alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24

- 6196

MARCUS ANTONIO SATTERFIELD , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. HOLLIE MCCADDAMS, ADA IN SUPERIOR COURTS ROXBORO NC PERSON COUNTY SUED IN THEIR INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY; MERILYN P. NEWELL, MAYOR OF ROXBORO CITY OF ROXBORO SUED IN THEIR OFFICIAL CAPACITY; JOSH STEIN, ATTORNEY GENERALS COMMISSIONER SUED IN THEIR INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY; ROXBORO ATTORNEY GENERALS; ADMINISTRATORS OF NORTH CAROLINA C OUNTY COMMISSIONER , Defendants

- Appellees

.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina , at Greensboro

. William L. Osteen, Jr

. , District Judge. ( 1:23

- cv - 01071

- WO

- JLW )

Submitted : July 30, 2024 Decided: August 2, 2024

Before NIEMEYER, AGEE , and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Marcus Antonio Satterfield , Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 24-6196 Doc: 9 Filed: 08/02/2024 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM: Marcus Antonio Satterfield appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing Satterfield’s civil complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). Limiting our review to the issues raised in Satterfield’s informal brief, we have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b); Jackson v. Lightsey , 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues prese rved in that brief.”). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Satterfield v. Mccaddams , No. 1:23

- cv - 01071

- WO

- JLW (M.D.N.C. Feb. 9, 2024). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED USCA4 Appeal: 24-6196 Doc: 9 Filed: 08/02/2024 Pg: 2 of 2
### Document Number FAA-2012-0593

Contacts. With whom outside the FAA has this proposal been discussed?

Organization Person Contacted Date Response

National Business Aircraft Association Eli Cotti 11/4/11

Regional Airline Association 11/4/11

Aircraft Owners & Pilots Association Robert Hackman 11/4/11

ATA Joe White 11/4/11
No. 11-8899.

#### Viray *v.*Smith, Warden, et al.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
EXHIBIT  99.2
                                  HIV-VAC, INC.
                            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 HIV-VAC, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-QSB/A for the period ending March 31, 2000, as filed with the  Securities and
Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, Sally Del Principe,
the Chief  Financial  Officer of the  Company,  hereby  certify,  pursuant to 18
U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted  pursuant to ss. 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/ Sally Del Principe
                                                     ----------------------
                                                     Sally Del Principe
                                                     Chief Financial Officer


October 22, 2002





                                       20
§ 80.275 Technical Requirements for Class A Automatic Identification System (AIS) equipment. ( a ) Prior to submitting a certification application for a Class A AIS device, the following information must be submitted in duplicate to the Commandant (G-PSE), U.S. Coast Guard, 2100 2nd Street, SW., Washington, DC 20593-0001: ( 1 ) The name of the manufacturer or grantee and the model number of the AIS device;
( 2 ) Copies of the test report and test data obtained from the test facility showing that the device complies with the environmental and operational requirements identified in § 80.1101.
( b ) After reviewing the information described in paragraph (a) of this section, the U.S. Coast Guard will issue a letter stating whether the AIS device satisfies all of the requirements specified in § 80.1101.
( c ) A certification application for an AIS device submitted to the Commission must contain a copy of the U.S. Coast Guard letter stating that the device satisfies all of the requirements specified in § 80.1101, a copy of the technical test data, and the instruction manual(s).
[69 FR 64673, Nov. 8, 2004, as amended at 74 FR 5125, Jan. 29, 2009]
126P15

#### Johnny L. Stoutamire v. Daniel Bailey, in his individual and official capacity as Sheriff of Mecklenburg County, and Ohio Casualty Insurance Company

Pit’s PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31 (COA14-322)

Denied
§ 90.1021 Definitions concerning competitive bidding process. ( a ) *Scope.* The definitions in this section apply to §§ 90.1001 through 90.1025, unless otherwise specified in those sections.
( b ) *Small and very small business.* ( 1 ) A *small business* is an entity that, together with its affiliates and controlling interests, has average gross revenues that are not more than $15 million for the preceding three years.
( 2 ) A *very small business* is an entity that, together with its affiliates and controlling interests, has average gross revenues that are not more than $3 million for the preceding three years.
[62 FR 15999, Apr. 3, 1997, as amended at 67 FR 46376, July 9, 2002; 68 FR 43001, July 21, 2003]
§ 80.322 Form of acknowledgement. ( a ) The acknowledgement of receipt of a radiotelegraph distress message is transmitted in the following form: ( 1 ) The distress signal SOS;
( 2 ) The call sign of the station sending the distress message, sent three times;
( 3 ) The word DE;
( 4 ) The call sign of the station acknowledging receipt, sent three times;
( 5 ) The group RRR;
( 6 ) The message signal SOS.
( b ) The acknowledgement of receipt of a radiotelephone distress message is transmitted in the following form: ( 1 ) The distress signal MAYDAY;
( 2 ) The call sign or other identification of the station sending the distress message, spoken three times;
( 3 ) The words THIS IS;
( 4 ) The call sign or other identification of the station acknowledging receipt, spoken three times;
( 5 ) The word RECEIVED;
( 6 ) The distress signal MAYDAY.
Editorial Note on Part 74
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 74 appear at 64 FR 4055, Jan. 27, 1999.

