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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-752

In Re: RESTONEY ROBINSON,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus, (CA-96-1017-6)

Submitted: January 22, 1998 Decided: February 4, 1998

Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Restoney Robinson, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Restoney Robinson brought this mandamus petition complaining

about the district court's handling of a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994)

action he brought concerning disciplinary action taken against him

after he tested positive for marijuana use in a random prison drug

test. The district court adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation and denied relief in that action, and on appeal, this court

affirmed. See Robinson v. Atkins, No. 97-6773 (4th Cir. Sept. 17,

1997) (unpublished). Apparently, in this mandamus petition, Robinson seeks to revisit the concerns he raised in the § 1983 action.

Where there is another available remedy, mandamus relief is not

available. See In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987).

Mandamus relief is not a substitute for appeal. See In re United

Steelworkers of America, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir. 1979). Robinson could have raised these claims in an appeal from the § 1983

action. Accordingly, we deny mandamus relief. 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.

PETITION DENIED
§ 1150.4 Information about the proposal. ( a ) A description of the proposal and the significant terms and conditions, including consideration to be paid (monetary or otherwise). As exhibit B, copies of all relevant agreements.
( b ) Details about the amount of traffic and a general description of commodities.
( c ) The purposes of the proposal and an explanation of why the public convenience and necessity require or permit the proposal.
( d ) As exhibit C, a map which clearly delineates the area to be served including origins, termini and stations, and cities, counties and States. The map should also delineate principal highways, rail routes and any possible interchange points with other railroads. If alternative routes are proposed for construction, the map should clearly indicate each route.
( e ) A list of the counties and cities to be served under the proposal, and whether there is other rail service available to them. The names of the railroads with which the line would connect, and the proposed connecting points; the volume of traffic estimated to be interchanged; and a description of the principal terms of agreements with carriers covering operation, interchange of traffic, division of rates or trackage rights.
( f ) The time schedule for consummation or completion of the proposal.
( g ) If a new line is proposed for construction: ( 1 ) The approximate area to be served by the line.
( 2 ) The nature or type of existing and prospective industries (e.g., agriculture, manufacturing, mining, warehousing, forestry) in the area, with general information about the age, size, growth potential and projected rail use of these industries.
( 3 ) Whether the construction will cross another rail line and the name of the railroad(s) owning the line(s) to be crossed. If the crossing will be accomplished with the permission of the railroad(s), include supporting agreements. If a Board determination under 49 U.S.C. 10901(d)(1) will be sought, include such requests.
§ 175.703 Other special requirements for the acceptance and carriage of packages containing Class 7 materials. ( a ) No person may accept for carriage in an aircraft packages of Class 7 materials, other than limited quantities, contained in a rigid or non-rigid overpack, including a fiberboard box or plastic bag, unless they have been prepared for shipment in accordance with § 172.403(h) of this subchapter.
( b ) Each shipment of fissile material packages must conform to the requirements of §§ 173.457 and 173.459 of this subchapter.
( c ) No person shall offer or accept for transportation, or transport, by air— ( 1 ) Vented Type B(M) packages, packages which require external cooling by an ancillary cooling system or packages subject to operational controls during transport; or
( 2 ) Liquid pyrophoric Class 7 (radioactive) materials.
( d ) Packages with radiation levels at the package surface or a transport index in excess of the limits specified in § 173.441(a) of this subchapter may not be transported by aircraft except under special arrangements approved by the Associate Administrator.
**OFFICE OF**  **THE A-ITORNEY**  **GENERAL OF**  **TEXAS** AUSTIN Maroh 20. 1939 XC. Dan V. Jao'k6on Dl6tricthttoney I.arr3.6 cfxusy -tOIi, %3X66

:Mr.Dan W. Jaokaon, Xaroh 20, 1999, pge 442

.,’ ~oOOrdiX@y~ it 16 Our OphdOn that ff 6nch provislonain a olty obarter here been followed, t&n such co&l.lanoe

meet6 all the Is& requirement6 of'law in that respect.

