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

**No. 16**  **- 6134** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. DAMON BRIGHTMAN , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Charleston
. Solomon Blatt, Jr. , Senior District Judge. ( 2:03

- cr - 00627

- SB

- 2; 2:15

- cv - 00532

- SB )

Submitted : April 21 , 2016 Decided: April 26, 2016

Before WILKINSON, KING , and KEENAN , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

. Damon Brightman, Appellant Pro Se. Nathan S. Williams, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Damon Brightman seeks to appeal the district court’s order treating his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion as a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 ( 2012 ) motion and denying it on that basis. As we recently held , a certificate of appealability is not required in order for us to address the district court’s jurisdictional categorization of a “Rule 60(b) motion as an unauthorized successive habeas petition.” United States v. McRae , 793 F.3d 392, 400 (4th Cir. 2015). Our review of the record confirms that Brightman sought successive § 2255 r elief, without authorization from this court, and we therefore hold that the district court properly concluded that it lacked jurisdiction to consider the subject motion. 28 U.S.C. § § 2244(b)(3)(A) , 2255(h) (2012). Thus, we affirm the district court’s or der. Additionally, we construe Brightman ’s notice of appeal and informal brief as an application to file a second or successive
§ 2255 motion. United States v. Winestock , 340 F.3d 200, 208 (4th Cir. 2003). In order to obtain authorization to file a successive § 2255 motion, a prisoner must assert claims based on either: (1) newly discovered evidence that

. . . would be sufficient to establish by clear and convincing evidence that no reasonable factfinder wo uld have found the movant guilty of the offense; or3 (2) a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive to cases on collateral review by the Supreme Court , that was previously unavailable

. 28 U.S.C. § 22 55(h ). Brightman ’ s claims do not satisfy either

o f these criteria. Therefore, we deny authorization to file a successive § 2255 motion. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                             5

<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
THE CONSOLIDATED CONDENSED BALANCE SHEET AND THE CONSOLIDATED
CONDENSED STATEMENT OF INCOME FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1997
(UNAUDITED) AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

       
<S>                                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                         3-MOS

<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                     MAR-31-1998

<PERIOD-START>                        APR-01-1997

<PERIOD-END>                          JUN-30-1997

<CASH>                                      21,049

<SECURITIES>                                     0

<RECEIVABLES>                            8,592,191

<ALLOWANCES>                                     0

<INVENTORY>                              8,662,802

<CURRENT-ASSETS>                        17,741,657

<PP&E>                                 113,090,476

<DEPRECIATION>                          47,460,836

<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          85,410,080

<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                   12,675,534

<BONDS>                                  8,088,066

<COMMON>                                   961,132

<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0

<PREFERRED>                                      0

<OTHER-SE>                              34,752,862

<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>            85,410,080

<SALES>                                 22,293,433

<TOTAL-REVENUES>                        22,298,174

<CGS>                                   19,828,970

<TOTAL-COSTS>                           19,828,970

<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           507,014

<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0

<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         740,362

<INCOME-PRETAX>                          1,221,828

<INCOME-TAX>                                     0

<INCOME-CONTINUING>                      1,221,828

<DISCONTINUED>                                   0

<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0

<CHANGES>                                        0

<NET-INCOME>                             1,221,828

<EPS-PRIMARY>                                 1.31

<EPS-DILUTED>                                 1.31
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Dec-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   Dec-31-1998
<CASH>                                         5,952,659
<SECURITIES>                                   000
<RECEIVABLES>                                  690,768
<ALLOWANCES>                                   131,910
<INVENTORY>                                    000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               7,537,546
<PP&E>                                         35,280,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                 000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 42,817,546
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          783,609
<BONDS>                                        31,025,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          000
<PREFERRED>                                    000
<COMMON>                                       000
<OTHER-SE>                                     11,127,058
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   42,817,546
<SALES>                                        4,378,803
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               7,515,603
<CGS>                                          000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  2,156,802
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               1,573,116
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               4,145,677
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             2,249,312
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,583,615)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            000
<DISCONTINUED>                                 000
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                000
<CHANGES>                                      000
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,583,615)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (36.41)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (36.41)
        

</TABLE>
#### Mrs. Beaumont v. The City of Dallas.