§ 74.551 Equipment changes. ( a ) Modifications may be made to an existing authorization in accordance with §§ 1.929 and 1.947 of this chapter.
( b ) Permissible changes in equipment operating in the bands 18.3-18.58, 18.76-18.82 GHz and 19.1-19.16 GHz. Notwithstanding other provisions of this section, licensees of stations that remain co-primary under the provisions of § 74.502(c) may not make modifications to their systems that increase interference to satellite earth stations, or result in a facility that would be more costly to relocate.
[28 FR 13716, Dec. 14, 1963, as amended at 38 FR 6827, Mar. 13, 1973; 47 FR 54448, Dec. 3, 1982; 49 FR 7130, Feb. 27, 1984; 50 FR 48599, Nov. 26, 1985; 58 FR 19775, Apr. 16, 1993; 61 FR 4368, Feb. 6, 1996; 65 FR 54172, Sept. 7, 2000; 68 FR 12768, Mar. 17, 2003; 68 FR 16967, Apr. 8, 2003; 68 FR 20225, Apr. 24, 2003; 69 FR 43772, July 22, 2004]
I

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4909

To amend the Elwha River Ecosystem and Fisheries Restoration Act to

provide greater flexibility in the expenditure of funds, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

AUGUST 5, 1994

Mr. DICKS (for himself, Mr. MILLER of California, and Mr. SWIFT) introduced

the following bill; which was referred jointly to the Committees on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, Natural Resources, and Energy and Commerce

A BILL

To amend the Elwha River Ecosystem and Fisheries Restoration Act to provide greater flexibility in the expenditure

of funds, and for other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. ELWHA RIVER ECOSYSTEM AND FISHERIES

4 RESTORATION EXPENDITURES.

5 Section 9 of the Elwha River Ecosystem and Fish6 eries Restoration Act (Public Law 102–495; 106 Stat.

7 3178) is amended—
2

•HR 4909 IH

1 (1) by striking ‘‘for expenditure through the

2 Assistant Secretary for Fish, Wildlife, and Parks’’;

3 and

4 (2) by striking ‘‘for expenditure through the

5 National Marine Fisheries Service’’.

Æ
AD Economic Evaluation

Docket No. FAA-2015-0669 Directorate ID: 2013-SW-038-AD

Helicopter Model: Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH Model MBB-BK 117 A-1, A-3, A-4, 

B-1, B-2, C-1, and C-2 Helicopters

Number of Helicopters (U.S. Operators): 441 Helicopters in the US Registry.

Reason: The actions of this AD are intended to detect corrosion, a crack, or a scratch in the N2 

control arm, which could lead to failure of the N2 control arm, a drop in rotor speed, and 

subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

Costs:

Parts per Helicopter $2,743 for N2 control arm replacement for Model 

MBB-BK 117 A-1, A-3, A-4, B-1, B-2, and C-1 

helicopters

$4,500 for N2 control arm replacement for Model 

MBB-BK 117 C-2 helicopters

Labor per Helicopter

(1 work-hour x $85/workhour for the inspection)

(4 work-hour x $85/workhour for N2 control arm 

repair)

(3 work-hour x $85/workhour for N2 control arm 

replacement)

$85 per inspection cycle

$340

$255

Other (Explain)

Total Cost per Helicopter $85 per inspection cycle

$340 for repairing the N2 control arm

$2,998 for N2 control arm replacement for Model 

MBB-BK 117 A-1, A-3, A-4, B-1, B-2, and C-1 

helicopters

$4,755 for N2 control arm replacement for Model 

MBB-BK 117 C-2 helicopters

Total US Fleet Cost $37,485 per inspection cycle

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action?” Yes ( ) No ()

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant? Yes ( ) Explain Below No ()
2

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

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

Yes ( ) No ()

