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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-7117

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

WALTER LEE SADLER,

Defendant - Appellant.

No. 02-7408

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

WALTER LEE SADLER,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western

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

District Judge. (CR-95-134, CA-02-334-3-V)

Submitted: November 7, 2002 Decided: November 14, 2002
2

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

Circuit Judge.

No. 02-7117 affirmed and No. 02-7408 dismissed by unpublished per

curiam opinion.

Walter Lee Sadler, Appellant Pro Se. Brian Lee Whisler, OFFICE OF

THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
3

PER CURIAM:

In these consolidated appeals, Walter Sadler contests both the

denial of several motions he filed following the issuance of a

warrant for his arrest for violations of his supervised release and

the dismissal without prejudice of his motion under 28 U.S.C.

§ 2255 (2000) as successive. For the following reasons, we affirm

the district court’s orders in No. 02-7117 and dismiss the appeal

in No. 02-7408.

In No. 02-7117, Sadler challenges the denial of his motions

requesting appointment of counsel, a bond hearing, and the

dismissal of the supervised release violation charge. However, the

record indicates there was sufficient probable cause for the

district court to find Sadler violated his supervised release, to

issue a warrant for his arrest, to have him detained pending a

hearing on those charges. See 18 U.S.C. § 3606 (2000). Further,

because the district court had not yet scheduled a hearing,

Sadler’s request for appointment of counsel was premature.

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order denying those

motions.

In No. 02-7408, Sadler seeks to appeal the district court’s

order dismissing his § 2255 motion filed subsequent to his arrest

for violating the terms of his supervised release. We have reviewed

the record and conclude for the reasons stated by the district

court that Sadler has not made a substantial showing of the denial
4

of a constitutional right. See United States v. Sadler, Nos. CR95-134; CA-02-334-3-V (W.D.N.C. July 10, 2002). Accordingly, we

deny a certificate a certificate of appealability and dismiss the

appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) (2000). We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

No. 02-7117 - AFFIRMED

No. 02-7408 - DISMISSED
NINETIETH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION-Began January 10, 1967 

EXECUTIVE CALENDAR 

Prepared under the direction of FRANCIS R. VALEO, Secretary of the Senate 

By GERALD A. HACKETT, Executive Clerk 

Thursday, March 9, 1967 

Ordered, That, notwithstanding provisions of rule XXXVII, it be in order for Senators to call up amendments to any article of the pending treaty at any time until the Senate has concluded its consideration as in 

the Committee of the Whole instead of reading and amending it article by article. (March 8, 1967.) 

TREATY 

Date of Calendar Treaty No. Subject Action of committee 

report No. 

1967 

Mar. 3 11 Ex. D, 88th Cong., Consular Convention with the U.S.S.R _____ Reported favorably by 

2d sess. Mr. Fulbright, from 

the Committee on 

Foreign Relations, 

with a printed report 

together with individual views. (See Ex. 

Rept. No. 4, 90th 

Cong., 1st sess.) 

65-022-67-No. l.S 

J ot. ~aOVER IUd HT RI NTIHG OFFtCI (111
120 STAT. 680 PUBLIC LAW 109–267—AUG. 4, 2006

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 5877:

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 152 (2006):

July 26, considered and passed House.

July 31, considered and passed Senate.

Æ

Public Law 109–267

109th Congress

An Act

To amend the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act of 1996 to extend the authorities

provided in such Act until September 29, 2006.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITIES UNDER THE IRAN AND LIBYA

SANCTIONS ACT OF 1996.

Section 13(b) of the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act of 1996

(Public Law 104–172; 50 U.S.C. 1701 note) is amended by striking

‘‘on the date that is 10 years after the date of the enactment

of this Act’’ and inserting ‘‘on September 29, 2006’’.

Approved August 4, 2006.

