weighted average shares outstanding
  during the year                                         5,470,311                  5,470,311                  5,470,311

Effect of stock option dilution                                   -                          -                          -
                                                         ----------               ------------               ------------

Total shares outstanding for purposes
   of calculating diluted earnings
   per share                                              5,470,311                  5,470,311                  5,470,311
                                                         ==========               ============               ============

Earnings (loss) per common shares
   and common share equivalent - diluted                 $      .15               $      (.41)               $      (.27)
                                                         ==========               ============               ============

</TABLE>
250 E Street, SW

Washington, D.C. 20525

202-606-5000 | 800-942-2677 | TTY 800-833-3722

To: Deborah Jeffrey

Inspector General 

From: Lori Giblin/s/

Chief Risk Officer 

Subject: High-Dollar Overpayments for the quarter ending June 30, 2017 – Revised to 

include susceptible program names

Date: May 8, 2018

The purpose of this document is to comply with the High-Dollar overpayments' reporting 

requirements in Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-123, Appendix C. 

Appendix C requires agency heads to submit reports quarterly on High-Dollar 

overpayments to the Office of Inspector General.

The Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) identifies high-dollar 

overpayments through improper payments testing, which will be completed in Q4 of 

FY2017 and Q1 of FY2018. Therefore, during the reporting period covering 4/01/2017 

through 06/30/2017, CNCS has not identified any high-dollar overpayments in its four 

susceptible programs: AmeriCorps State and National, the Foster Grandparent Program 

(FGP), the Retired and Senior Volunteer Program (RSVP), and the Senior Companion 

Program (SCP). 

This report upholds the Corporation’s commitment to carrying out the Executive Order’s 

goals of eliminating payment errors. Reducing improper payments remains vital for the 

Corporation. We continue to monitor programs in order to reduce the amount of 

overpayments.
Editorial Note on Part 1
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 1 appear at 63 FR 54077, Oct. 8, 1998.

§ 1.1121 Billing procedures. ( a ) The fees required for the International Telecommunications Settlements (§ 1.1103 of this subpart), Accounting and Audits Field Audits and Review of Arrest Audits (§ 1.1106 of this subpart) should not be paid with the filing or submission of the request. The fees required for requests for Special Temporary Authority (*see* generally §§ 1.1102, 1.1104, 1.1106 & 1.1107 of this subpart) that the applicant believes is of an urgent or emergency nature and are filed directly with the appropriate Bureau or Office should not be paid with the filing of the request with that Bureau or Office.
( b ) In these cases, the appropriate fee will be determined by the Commission and the filer will be billed for that fee. The bill will set forth the amount to be paid, the date on which payment is due, and the address to which the payment should be submitted. *See also* § 1.1113 of this subpart.
[55 FR 19172, May 8, 1990, as amended at 58 FR 68541, Dec. 28, 1993. Redesignated and amended at 59 FR 30998, June 16, 1994. Redesignated at 60 FR 5326, Jan. 27, 1995, as amended at 65 FR 49763, Aug. 15, 2000; 67 FR 67337, Nov. 5, 2002; 69 FR 41177, July 7, 2004. Redesignated and amended at 74 FR 3445, Jan. 21, 2009]
Exhibit
10.10


 
















借 款 合 同


Loan contract


甲方(借款人):杭州新林果业有限公司


Party A (the borrower):
Hangzhou Xinlin Fruits Co., Ltd


乙方(贷款人):杭州野之缘农业开发有限公司


Party B (lender): Hangzhou
Yezhiyuan Agriculture Development Co., Ltd.


甲乙双方就借款事宜,在平等自愿,协商一致的基础上达成如下协议,以资双方共同遵守



Party A and Party B agree on the following matters and sign the contract.


借款利息:无息,借款期限:一年:还款方式:现金支付。


Interest: no interest.
Term of the loans: one year. Payment: cash 


乙方贷给甲方人民币(大写)陆百柒拾五万元整,于2016年12月31日前交付甲方:


Party B grant party A RMB loan 6.75 million
Yuan, delivery before December 31, 2016. 


 违约责任  


Liability for breach of contract


1.
借款方的违约责任


The borrower's liability


借款方不按合同规定的用途使用借款,贷款方有权收回部分或者全部贷款,对违约时用的部分,
按银行规定的利率加收罚息。


The borrower need to use the
loan according to the purposes specified in the contract, the lender shall have the right to withdraw all or part of the loan.
Additional penalty rates will be applied if party A fails to obey the contract.


(1)
借款方如逾期不还借款,贷款方有权追回借款,并从到期日起付日息1%


if the borrower fails to repay
the loan in time, the lender shall have the right to recover the loans, and 1% daily interest will be charged after the maturity
date.


 


(2)
借款方使用借款造成损失浪费或者利用借款合同进行违法活动的,贷款方应追回贷款本息,有关单位对直接责任人应追究行政和经济责任,情节严重的,由司法机关追究刑事责任。


Inappropriate and illegal
usage of this loan and caused loss, the lender shall recover the loan principal and interest, the relevant person should be held
directly responsible for administrative and economic responsibility.






