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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20-6714

LUKE D. PATTERSON,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

CHRISTOPHER GOMEZ, Acting Warden,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at 

Wheeling. John Preston Bailey, District Judge. (5:19-cv-00190-JPB-JPM; 1:19-cv-00121-

JPB-MJA)

Submitted: December 22, 2020 Decided: December 29, 2020

Before NIEMEYER, FLOYD, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Luke D. Patterson, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Luke D. Patterson, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order denying relief 

on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition in which he sought to challenge his sentence as an armed 

career criminal by way of the savings clause in 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Pursuant to § 2255(e), 

a prisoner may challenge his sentence in a traditional writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 

§ 2241 if a § 2255 motion would be inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of his 

detention. 

[Section] 2255 is inadequate and ineffective to test the legality of a sentence 

when: (1) at the time of sentencing, settled law of this circuit or the Supreme 

Court established the legality of the sentence; (2) subsequent to the prisoner’s 

direct appeal and first § 2255 motion, the aforementioned settled substantive 

law changed and was deemed to apply retroactively on collateral review; (3) 

the prisoner is unable to meet the gatekeeping provisions of § 2255(h)(2) for 

second or successive motions; and (4) due to this retroactive change, the 

sentence now presents an error sufficiently grave to be deemed a fundamental 

defect.

United States v. Wheeler, 886 F.3d 415, 429 (4th Cir. 2018). 

We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm 

for the reasons stated by the district court. Patterson v. Gomez, No. 5:19-cv-00190-JPBJPM; 1:19-cv-00121-JPB-MJA (N.D.W. Va. Apr. 29, 2020). We deny Patterson’s motion 

for summary disposition and 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
#### Pittsburg *v.*Tabor *& a.*

*A*collector of taxes is liable for taxes which he might have collected by reasonable diligence, but which, by reason of his negligence, having been left uncollected, have been lost.

A collector of taxes is liable for interest at six per cent, from the time of demand on taxes not collected and lost by his' negligence, and for interest on taxes collected by him from the time when it was his duty to pay them into the town treasury.

Debt, on a collector’s bond. Facts found by a referee. The only matters in controversy were a tax against Ross & Leavitt, a tax against R. E. Peabody & Co., and a claim of ten per cent, interest after December 1, 1876, on uncollected taxes and taxes collected and not paid over to the town. As to the Peabody tax, the collector was negligent. He could have collected it by the exercise of reasonable care and diligence, such as he was bound to exercise in his office. He was not guilty of bad faith. As to the Ross & Leavitt tax, he was guilty of no negligence or misconduct in not collecting it. The plaintiffs demanded the amount of the Peabody tax April 1, 1879, and now claim ten per cent, interest thereon. They also claim $2.59, being interest received May 10, 1877, by the collector on taxes for which the lands taxed were sold. No demand for this sum was made prior to the date of the writ.

*Dudley Remide*and Ray, *Drew*Jordan, for the plaintiffs.

*T. B. Johnson*and *Bingham*Aldrich, for the defendants.

Stanley, J.

The collector is liable for his negligence, which caused the loss of the Peabody tax, not because he has collected it, but because he has unreasonably neglected to 'do so. It was demanded of him April 1, 1879, and the interest should be reckoned from that time. On this question the case does not stand as if it had been collected and not paid over. When collected, it is the duty of the collector to pay it over on or before the first Saturday of the month following its collection. Laws of 1874, *c.*85, s. 9; G. L., *c.*40, *s.*1. Formerly the collector was only liable when he had unreasonably neglected to pay it over, or had used it. *Hudson*v. Tenney, 6 N. H. 456.

The plaintiffs claim that the collector should be charged with interest at ten per cent, after December 1, 1876. The tax-payer who neglects to pay his taxes on or before December 1 succeeding the assessment, is bound to pay ten per cent, interest. In all other cases six per cent, is the legal rate. Interest should be computed from the day of the demand. If the tax had been collected,. *101interest would have been reckoned from the day when it was his ■duty to pay the money into the town treasury. On the $2.59 which he received May 10, 1877, he is chargeable with interest from the first Saturday of the next month.

The plaintiffs are entitled to judgment on the report for $2.59 and interest from the first Saturday of June, 1.877, and for $191.23 and interest from April 1, 1879, on both sums, at six per cent. *Northumberland*v. Cobleigh, 59 N H. 250, 256.

*Case discharged.*

Doe, C. J., did not sit: the others concurred.
Docket: CMS-2009-0040 

Request for Information Regarding the Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction 

Equity Act of 2008 

Comment On: CMS-2009-0040-0001 

Request for Information Regarding the Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction 

Equity Act of 2008 

Document: CMS-2009-0040-0011 

GA-James Peterson 

Submitter Information 

Name: James Peterson 

Address: 

Marietta, GA, 30060 

Organization: n/a 

General Comment 

I didn't see a category for access. I want to make the access to anyone's records 

harder to do than what they are currently. Just about anyone can access records 

listed on the internet. I have instructed all of our doctors not to put I and my wife's 

records, but they say by law they have to list them. I contend this is not so. 