Project Engineer: James Blyn
§ 69.601 Exchange carrier association. ( a ) An association shall be established in order to prepare and file access charge tariffs on behalf of all telephone companies that do not file separate tariffs or concur in a joint access tariff of another telephone company for all access elements.
( b ) All telephone companies that participate in the distribution of Carrier Common Line revenue requirement, pay long term support to association Common Line tariff participants, or receive payments from the transitional support fund administered by the association shall be deemed to be members of the association.
( c ) All data submissions to the association required by this title shall be accompanied by the following certification statement signed by the officer or employee responsible for the overall preparation for the data submission:
Certification I am (title of certifying officer or employee). I hereby certify that I have overall responsibility for the preparation of all data in the attached data submission for (name of carrier) and that I am authorized to execute this certification. Based on information known to me or provided to me by employees responsible for the preparation of the data in this submission, I hereby certify that the data have been examined and reviewed and are complete, accurate, and consistent with the rules of the Federal Communications Commission. Date: Name: Title: (Persons making willful false statements in this data submission can be punished by fine or imprisonment under the provisions of the U.S. Code, Title 18, Section 1001).
[48 FR 10358, Mar. 11, 1983, as amended at 52 FR 21542, June 8, 1987; 60 FR 19530, Apr. 19, 1995]
#### § 32.6620 Services.

Companies shall use this account for expenses of the type and character detailed in Accounts 6621 through 6623.

[82 FR 20843, May 4, 2017]
Acronyms and Abbreviations Used in the Evidence Tables

5-FU		5-fluorouracil

AC		Anterior chamber

ACG		Angle closure glaucoma

ALT		Argon laser trabeculoplasty

ATT		Argon laser trabeculoplasty - trabeculectomy - trabeculectomy 

		treatment sequence

BSS		Balanced salt solution

CE		Cataract extraction

CME		Cystoid macular edema

DSCI		Deep sclerectomy with collagen implant

ECCE		Extracapsular cataract extraction

Epi.		Corneal epithelial

Hem. 		Hemorrhage

ICCE		Intracapsular cataract extraction

IOL		Intraocular lens

IOP		Intraocular pressure

MMC		Mitomycin-C

N/A		Not applicable

No CE	No cataract extraction

NR		Not reported

NRCT		Non-randomized controlled trial

OAG		Open-angle glaucoma

PC		Posterior capsule

PCO		Posterior capsular opacification

PECE		Phacoemulsification cataract extraction

Phaco.		Phacoemulsification

PMMA 	poly(methyl methacrylate) intraocular lens

POAG		Primary open-angle glaucoma

RCT		Randomized controlled trial

SPK		Superficial punctate keratitis

TAT		Trabeculectomy - argon laser trabeculoplasty - trabeculectomy 

		treatment sequence

Trab.		Trabeculectomy

VA		Visual acuity

YAG		YAG laser
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,

J ustices

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

_______________________________________ __ Clerk March 29, 2010

s0322 

# Order

March 29, 2010

140178

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 140178 COA: 286322 Muskegon CC: 07-055336-FC DEQUAN IAHSELLE BUCHANAN, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the November 19, 2009 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
I

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4880

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permit the issuance of

tax-exempt bonds for air and water pollution control facilities.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

AUGUST 1, 1994

Mr. MCHALE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permit

the issuance of tax-exempt bonds for air and water pollution control facilities.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Pollution Control

5 Equipment Investment Act of 1994’’.

6 SEC. 2. TAX-EXEMPT BONDS FOR AIR AND WATER POLLU7 TION CONTROL FACILITIES.

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (a) of section 142 of

9 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (defining exempt facil10 ity bond) is amended by striking ‘‘or’’ at the end of para-
2

•HR 4880 IH

1 graph (11), by striking the period at the end of paragraph

2 (12) and inserting ‘‘, or’’, and by adding at the end the

3 following new paragraph:

4 ‘‘(13) air or water pollution control facilities.’’

5 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

6 subsection (a) shall apply to obligations issued after the

7 date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
Florida Department of 

Environmental Protection 

Bob Martinez Center 

2600 BIair Stone Road 

T~&ssx, FIori& 32399-2400 -. 

Mr. A. Stanley Meiburg 

Acting Regional Administrator 

United States Environmental 

Prstection Agency - Region 4 

61 Fotsyth Street, SW 

Atlanta, Georgia 30503-8901) 

Re: Air Program: Implementatkin of the EPA Tailoring Rule 

Dear Mr. Meiburg: 

In its June 3 publication of the greenhouse gas (GHG) tailoring rule, EPA requested information 

fkm the states regarding their plans for implementing the rule. This Ietter is in response to that request. 

Florida is unable to automaticatly implement the prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) 

pvisions of the tailoring rule by interpretation of the term "subject to regulation." As you may know, 

Ficwida's PSD pennming program is limited to those pollutants identified in our state rules as "PSD 

pollutants," a term that does not include GHGs. In order to incorporate GHGs into our PSD permitting 

program, we will need to amend our srate rules and submit a SIP revision to EPA. Likewise, Florida's 

Tile V permitting program is limited to "regulated pollutants" as narrowly defined in our rutes. Again, 

we cannot extend the program to sources that would be Title V solely on the basis of their GHG 

emissions without amending our state rules accordingly. 