Aug. 4, 2006

[H.R. 5877]
```

[Federal Register: March 12, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 48)]
[Notices]               
[Page 11940]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr12mr10-159]                         

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES

 
National Endowment for the Arts; Arts Advisory Panel

    Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act 
(Pub. L. 92-463), as amended, notice is hereby given that a meeting of 
the Arts Advisory Committee will be held by teleconference from 1 p.m. 
to 1:20 p.m. (ending time is approximate) on March 15, 2010 at the 
Nancy Hanks Center, 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 
20506. This meeting, being held on an emergency basis to address time 
sensitive issues, is for application review and will be closed.
    The closed portions of meetings are for the purpose of Panel 
review, discussion, evaluation, and recommendations on financial 
assistance under the National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities 
Act of 1965, as amended, including information given in confidence to 
the agency. In accordance with the determination of the Chairman of 
November 10, 2009, these sessions will be closed to the public pursuant 
to subsection (c)(6) of section 552b of Title 5, United States Code.
    Further information with reference to these meetings can be 
obtained from Ms. Kathy Plowitz-Worden, Office of Guidelines & Panel 
Operations, National Endowment for the Arts, Washington, DC 20506, or 
call 202/682-5691.

    Dated: March 9, 2010.
Kathy Plowitz-Worden,
Panel Coordinator, Panel Operations, National Endowment for the Arts.
[FR Doc. 2010-5494 Filed 3-11-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7537-01-P
```
§ 150.205 Sources of information triggering an investigation of State enforcement. Information that may trigger an investigation of State enforcement includes, but is not limited to, any of the following: ( a ) A complaint received by CMS.
( b ) Information learned during informal contact between CMS and State officials.
( c ) A report in the news media.
( d ) Information from the governors and commissioners of insurance of the various States regarding the status of their enforcement of PHS Act requirements.
( e ) Information obtained during periodic review of State health care legislation. CMS may review State health care and insurance legislation and regulations to determine whether they are: ( 1 ) Consistent with PHS Act requirements.
( 2 ) Not pre-empted as provided in § 146.143 (relating to group market provisions) and § 148.120 (relating to individual market requirements) on the basis that they prevent the application of a PHS Act requirement.
( f ) Any other information that indicates a possible failure to substantially enforce.
[64 FR 45795, Aug. 20, 1999, as amended at 78 FR 13440, Feb. 27, 2013; 86 FR 24286, May 5, 2021]
# fM-2.01D-0700

Contacts. With whom outside the FAA hasthis proposal been discussed? Organization Person Contacted Date Response TCCA 

### Gordanka 

### 5111110 Concurs

Jeremic Bombardier 

### Ruxandra 

### 5111110 Left email

Pooescu RAA David Lotterer 

### 5111/10 Concurs



# .
§ 1355.56 Requirements for S/TACWIS and non-S/TACWIS projects during and after the transition period. ( a ) During the transition period a title IV-E agency with a S/TACWIS project may continue to claim title IV-E funding according to the cost allocation methodology approved by ACF for development or the operational cost allocation plan approved by the Department, or both.
( b ) A S/TACWIS project must meet the submission requirements of § 1355.52(i)(1) during the transition period to qualify for the CCWIS cost allocation methodology described in § 1355.57(a) after the transition period.
( c ) A title IV-E agency with a S/TACWIS may request approval to initiate a new CCWIS and qualify for the CCWIS cost allocation methodology described in § 1355.57(b) by meeting the submission requirements of § 1355.52(i)(1).
( d ) A title IV-E agency that elects not to transition a S/TACWIS project to a CCWIS project must: ( 1 ) Notify ACF in an APD or Notice of Intent submitted during the transition period of this election; and
( 2 ) Continue to use the S/TACWIS through its life expectancy in accordance with 45 CFR 95.619.
( e ) A title IV-E agency that elects not to transition its S/TACWIS project to a CCWIS and fails to meet the requirements of paragraph (d) of this section is subject to funding recoupment described under § 1355.58(d).
( f ) A title IV-E agency with a non-S/TACWIS (as defined in § 1355.51) that elects to build a CCWIS or transition to a CCWIS must meet the submission requirements of § 1355.52(i)(1): ( 1 ) During the transition period to qualify for a CCWIS cost allocation as described at § 1355.57(a); or
( 2 ) At any time to request approval to initiate a new CCWIS and qualify for a CCWIS cost allocation as described at § 1355.57(b).
[81 FR 35481, June 2, 2016]
<PAGE>   1

                                                                      EXHIBIT 11

               AMERICAN NATIONAL FINANCIAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                        COMPUTATION OF BASIC AND DILUTED
                               EARNINGS PER SHARE
                      (IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                      THREE MONTHS ENDED   NINE MONTHS ENDED
                                         SEPTEMBER 30,       SEPTEMBER 30,
                                       ----------------    ----------------
                                        2000      1999      2000      1999
                                       ------    ------    ------    ------
<S>                                    <C>       <C>       <C>       <C>

Net earnings, basic basis .........    $  817    $  743    $1,128    $6,186
                                       ======    ======    ======    ======
Weighted average basic shares .....     7,368     7,150     7,303     6,773
                                       ------    ------    ------    ------
Basic earnings per share ..........    $ 0.11    $ 0.10    $ 0.15    $ 0.91
                                       ======    ======    ======    ======