They can list them locally and restrict access. Please respond to this and let me 

know if I am correct. 

PUBLIC SUBMISSION 

As of: May 12, 2009 

Received: May 07, 2009 

Status: Posted 

Posted: May 11, 2009 

Category: Government - Other

Tracking No. 8097d084 

Comments Due: May 28, 2009

Submission Type: Web
#### Richard Smith, Appellant, v. George W. Robbins and others, Respondents.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. Opinion by

Learned, P. J.
-----Original Message----- 

From: mikebeason@worldnet.att.net [mailto:mikebeason@worldnet.att.net] 

Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2010 7:43 AM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

May 01, 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, 

Mitchell Beason 

154 Donald Ln 

Luttrell, TN 37779
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Thursday, October 12, 1995 (127), Para 127.13 Civilian Science Research Authorization]
[Page 1511]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.127.13  civilian science research authorization

  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. LaTOURETTE, pursuant to House Resolution 
234 and rule XXIII, declared the House resolved into the Committee of 
the Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration 
of the bill (H.R. 2405) to authorize appropriations for fiscal years 
1996 and 1997 for civilian science activities of the Federal Government, 
and for other purposes.
  Mr. KINGSTON, Chairman of the Committee of the Whole, resumed the 
chair; and after some time spent therein,
```
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Friday, September 29, 1995 (123), Para 123.6 Providing for the Consideration of H.R. 2405]
[Page 1473]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.123.6  providing for the consideration of h.r. 2405

  Mr. LINDER, by direction of the Committee on Rules, reported (Rept. 
No. 104-270) the resolution (H. Res. 234) providing for the 
consideration of the bill (H.R. 2405) to authorize appropriations for 
fiscal years 1996 and 1997 for civilian science activities of the 
Federal Government, and for other purposes.
  When said resolution and report were referred to the House Calendar 
and ordered printed.
```
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 00-50742

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ARTURO DE LA CRUZ-VILLARREAL, also known as Arturo Vera CruzVillareal,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. DR-99-CR-657-1

- - - - - - - - - -

April 12, 2001

Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Arturo De La Cruz-Villarreal appeals his sentence following

his guilty plea conviction for illegal re-entry after deportation

in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. De La Cruz argues that his

sentence should not have exceeded the two-year maximum sentence

under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). De La Cruz acknowledges that his

argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523

U.S. 224 (1998), but he seeks to preserve the issue for Supreme
No. 00-50742

- 2 -

Court review in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 120 S. Ct. 2348

(2000). 

Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi,

120 S. Ct. at 2362; United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984

(5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 121 S. Ct. 1214 (2001). De La

Cruz’s argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres, 523 U.S. at

235. 

The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of

filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks

that the judgment of the district court be affirmed and that an

appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is granted.

AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Thursday October 26, 1995 (135), Para 135.27 Private Bills and Resolutions]
[Page 1798]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.135.27  private bills and resolutions

  Under clause 1 of rule XXII.