*No. 630.*

*Decided January 16.*

Complaint—Name of Accused.—The Code of Criminal Procedure, article 236, subdivision 1, requires, that a complaint11 must state the name of the accused, if known, and if not known, must give some reasonably definite description of him.” *Held,*that a complaint against ‘‘Mrs. Beaumont” is fatally insufficient.

Appeal from the City Court of Dallas. Tried below before Hon. Kenneth Forge, Judge of the City Court.

Appellant was prosecuted by a complaint in the City Court of Dallas which charged her with keeping a disorderly house, and at the trial was convicted, the penalty assessed being a fine of $200.

The complaint is as follows:

“The City of Dallas

“v. “Ho. 417.

*“*Mrs. Beaumont.

“Personallyappeared before me, the undersigned authority, C. F. Durham, who, after being duly sworn, deposes and says that Mrs. Beaumont, whose given name is to affiant unknown, a better description of whom affiant can not give, in the city of Dallas and the State of Texas, on the 21st day of May, A. D. 1894, and before the filing of this complaint, was the owner, tenant, and lessee of a house, building, and edifice then and there situated. And she, the said Mrs. Beaumont, did then and there unlawfully keep, was concerned in keeping, and knowingly permitted to be kept, the said house, building, and edifice, for prostitution, where prostitutes were then and there permitted by the said Mrs. Beaumont to resort and reside for the purpose of plying their vocation, contrary to ordinances in such cases made and provided. [Signed] “C. F. Durham.

“Sworn to and subscribed before me, this 24th day of May, A. D. 1894. [Signed] “M. C. Kahn,

“Clerk of the City Court, City of Dallas, Texas.”

Ho briefs on file.

*69DAVIDSON, Judge.

This conviction was for keeping a disorderly-house. The name of the appellant is charged as “Mrs. Beaumont.” The statute requires the name of the accused to be stated in the complaint, if known, and if not known, “ some reasonably definite description ” of such accused must be given. In this case this was not done. Code Grim. Proc., art. 236; Bell v. The State, 25 Texas, 574; Pancho v. The State, 25 Texas Grim. App., 402.

It is strange that witnesses can be found who are cognizant of the crime, and yet unable to give “some reasonably definite” description of the perpetrator of that crime.

Be this as it may, it must be done, because the statute requires it to be done.

Judgment is reversed, and the prosecution dismissed.

*Reversed and dismissed.*

Judges all present and concurring.
Exhibit 12.4

West Texas Utilities Company
Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
For Years Ended December 31

                        1995       1994      1993      1992       1991
                                  (thousands, except ratios)

Operating income      $59,486    $54,763   $46,576   $57,302    $57,925
Adjustments:
 Income taxes           6,456      7,900    10,869    12,387     13,283
 Provision for
   deferred income
   taxes                1,971      8,377     3,593     6,426      5,216
 Deferred investment
   tax credits         (1,321)    (1,321)   (1,321)   (1,515)    (1,349)
 Other income and
   deductions            (463)     4,210     1,907     1,114      1,603
 Allowance for
   borrowed and equity
   funds used during
   construction         1,030        474       247       156        146
   Earnings            $67,159   $74,403   $61,871   $75,870    $76,824


Fixed charges:
 Interest on long-
  term debt            $21,413   $18,547  $19,225   $21,368     $21,339
 Interest on short-
  term debt and other    4,110     3,534    2,988     2,197       1,967
   Fixed charges       $25,523   $22,081  $22,213   $23,565     $23,306


Ratio of earnings
 to fixed charges         2.63      3.37     2.79      3.22        3.30
Filed 06/29/20 by Clerk of Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2020 ND 137

Stoneart OFS LLC, d/b/a Scotty Fain

Construction and Scotty Fain, Individually, Appellant

v.