. ., , .-.’ _

.. <.v$ky; truly. Your? . : w.w OF v,’
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Monday, July 31, 1995 (105), Para 105.11 Recess--1:36 P.M.]
[Page 1226]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.105.11  recess--1:36 p.m.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. EVERETT, pursuant to clause 12 of rule I, 
declared the House in recess at 1 o'clock and 36 minutes p.m., subject 
to the call of the Chair until 2 p.m..
```
SUPREME COURT.

#### Robert Martin, as executor, &c., of Daniel Marley, deceased, respondent, agt. Catherine N. E. Hicks, appellant.

*New York General Term,*

*December,*1875.

*Order putting cause oner the circuit.*

No appeal lies directly to the general term from an order made at the circuit refusing to postpone the trial of a case.

The correct practice in such cases stated.

The present appeal is taken from the refusal of Mr. justice Van Brunt, presiding at the circuit on the twenty-third of Eebruary last, to permit the cause to go over the term on defendant’s motion, which decision was put in the form of an order of that date.

*Held,*that no appeal lies directly to the general term from an order made at circuit refusing to postpone the trial of a case. The correct practice in such cases is as follows: When a party defendant feels himself aggrieved by a refusal to postpone a trial, whether such refusal be made on the trial by a jury or the trial -by the court, he may withdraw from the trial, and if the trial proceeds and the cause is decided against him, he may, upon affidavits showing the application to postpone, the papers upon which it is founded, its denial, and that a decision has been made against him, make a non-enumerated motion at special term to set aside such decision; he may also remain and try the case on the merits; and in case of a decision against him, either pursue the same course *356to obtain a new trial, or may, if the trial were by jury, under section 265, move at special term on a case for a new trial, alleging as one of the grounds, the refusal to postpone the *trial;*or if the trial were by the court, may then, under section 268, appeal directly to the general term, alleging as a cause for reversal the refusal to postpone *(Howard*agt. Freedman, 3 *Abb. [N.*S.], 392; *Ogden*agt. Payne, 5 *Cow.,*15; *Hooker*agt. *Rogers,*6 *id., 577;*38 *How.,*451).

The appeal from the order of the circuit court should, therefore, be dismissed, with costs.

Opinion by Davis, P. J.; Brady and Daniels, JJ., concurring.
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.                  

###### Commodity Futures Trading Commission

# Time and Date:

11 a.m., Friday, July 27, 2007. 

# Place:

1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission Conference Room.

# Status:

Closed.

# Matters to be Considered:

Surveillance Matters.

      ( print page 34447)    

# Contact PERSON for More Information:

Eileen A. Donovan, 202-418-5100.

Eileen A. Donovan,

Acting Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 07-3091  Filed 6-20-07; 10:36 am]

BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 09-1023 

________________________________________________________________________ 

EDUCATION 

 Agreement Between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and CANADA Amending the 

Agreement of November 15, 1999, as 

Amended 

Effected by Exchange of Notes at 

Ottawa May 8 and 22, 2009 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
CANADA 

Education 

 Agreement amending the agreement of 

 November 15, 1999, as amended. 

 Effected by exchange of notes at Ottawa 

 May 8 and 22, 2009; 

 Entered into force October 23, 2009.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION

In
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Biovest International, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Form
10-Q), I, Francis E. ODonnell, Jr., Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of 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:

(1) The Form 10-Q 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 Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.

Dated: May 13, 2011



|                                                        
|--------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Francis E. ODonnell, Jr.                           
|Francis E. ODonnell, Jr., M.D.                         
|Chief Executive Officer;
Chairman of the Board; Director

This certification accompanies the Form 10-Q to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, and is not to be
incorporated by reference into any filing of Biovest International, Inc. under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-Q), irrespective of
any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
#### Leon D. Polley, Respondent, *v.*Lehigh Valley Railroad Company, Appellant.

*Polley*v. *Lehigh Valley R. R. Co.,*138 App. Div. 636, affirmed.

(Submitted January 4, 1911;

decided January 24, 1911.)

Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, *586entered May 6, 1910, which affirmed an order of Special Term denying a motion for a change of venue.

The following question was certified: “ Did the defendant reside within the county of Cortland within the meaning of section 984 of the Code of Civil Procedure at the time of the commencement of this action ? ”

*Alexander S. Diven*for appellant.

*Clayton R. Lush*for respondent.

Order affirmed, with costs; question certified answered in the affirmative; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Vann, Werner, Willard Bartlett, Hiscock, Chase and Collin, JJ.
#### Ladd *v.*Stratton.

A plea in abatement, alleging the pendency of a prior action for the same cause, is bad on demurrer, if the record of the prior action is not enrolled.

Writ of Entry. Plea in abatement, alleging the pendency of a prior action for the same cause. The plaintiff filed a replication, to which there was a demurrer by the defendant. The de~ ■ fendant did not enroll the record of the prior action.

*Bingham,*Mitchell, for the defendant.

*Carpenter*and *Batchellor*for the plaintiff.

Stanley, J.

The plea in abatement is bad. It does not fully set out the record of the prior action. The rule is uniform in this state, that a defendant, who by plea in abatement relies on the record or process of any court, must enroll in or with his plea the record or process on which he relies. *Smith*v. *Ins. Co.,*22 N. H. 25. This is required, so that the court may have the whole record before them, and judge from its inspection whether the facts are as alleged.

*Demurrer overruled.*

Bingham and Smith, JJ., did not sit: the others concurred.
From: cerrigayle@yahoo.com [mailto:cerrigayle@yahoo.com] 

Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2010 11:34 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 24, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

Richard Cerri 

39 Partridge Dr 

Novato, CA 94945
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>  This schedule contains summary financial information extracted
from the year ended March 30, 1998 Form 10K Balance Sheets and
Statements of Operations and is qualified in its entirety by reference
to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>          0000830159
<NAME>           American Tax Credit Properties L.P.
<MULTIPLIER>               1000
<CURRENCY>                U.S. Dollars
       
<S>                                              <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                  12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                         MAR-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                             APR-1-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                              MAR-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                                  1.00