Currently, it is not possibre to estimate how much time will be needed for us to amend our rules 

to implement the PSD and Tide V provisions of the tailoring rule, particularly since we anticipate a high 

level of inteest in this rulemaking by el4 officials, including a new governor and staff. 

It is our understanding that EPA will propose a SIP call in August for states that are unable to 

automatidly implement the tailoring rule by interpretation of the tenn "subject to regulation." This is to 

conh that Florida should be on the list of expected SfP-caIl states in that pmpusal. We will respond 

directly to the ShPcaII proposal once we have had a chance to review it; in the meantime, however, we 

believe EPA should anticipate having to use, for an indefinite period of time, its Federal Implementation 

Plan authority for implementing the PSD program in Florida and its Tie V authority to regulate sources 

that are major for GHGs only. 

~iv&ion of Air Resource Management 

JKflgt 

cc: Richard Schu~ Chief, Air Planning Branch, EPA Region 4
<PAGE>   1




                                  EXHIBIT 23.1

                         INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


To the Board of Directors of
Tescorp, Inc.


We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements on Form
S-3 (File No. 33-94718) and Form S-8 for the Tescorp, Inc. 1991 Incentive Plan,
dated March 20, 1991, of our report dated June 3, 1997, relating to the
consolidated balance sheets of Tescorp, Inc. and subsidiaries as of March 31,
1997 and 1996, and the related statements of operations, stockholders' equity
and cash flows for each of the years in the two-year period ended March 31,
1997, which report appears in the March 31, 1997 annual report on Form 10-KSB
of Tescorp, Inc.

Austin, Texas
June 20, 1997                                               KPMG PEAT MARWICK
LLP
###### Editorial Note on Part 36

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 36 appear at 74 FR 23956, May 22, 2009, 77 FR 30411, May 23, 2012, 82 FR 25538, June 2, 2017, and corrected at 83 FR 4153, Jan. 30, 2018. Nomenclature changes to part 36 also appear at 83 FR 63587, Dec. 11, 2018, and 84 FR 4360, Feb. 15, 2019.

#### § 36.502 Other jurisdictional assets—Net—Account 1500.

(a) Amounts in this account are separated based upon analysis of the specific items involved.
`[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4948 Engrossed in House (EH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4948

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT


 
 To designate Building Number 137 of the Tuscaloosa Veterans' Medical 
 Center in Tuscaloosa, Alabama, as the ``Claude Harris, Jr. Building''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    Building Number 137 of the Tuscaloosa Veterans' Medical Center in 
Tuscaloosa, Alabama, shall be known and designated as the ``Claude 
Harris, Jr. Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the building referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Claude Harris, Jr. 
Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives October 4, 1994.

            Attest:






                                                                 Clerk.








103d CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 4948

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate Building Number 137 of the Tuscaloosa Veterans' Medical 
 Center in Tuscaloosa, Alabama, as the ``Claude Harris, Jr. Building''.`
----

            COMMISSION DIRECTIVE 2005/42/EC

of 20 June 2005         

amending Council Directive 76/768/EEC, concerning cosmetic products, for the purposes of adapting Annexes II, IV and VI thereto to technical progress

(Text with EEA relevance)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 76/768/EEC of 27 July 1976 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to cosmetic products (1), and in particular Article 8(2) thereof,

After consulting the Scientific Committee on Cosmetic Products and Non-Food Products intended for Consumers,

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:

Article 1

Annexes II, IV and VI to Directive 76/768/EEC are amended in accordance with the Annex to this Directive.

Article 2

Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that from 31 March 2006 cosmetic products which fail to comply with Annexes II and IV of Directive 76/768/EEC as amended by this Directive are not placed on the market by Community manufacturers or by importers established within the Community, nor sold or disposed of to the final consumer.

Article 3

1.   Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by 31 December 2005 at the latest. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions and a correlation table between those provisions and this Directive.

When Member States adopt those provisions, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or be accompanied by such a reference on the occasion of their official publication. Member States shall determine how such reference is to be made.

2.   Member States shall communicate to the Commission the text of the main provisions of national law which they adopt in the field covered by this Directive.

Article 4

This Directive shall enter into force on the twentieth day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Article 5

This Directive is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 20 June 2005.

For the Commission

Günter VERHEUGEN            

Vice-President

----

(1)OJ L 262, 27.9.1976, p. 169. Directive as last amended by Commission Directive 2005/9/EC (OJ L 27, 29.1.2005, p. 46).

----

ANNEX

The Annexes to Directive 76/768/EEC are amended as follows:

----
No. 11-10176.

#### Castellano *v.*United States.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.