Diluted net earnings ..............    $  817    $  743    $1,128    $6,186
                                       ======    ======    ======    ======
Weighted average shares outstanding
  during the period, basic basis ..     7,368     7,150     7,303     6,773

Effect of dilutive options ........        --        --        --        44
                                       ------    ------    ------    ------
Weighted average shares outstanding
  during the period, diluted basis      7,368     7,150     7,303     6,817
                                       ======    ======    ======    ======

Diluted earnings per share ........    $ 0.11    $ 0.10    $ 0.15    $ 0.91
                                       ======    ======    ======    ======
</TABLE>
# PAC Table 9d

&"Arial,Bold"&10&KFF0000This table was generated on 8/31/23.
SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

ONE HUNDRED THIRD CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION { 

SECOND SESSION { 

Convened January 5, 1993 

EXECUTIVE CALENDAR 

Thursday, June 10, 1993 

PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF WALTER J. STEWART, 

SECRETARY OF THE SENATE 

By Gerald A. Hackett, Executive Clerk 
Calendar I T reatJ' 

No. . Doc. No. 

1 

TREATIES 

SubJect Reported 

BY 
2 

NOMINATIONS 

Calendar Mes.sage Nommee, Office, And Predecessor Reported 

• 

• 

No. No. Bv 

[NEW REPORTS] 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

222 279 Marshall S. Smith, of Calif omia, to be Jun 9, 93 Mr. Kennedy, 

Under Secretar;. of Education. (New Committee on Labor and 

Pos1t1on) Human Resources, without 

prmtecl report. 

223 292 David A. Longanecker, of Colorado, to be Do . 

Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary 

Education. Department of Education, vice 

Carolvnn Reid-Wallace. res1rnecl. 

•S1gn1f1es nominee's commitment to respond to requests to appear and testify before any duly 

constituted committee of the Senate
##### 



Exhibit 31.1 Certification Pursuant to Section 302
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 I, George M. Lee, certify that:  1.
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of MetroCorp Bancshares, Inc.;2.
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;3.
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and
for, the periods presented in this report;4.
    The registrants other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:  a)
    designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known
to us by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which this report is being prepared;b)
    evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our
conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and
procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report
based on such evaluation; andc)
    disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the
registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth
fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,
the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and  5.
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit
committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):  a)
    all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to
record, process, summarize and report financial information; andb)
    any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting. Date: May 13, 2005 /s/ George M. LeeGeorge M. LeeChief Executive Officer
§ 148.312 Amount of grant payment. ( a ) An eligible State may receive a grant to fund up to 100 percent of the losses incurred in the operation of its qualified high risk pool during the period for which it is applying or a lesser amount based on the limits of the allotment under the formula.
( b ) Funds will be allocated in accordance with this paragraph to each State that meets the eligibility requirements of § 148.310 and files an application in accordance with § 148.316. The amount will be divided among the States that apply and are awarded grants according to the allotment rules that generally provide that: 40 percent will be equally divided among those States; 30 percent will be divided among States and territories based on their number of uninsured residents in the State during the specified year as compared to all States that apply; and 30 percent will be divided among States and territories based on the number of people in State high risk pools during the specified year as compared to all States that apply. For purposes of this paragraph: ( 1 ) The number of uninsured individuals is calculated for each eligible State by taking a 3-year average of the number of uninsured individuals in that State in the Current Population Survey (CPS) of the Census Bureau during the period for which it is applying. The 3-year average will be calculated using numbers available as of March 1 of each year.
( 2 ) The number of individuals enrolled in health care coverage through the qualified high risk pool of the State will be determined by attestation by the State in its grant application and verified for reasonability by the Secretary through acceptable industry data sources.
( c ) The amount awarded to each eligible State will be the lesser of the 50 percent of losses incurred by its qualified risk pool for the fiscal year in question or its allotment under the formula.
( d ) One-third of the total appropriation will be available for the bonus grants. In no case will a State for a fiscal year receive bonus grants that exceed 10 percent of the total allotted funds for bonus grants.
[68 FR 23414, May 2, 2003, as amended at 69 FR 15700, Mar. 26, 2004; 72 FR 41237, July 27, 2007; 73 FR 22285, Apr. 25, 2008]
#### § 72.64 [Reserved]
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 Umami Sustainable Seafood Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), we, Oli Valur Steindorsson, Chief Executive Officer, and Daniel G. Zang, Chief Financial Officer, certify. pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:





(1) This 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 Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





/s/ Oli Valur Steindorsson

/s/ Daniel G. ZangChief Executive Officer

Chief Financial OfficerPrincipal Executive Officer

Principal Financial and Accounting OfficerDate:
November 14, 2011

Date:
November 14, 2011
BILLING CODE: 6715-01-M

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE: THURSDAY, JANUARY 12, 2023 AT 10:30 A.M.