North Dakota Workforce Safety and Insurance 

Fund, Appellee

No. 20200063

Appeal from the District Court of Williams County, Northwest Judicial 

District, the Honorable Benjamen J. Johnson, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Stephen D. Little, Bismarck, ND, for appellant.

Jacqueline S. Anderson, Special Assistant Attorney General, Fargo, ND, for

appellee.
1

Stoneart OFS LLC v. WSI

No. 20200063

Per Curiam.

[¶1] Stoneart OFS LLC d/b/a Scotty Fain Construction, and Scotty Fain 

individually (together “Fain”), appealed from a district court judgment 

affirming an administrative law judge’s (“ALJ”) order determining Dennis 

Teems was acting as Fain’s employee during an accident that resulted in 

Teems’ death. 

[¶2] Fain asserts there is no evidence Teems was performing services for 

remuneration and therefore the ALJ improperly applied the statutory 

presumption that Teems was an employee. See N.D.C.C. § 65-01-03(1) (stating 

an individual who performs services for remuneration is presumed to be an 

employee unless it is proven he or she is an independent contractor under the 

common law test). 

[¶3] We conclude the ALJ’s finding that Teems was performing services for 

remuneration is supported by a preponderance of the evidence. See SAEJ 

Enter., LLC v. Workforce Safety and Ins., 2020 ND 61, ¶ 3, 940 N.W. 2d 611 

(applying the preponderance of the evidence standard to an ALJ’s finding of 

fact). We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(5).

[¶4] Jon J. Jensen, C.J.

Gerald W. VandeWalle

Jerod E. Tufte 

Daniel J. Crothers

Lisa Fair McEvers
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Monday, September 18, 1995 (116), Para 116.25 Message from the President--National Emergency with Respect to Unita]
[Pages 1370-1371]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.116.25  message from the president--national emergency with respect 
          to unita

  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. FOLEY, laid before the House a message 
from the President, which was read as follows:

To the Congress of the United States:
  Section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)) 
provides for the automatic termination of a national emergency unless, 
prior to the anniversary date of its declaration, the President 
publishes in the Federal Register and transmits to the Congress a notice 
stating that the emergency is to continue in effect beyond the 
anniversary date. In accordance with this provision, I have sent the 
enclosed notice, stating that the emergency declared

[[Page 1371]]

with respect to the National Union for the Total Independence of Angola 
(``UNITA'') is to continue in effect beyond September 26, 1995, to the 
Federal Register for publication.
  The circumstances that led to the declaration on September 26, 1993, 
of a national emergency have not been resolved. United Nations Security 
Council Resolution 864 (1993) continues to oblige all Member States to 
maintain sanctions. Discontinuation of the sanctions would have a 
prejudicial effect on the Angolan peace process. For these reasons, I 
have determined that it is necessary to maintain in force the broad 
authorities necessary to apply economic pressure to UNITA.
                                                   William J. Clinton.  
  The White House, September 18, 1995.

  By unanimous consent, the message, together with the accompanying 
papers, was referred to the Committee on International Relations and 
ordered to be printed (H. Doc. 104-116).
```
# EUR-Lex - 52004AP0084 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 52004AP0084

**European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a Council regulation on financial and technical measures to accompany (MEDA) the reform of economic and social structures in the framework of the Euro-Mediterranean partnership (Codified version) (COM(2004)0077 — C5-0091/2004 — 2004/0024(CNS)) **

*
Official Journal 226 E , 15/09/2005 P. 0042 - 0043 *

P6_TA(2004)0084

Euro-Mediterranean partnership *

European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a Council regulation on financial and technical measures to accompany (MEDA) the reform of economic and social structures in the framework of the Euro-Mediterranean partnership (Codified version) (COM(2004)0077 — C5-0091/2004 — 2004/0024(CNS))

(Consultation procedure)

The European Parliament,

- having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2004)0077) [1],

- having regard to Article 308 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C5-0091/2004),

- having regard to Rules 51, 80 and 43(1) of its Rules of Procedure,

- having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A6-0045/2004),

1. Approves the Commission proposal;

2. Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament;

3. Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to amend the Commission proposal substantially;

4. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission.

[1] Not yet published in OJ.

--------------------------------------------------
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Monday, July 10, 1995 (91), Para 91.14 After Recess--5:00 P.M.]
[Page 1096]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.91.14  after recess--5:00 p.m.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. WALKER, called the House to order.
```
From: rachaelsarto@yahoo.com [mailto:rachaelsarto@yahoo.com] 

Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2010 6:53 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, 

Rachael Sarto 

3817 22ND Ave S 

Minneapolis, MN 55407
| 1. | I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Champion Industries, 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; |
|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Wednesday, August 2, 1995 (107), Para 107.10 Committees and Subcommittees to Sit]
[Page 1241]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.107.10  committees and subcommittees to sit

  On motion of Mr. SOLOMON, by unanimous consent, the following 
committees and their subcommittees were granted permission to sit during 
the 5-minute rule today: the Committee on Banking and Financial 
Services, the Committee on International Relations, the Committee on 
National Security, the Committee on Small Business, the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure, and the Committee on Veterans' 
Affairs.
```
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 Quarterly Report of Viropro, Inc, (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ending August 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Dr. Jean-Marie Dupuy, President & CEO of Viropro, Inc., 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 Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



(2)

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





Date: November 17, 2005.





/s/ Jean-Marie Dupuy

_______________________

Dr. Jean-Marie Dupuy

President & CEO
This memorandum opinion was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Reports. Please 1 see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions. 2 Please also note that this electronic memorandum opinion may contain computer-generated 3 errors or other deviations from the official paper version filed by the Court of Appeals and does 4 not include the filing date. 5 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO 6 G&C ENTERTAINMENT, LLC, a 7 New Mexico limited liability company; 8 GEORGE CATALOIU, an individual, 9 and CHAD ALADOUD, an individual, 10 Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants/ 11 Third Party Defendants/Appellees, 12
v. NO. 30,618 13 HEADSTART ENTERPRISES LIMITED 14 PARTNERSHIP, a New Mexico limited 15 partnership; and JAMES P. GUTHRIE, an 16 individual, 17 Defendants/Counter-Plaintiffs/ 18 Third Party Plaintiffs/Appellants. 19
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BERNALILLO COUNTY 20 Ted C. Baca, District Judge 21 Richard Leverick 22 Albuquerque, NM 23 for Appellees 24 Rammelkamp, Muehlenweg, & Cordova, P.A. 25 Robert J. Muehlenweg 26 Elizabeth A. Heaphy 27Michelle A. Hironaka 1 Albuquerque, NM 2 for Appellants 33 MEMORANDUM OPINION 1 CASTILLO, Chief Judge. 2 Summary affirmance in part and reversalin part was proposed for the reasons 3 stated in the notice of proposed disposition. No memorandum opposing summary 4 affirmance in part and reversal in part has been filed, and the time for doing so has 5 expired. 6 Affirmed in part, reversed in part. 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8

__________________________________ 9 CELIA FOY CASTILLO, Chief Judge 10 WE CONCUR: 11

__________________________________ 12JONATHAN B. SUTIN, Judge 13

__________________________________ 14 MICHAEL E. VIGIL, Judge 15
Editorial Note on Part 195
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 195 appear at 71 FR 33409, June 9, 2006.

§ 195.101 Qualifying metallic components other than pipe. Notwithstanding any requirement of the subpart which incorporates by reference an edition of a document listed in § 195.3, a metallic component other than pipe manufactured in accordance with any other edition of that document is qualified for use if— ( a ) It can be shown through visual inspection of the cleaned component that no defect exists which might impair the strength or tightness of the component: and
( b ) The edition of the document under which the component was manufactured has equal or more stringent requirements for the following as an edition of that document currently or previously listed in § 195.3: ( 1 ) Pressure testing;
( 2 ) Materials; and
( 3 ) Pressure and temperature ratings.
[Amdt. 195-28, 48 FR 30639, July 5, 1983]