       Mr. SAXTON introduced a bill (H.R. 2554) to authorize the 
     Secretary of Transportation to issue a certificate of 
     documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in 
     the coastwise trade and on the Great Lakes and their 
     tributary and connecting waters in trade with Canada for the 
     vessel M/V Marion C II: which was referred to the Committee 
     on Transportation and Infrastructure.
```
----

----

| CLECO              CORPORATION | EXHIBIT                32(a) |
|--------------------------------|------------------------------|

|   Cleco                Corporation                                |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| CERTIFICATION                PURSUANT TO                                    |
| 18                U.S.C. SECTION 1350,                                      |
| AS                ADOPTED PURSUANT TO                                       |
| SECTION                906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF                2002 |

| (1)                The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)                or 15(d)                of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;                               |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (2)                The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the                Company. |

| /s/                Michael H. Madison                                                 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Michael                H. MadisonPresident                and Chief Executive Officer |

| /s/                Kathleen F. Nolen                                                                            |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Kathleen                F. NolenSenior                Vice President and Chief                Financial Officer |

----

----
§ 23.73 What requirements apply to privately-owned or leased terminal buildings? ( a ) If you are a recipient who is required to implement an ACDBE program on whose airport there is a privately-owned or leased terminal building that has concessions, or any portion of such a building, this section applies to you.
( b ) You must pass through the applicable requirements of this part to the private terminal owner or lessee via your agreement with the owner or lessee or by other means. You must ensure that the terminal owner or lessee complies with the requirements of this part.
( c ) If your airport is a primary airport, you must obtain from the terminal owner or lessee the goals and other elements of the ACDBE program required under this part. You must incorporate this information into your concession plan and submit it to the FAA in accordance with this part.
( d ) If the terminal building is at a non-primary commercial service airport or general aviation airport or reliever airport, you must ensure that the owner complies with the requirements in § 23.21(e).
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.                  

###### Department of Veterans Affairs

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) gives notice under the Public Law 92-463 (Federal Advisory Committee Act) that the Advisory Committee on CARES Business Plan Studies will hold a meeting on September 17, 2007, at the University of Massachusetts/Boston, Columbia Point, Campus Center Ballroom in Boston, Massachusetts. The meeting will convene at 1 p.m. and conclude at 6:30 p.m. The meeting is open to the public. 

The purpose of the Committee is to provide advice to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs on proposed business plans at those VA facility sites identified in May 2004 as requiring further study by the Capital Asset Realignment for Enhanced Services (CARES) Decision document. 

The objective of this meeting is to provide the Secretary with advice regarding the final selection of a healthcare, capital planning and reuse option for the Greater Boston area campuses of the VA New England Healthcare System. An analysis of the business planning options completed by the VA contractor is to be presented at the meeting prior to their final submission to the VA. The agenda will also accommodate public commentary on the options. 

                    Interested persons may attend and present oral or written statements to the Committee. For additional information regarding the meeting, please contact Mr. Jay Halpern, Designated Federal Officer, (00 CARES), at 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20420, by phone at (202) 273-5994, or by e-mail at                     *jay.halpern@va.gov.*

Dated: August 27, 2007. 

By direction of the Secretary. 

E. Phillip Riggin, 

Committee Management Officer. 

[FR Doc. 07-4279 Filed 8-30-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8320-01-M
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.
 Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families
 *Title:*
                     Financial Institution Data Match. *OMB No.*
                     0970-0196. *Description:*
                     Section 466(a)(17) of the Social Security Act (the Act) requires States to establish procedures under which the State Child Support Enforcement IV-D agencies shall enter into agreements with financial institutions doing business in States for the purpose of securing information leading to the enforcement of child support orders. Under 452(l) and 466(a)(17)(A)(i) of the Act, the Secretary may aid State agencies conducting data matches with financial institutions doing business in multiple States by centrally matching through the Federal Parent Locator Service. *Respondents:*
                     Financial institutions doing business in two or more States. Annual Burden Estimates
Instrument
Number of respondents
Number of responses per respondent
Average burden hours per response
Total burden hoursFinancial Data Match Tape
4,465
4
.5
8,930Election Form
71
1
.5
35.5
 *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:*
                     8.965.5. *Additional Information:*
                     Copies of the proposed collection may be obtained by writing to the Administration for Children and Families, Office of Administration, Office of Information Services, 370 L'Enfant Promenade, SW., Washington, DC 20447, Attn: ACF Reports Clearance Officer. All requests should be identified by the title of the information collection. E-mail address: 
                    *infocollection@acf.hhs.gov.* *OMB Comment:*
                     OMB is required to make a decision concerning the collection of information between 30 and 60 days after publication of this document in the 
                    **Federal Register**
                    . Therefore, a comment is best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it within 30 days of publication. Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent directly to the following: Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project, Fax: 202-395-6974, Attn: Desk Officer for the Administration for Children and Families. Dated: August 28, 2007. Janean Chambers, Reports Clearance Officer.


[FR Doc. 07-4293 Filed 8-31-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4184-01-M
###### Editorial Note on Part 193

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 193 appear at 71 FR 33408, June 9, 2006.

#### §§ 193.2189-193.2233 [Reserved]
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman,

 Chief Justice

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen,

 Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 March 17, 2017

Order 

Clerk

March 17, 2017

153110(91)

NL VENTURES VI FARMINGTON, LLC,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

SC: 153110

v COA: 323144

Wayne CC: 13-004863-CZ

CITY OF LIVONIA,

Defendant-Appellee.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of the Michigan Municipal League, the 

Michigan Townships Association, and the Public Corporation Law Section of the State 

Bar of Michigan to file an amicus curiae brief is GRANTED. The amicus brief submitted 

on March 14, 2017, is accepted for filing.
From: O'Neill, John J (Karr, Robert T) [mailto:joneill@firstenergycorp.com] 

Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2015 11:17 AM

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA

Subject: RIN 1210-AB32 comments

Please stay out of my 401K. I do not need or desire any assistance in managing my money. Nor do I 

want the government, federal or otherwise, to know anything more about my finances.

The information contained in this message is intended only for the personal and 

confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If the reader of this message is not the 

intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you 

are hereby notified that you have received this document in error and that any review, 

dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have 

received this communication in error, please notify us immediately, and delete the original 

message.
EXHIBIT
32.1





Certification Pursuant to § 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.§ 1350)





The
undersigned, as the chief executive officer of PAB Bankshares, Inc., certifies,
to the best of my knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
period ended March 31, 2009, which accompanies this certification fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and the information contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of PAB
Bankshares, Inc. at the dates and for the periods indicated.  The
foregoing certification is made pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350) and shall not be relied upon for any other
purpose.





Dated
this 11th day of May, 2009.








/s/ Donald J. Torbert, Jr.Donald
      J. Torbert, Jr.President
      and Interim Chief Executive
Officer











A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
PAB Bankshares, Inc. and will be retained by PAB Bankshares, Inc. and furnished
to the SEC or its staff upon request.
#### § 230.1 Purpose and scope.

This part prescribes minimum Federal safety standards for all steam-propelled locomotives operated on railroads to which this part applies. This part does not restrict a railroad from adopting and enforcing additional or more stringent requirements not inconsistent with this part.