PLACE: HYBRID MEETING: 1050 FIRST STREET, N.E. WASHINGTON, D.C. (12TH

FLOOR) AND VIRTUAL. 

NOTE: FOR THOSE ATTENDING THE MEETING IN PERSON, CURRENT COVID-19 

SAFETY PROTOCOLS FOR VISITORS, WHICH ARE BASED ON THE CDC COVID-19 

COMMUNITY LEVEL IN WASHINGTON, D.C., WILL BE UPDATED ON THE 

COMMISSION’S CONTACT PAGE BY THE MONDAY BEFORE THE MEETING. SEE 

THE CONTACT PAGE AT https://www.fec.gov/contact/. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO 

VIRTUALLY ACCESS THE MEETING, SEE THE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW.

STATUS: THIS MEETING WILL BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC, SUBJECT TO THE 

ABOVE-REFERENCED GUIDANCE REGARDING THE COVID-19 COMMUNITY 

LEVEL AND CORRESPONDING HEALTH AND SAFETY PROCEDURES. TO ACCESS 

THE MEETING VIRTUALLY, GO TO THE COMMISSION’S WEBSITE www.fec.gov

AND CLICK ON THE BANNER TO BE TAKEN TO THE MEETING PAGE.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

Audit Division Recommendation Memorandum on the Jim Risch for U.S. 

Senate Committee (A21-06)

Audit Division Recommendation Memorandum on Sheila Jackson Lee for 

Congress (A21-05)

Draft Advisory Opinion 2022-25: Senator Mike Crapo/Mike Crapo for U.S. 

Senate

Management and Administrative Matters

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

Judith Ingram, Press Officer

Telephone: (202) 694-1220

Individuals who plan to attend in person and who require special assistance, such as 

sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should contact Laura 

E. Sinram, Secretary and Clerk, at (202) 694-1040, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting 

date.

(Authority: Government in the Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b)

Laura E. Sinram

Secretary and Clerk of the Commission

Submitted: January 5, 2023
#### § 1632.4 Recipient policies.

Each recipient shall adopt written policies to implement the requirements of this part.
§ 60.12 Nomination appeals. ( a ) Any person or local government may appeal to the Keeper the failure or refusal of a nominating authority to nominate a property that the person or local government considers to meet the National Register criteria for evaluation upon decision of a nominating authority to not nominate a property for any reason when requested pursuant to § 60.11, or upon failure of a State Historic Preservation Officer to nominate a property recommended by the State Review Board. (This action differs from the procedure for appeals during the review of a nomination by the National Park Service where an individual or organization may “petition the Keeper during the nomination process,” as specified in §§ 60.6(t) and 60.9(i). Upon receipt of such petition the normal 45-day review period will be extended for 30 days beyond the date of the petition to allow the petitioner to provide additional documentation for review.)
( b ) Such appeal shall include a copy of the nomination form and documentation previously submitted to the State Historic Preservation Officer or Federal Preservation Officer, an explanation of why the applicant is submitting the appeal in accord with this section and shall include pertinent correspondence from the State Historic Preservation Officer or Federal Preservation Officer.
( c ) The Keeper will respond to the appellant and the State Historic Preservation Officer or Federal Preservation Officer with a written explanation either denying or sustaining the appeal within 45 days of receipt. If the appeal is sustained, the Keeper will: ( 1 ) Request the State Historic Preservation Officer or Federal Preservation Officer to submit the nomination to the Keeper within 15 days if the nomination has completed the procedural requirements for nomination as described in §§ 60.6 or 60.9 except that concurrence of the State Review Board, State Historic Preservation Officer or Federal Preservation Officer is not required; or
( 2 ) If the nomination has not completed these procedural requirements, request the State Historic Preservation Officer or Federal Preservation Officer to promptly process the nomination pursuant to §§ 60.6 or 60.9 and submit the nomination to the Keeper without delay.
( d ) State Historic Preservation Officers and Federal Preservation Officers shall process and submit such nominations if so requested by the Keeper pursuant to this section. The Secretary reserves the right to list properties in the National Register or determine properties eligible for such listing on his own motion when necessary to assist in the preservation of historic resources and after notifying the owner and appropriate parties and allowing for a 30-day comment period.
( e ) No person shall be considered to have exhausted administrative remedies with respect to failure to nominate a property to the National Register until he or she has complied with procedures set forth in this section. The decision of the Keeper is the final administrative action on such appeals.
[48 FR 46308, Oct. 12, 1983]