<CASH>                                                            388
<SECURITIES>                                                    2,679
<RECEIVABLES>                                                      54
<ALLOWANCES>                                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                    0
<PP&E>                                                              0
<DEPRECIATION>                                                      0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                  9,012
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                              99
<BONDS>                                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                               0
<PREFERRED>                                                         0
<COMMON>                                                            0
<OTHER-SE>                                                          0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                    9,012
<SALES>                                                             0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                  261
<CGS>                                                               0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                  461
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                  0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                               (1,684)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                           (1,684)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                     0
<CHANGES>                                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                                  (1,684)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                 (40.39)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                       0
                                                                    

</TABLE>
#### Buchanan *v.*Balkum.

A recital in a deed of a prior unrecorded mortgage as an existing incumbrance, is actual notice of such unrecorded mortgage to the grantee, ■ and constructive notice of its existence to parties claiming under him.

Writ on Entky. Facts found by a referee. The court ordered judgment for the plaintiff, and the defendant excepted.

*407
      *S. B.*Page, for the defendant.

*A. P.*Carpenter, for the plaintiff.

Clakk, J.

This is a writ of entry to foreclose a mortgage to the plaintiff, given by Henry Williams, June 22, 1866, to secure two notes of $100 each, upon which nothing has been paid. The plaintiff’s mortgage was not recorded. The defendant claims title under a mortgage of the same premises from Williams to C. M. Weeks, dated May 21, 1868, by its terms made subject to the plaintiff’s mortgage. Weeks foreclosed this mortgage as against Williams, and in 1874 conveyed the premises to the defendant, with full covenants of warranty. January 5, 1872, Williams gave the plaintiff an absolute deed of the premises, and in consideration,. thereof the plaintiff gave up to him his notes and mortgage. The plaintiff had no knowledge of the mortgage from Williams to Weeks, although it had been previously recorded when he surrendered his notes and mortgage and received the deed from Williams.

The recital of the plaintiff’s mortgage as an existing incum'brance in the Weeks mortgage, under which the defendant claims, was actual notice of the plaintiff’s mortgage to Weeks, and constructive notice to the defendant. *Brown*v. Eastman, 16 N. H. 588; *Gooding*v. Riley, 50 N. H. 400; *Sanborn*v. Robinson, 54 N. H. 239; *White v. Foster,*102 Mass. 375; *George*v. *Kent, 7*Allen 16; *Merrill*v. Ireland, 40 Me. 569. By the mortgage from Williams and its foreclosure, Weeks acquired title to an equity of redemption merely *(Fiske*v. *Tolman,*124 Mass. 254), and could convey no more to the defendant. The defendant is bound by the recitals in the deed of his grantor (Jones Mort., *s.*594); and he cannot complain that he holds the premises subject to the plaintiff’s mortgage, because, although his deed purports to convey an absolute title, if he had examined his grantor’s title he would not have been deceived.

The plaintiff’s debt has not been paid, nor his mortgage discharged. The surrender of the notes and mortgage by the. plaintiff to Williams in ignorance of the Weeks mortgage, and his acceptance of the deed from Williams, giving him, as lie supposed, an absolute title to the mortgaged premises, was neither a payment of the notes nor an extinguishment of the mortgage. Jones Mort., s. 873; *Robinson*v. Leavitt, 7 N. H. 73, 95, 96; *Towle*v. *Hoit,*14 N. H. 61; *Johnson*v. Elliot, 26 N. H. 67; *Ladd*v. *Wiggin,*35 N. H. 421; *Stantons*v. Thompson, 49 N. H. 272. In *Holt*v. *Baker,*58 N. H. 276, justice did not require the discharged mortgage to be kept on foot. In this case, justice requires that the plaintiff’s mortgage should *not be*extinguished by the conveyance which was intended to operate as a foreclosure.

*Exceptions overruled.*

Smith, J., did not sit: the others concurred.
-----Original Message----- 

From: easttxdave@gmail.com [mailto:easttxdave@gmail.com] 

Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2010 9:08 AM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 25, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

David Bell 

151 Harbour Row Dr 

Coldspring, TX 77331
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from
the financial statements of Globe Manufacturing Corp. for the six months ended
June 30, 1999 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial
statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                          JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                            JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                        1,364
<SECURITIES>                                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                                36,854
<ALLOWANCES>                                  2,466
<INVENTORY>                                  16,591
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             61,429
<PP&E>                                      163,004
<DEPRECIATION>                               79,302
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              155,902
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        44,233
<BONDS>                                     265,066
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             0
<PREFERRED>                                       0
<COMMON>                                          1
<OTHER-SE>                                (155,021)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                155,902
<SALES>                                      87,958
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             87,958
<CGS>                                        59,925
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                73,995
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (217)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           13,938
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 242
<INCOME-TAX>                                     86
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               0
<DISCONTINUED>                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0
<CHANGES>                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                                    156
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0


</TABLE>