    	 	1	 



    	 



    

 


2.贷款方的违约责任


Liability for breach
of contract


(1)
贷款方未按期提供贷款,应按违约数额和延期天数,付给借款方违约金。违约金数额的计算与加收借款方的罚息计算相同。


if the lender fails to provide
the loan on schedule, the default penalty shall be paid to the borrower according to the amount of default and the number of days
of delay. The penalty will be calculated as the borrower’s penalty.


(2)利用借款合同进行违法活动的,追究行政和经济责任,情节严重的,由司法机关追究刑事责任。


if the loan contract is used for illegal
activities, the administrative and economic responsibilities shall be beared.


 


争议解决方式,各方协商解决,协商不成,提交乙方所在地人民法院判决。


 Disputes arising from the contract
shall be settled through consultation between the parties, or else can attribute to local authorities.


本合同自签署之日起生效,本合同一式两份,双方各执一份,合同文本具有同等法律效力


This contract shall come into force as
of the date of signing, this contract shall be in two copies, each party holds one copy, and the contract shall have the same legal
effect


 


 


甲方:杭州新林果业有限公司 


签订日期:2016年10月1日



/s/ Hangzhou Xinlin
Fruits Co., Ltd


 
乙方 : 杭州野之缘农业开发有限公司


签订日期:2016年10月1日


/s/ Hangzhou Yezhiyuan Agriculture Development Co., Ltd.


Date of signature: date of signing in
Oct 1, 2016












 


2
Exhibit 10.2


 


		ENERGY

        NORTHWEST
	T.
        N. Johnson

        Contracts

        P.O.
        Box 968, PE 10

        Richland,
        WA 99352-0968

        Ph.
        509-377-8640 Fax. 377-4357 TNJohnson@energy-northwest.com



 


 






  


 


CONTRACT MODIFICATION


 





	Issued by:	T.N. Johnson / R.A. Shaft Jr.
	 	 
	LESSEE:	ISORAY MEDICAL, INC.
	 	350 Hills Street, Suite 106 
	 	Richland, WA 99354




 





	Contract Number:	X-40403
	Modification Number:	22
	Modification Date:	November 1, 2016










 


		1.	DESCRIPTION OF MODIFICATION



 


The subject Contract is herein amended to incorporate
the extension of the current three year lease term period from May 1, 2016 to April 30, 2019 to extend the contract term to five
years.


 


		•	ARTICLE
2— TERM



 


Effective November 1, 2016, the contract term
is now extended to a five year term with a completion date of April 30, 2021.


 


		2.	EXECUTION



 


The completion date, Contract price and all other
terms, covenants and conditions of the above-referenced Contract, except as duly modified by this and previous amendments, if any,
remain in full force and effect.


 




     


     


    

ENERGY NORTHWEST

CONTRACT MODIFICATION (Cont'd)

Contract Number: X-40403

Modification Number 22


 





Signatures


 


LESSEE


ISORAY MEDICAL, INC.


 


	 	Signature:   	/s/ Thomas LaVoy	 
	 	Name:	Thomas C. LaVoy	 
	 	Title:	CEO	 
	 	Date:	11/15/16	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	Signature:	/s/ Brien Ragle	 
	 	Name:	Brien L. Ragle	 
	 	Title:	CFO	 
	 	Date:	11/15/16	 


 


LESSOR


Energy Northwest


 


	 	Signature:  	/s/ Richard Shaff	 
	 	Name:	Richard A. Shaff, Jr.	 
	 	Title:	Contracts Supervisor	 
	 	Date:	11/15/16	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	Signature:	/s/ James W. Gaston	 
	 	Name:	James W. Gaston	 
	 	Title:	General Manager, Energy Services and Development	 
	 	Date:	11/15/16	 


 


cc: AR (PE60)
1

The Honorable Mark W. Bennett, Chief Judge, United States District Court

for the Northern District of Iowa.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 01-1406

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Northern District of Iowa.

Eduardo Rodriguez-Rodriguez, also *

known as Eddie Randy Rodriguez, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellant. *

___________

 Submitted: October 4, 2001

 Filed: October 10, 2001

___________

Before BYE, RICHARD S. ARNOLD, and BEAM, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Eduardo Rodriguez-Rodriguez pleaded guilty to illegally reentering the United

States after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. The district court1

 sentenced

Rodriguez-Rodriguez to 96 months imprisonment and 3 years supervised release. On

appeal, his attorney has filed a brief and moved to withdraw under Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).
-2-

Counsel argues that the district court should have granted a downward

departure; however, counsel did not move for one below, and we conclude that the

district court did not plainly err in declining to grant a departure sua sponte. See

United States v. Montanye, 996 F.2d 190, 192 (8th Cir. 1993) (en banc).

Having found no nonfrivolous issues for appeal upon our independent review

pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we affirm the judgment of the

district court, and we grant counsel's motion to withdraw. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.