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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-7122

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

GEORGE WISE,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Columbia. Dennis W. Shedd, District Judge.

(CR-94-291, CA-95-3492-3-19)

Submitted: January 9, 1997 Decided: January 23, 1997

Before HALL and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

George Wise, Appellant Pro Se. Mark C. Moore, Assistant United

States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying

his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1994), amended by Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-

132, 110 Stat. 1214. We have reviewed the record and the district

court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny

a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Wise, Nos. CR-94-

291; CA-95-3492-3-19 (D.S.C. June 17, 1996). 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.

DISMISSED
# vertical_hydraulic_gradients
Before the Second Division,

November 21, 1966

No. P66/344.

No. P66/345.

No. P66/346.

#### Ashear Bros., Inc., et al. *v.*United States, protests 61/11609, etc. (New York). Ashear Bros., Inc., et al. *v.*United States, protests 65/12634, etc. (New York). Cisco, Inc. *v.*United States, protest 65/17247 (New York).

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of handkerchiefs, not blocked-printed by hand, similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Ashear*Bros., *Inc.*v. *United States*(55 Cust. Ct. 238, C.D. 2582), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

August 18, 2021

No. 04-21-00246-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF R.R., A CHILD

From the 225th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2020PA00605

Honorable Peter Sakai, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

This is an accelerated appeal from a final order terminating appellant’s parental rights 

which must be disposed of by this court within 180 days of the date the notice of appeal was 

filed. See TEX. R. JUD. ADMIN. 6.2. Appellant has filed a second motion requesting an extension 

of time to file the appellant’s brief. The motion is GRANTED. The appellant’s brief is due on or 

before August 23, 2021.

Given the time constraints governing the disposition of this appeal, no further 

requests for extensions of time will be granted absent extenuating circumstances.

_________________________________

Irene Rios, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 18th day of August, 2021.

___________________________________

Michael A. Cruz, 

Clerk of Court
| Skip to Content*Release Date: June 5, 2014*Release dates |  Announcements |   Coded tables |  Historical data | Technical Q&AsCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB) |  Data Download Program (DDP)**F.128 Security Brokers and Dealers** |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
No. 61108.

protest 224089-K (New York).

#### Astra Trading Corp. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the issues are the same in all material respects as those the subject of *John P. Herber & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(30 Cust. Ct. 193, C. D. 1519), the protest was dismissed, and the matter was remanded to a single judge sitting in reappraisement for determination of the value of the merchandise in the manner provided by law (28 U. S. C. § 2636 (d)).
No. 53310.

protest 145105-K (New York).

#### Fuchs Shoe Corp. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Rao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain items of the merchandise consist of sisal handbags similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *Goldberg & Seltzer, Inc.*(36 C. C. P. A. 64, C. A. D. 399), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No. 63906.

protest 58/17015 (New York).

#### Charles Herman Contracting Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of Shoji panels similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United Enterprises et al.*v. *United States*(41 Cust. Ct. 73, C.D. 2023), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-19-00381-CV

IN THE MATTER OF A.D. §

§

§

§

§

On Appeal from 

County Court at Law No. 1

of Wichita County (CCL1-MH2019-0423)

January 7, 2020

Opinion by Justice Gabriel

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there 

was no reversible error in the trial court’s October 2, 2019 “Order to Authorize 

Psychoactive Medication.” The trial court’s order is affirmed. 

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By /s/ Lee Gabriel

 Justice Lee Gabriel
EXHIBIT 32.2


CERTIFICATION OF THE PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER


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 Magnolia Solar Corporation, (the ‘‘Company’’) on Form 10-K for year ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the ‘‘Report’’), I, Dr. Yash R. Puri, Executive Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:





(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: March 28, 2011





/s/ Yash R. PuriDr. Yash R. Puri

Executive Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)
From: jmcguire@frontiernet.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 9:35:27 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Jason McGuire

Lima, NY 14485
Exhibit 23.2

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the post-effective Amendment No. 1 to the Form S-1 registration statement of Chem Rx Corporation
(f/k/a Paramount Acquisition Corp.), (the "Company") on Form S-3 (Registration No. 333-127149) of our report, which included an explanatory paragraph as to the Company's ability to
continue as a going concern, dated March 30, 2007, with respect to our audit of the financial statements of the Company as of December 31, 2006 and for the year then ended, which report
is included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Chem Rx Corporation (f/k/a Paramount Acquisition Corp.) for the year ended December 31, 2007.

|/s/MARCUM & KLIEGMAN LLPMarcum & Kliegman LLP |  | 
|--------------------------------------------- |  | 

New York, New York
April 3, 2008

---



QuickLinks
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6175

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus RODNEY H. WILLIAMS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Vi rginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:01-cr-00231-RAJ; 2:04-cv-00129-RAJ) Submitted: March 7, 2007 Decided: April 4, 2007 Before KING, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Rodney H. Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Westley Haynie, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Rodney H. Williams appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for transcripts at Government expense. We have reviewed the record and the district court order and affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Williams , Nos. 2:01-cr-00231-RAJ; 2:04-cv-00129-RAJ (E.D. Va. Jan. 18, 2007). We deny Williams’ motion for appointment of counsel. 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. AFFIRMED
EXHIBIT 32-1





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 on Form 10-Q of WNC Housing Tax Credit Fund III, L.P. (the “Partnership”) for the quarter ended September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), and pursuant to 18 U.S.C., section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Wilfred N. Cooper, Jr., President and Chief Executive Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc., general partner of the Partnership, hereby certify that:





1.
The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





2.
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Partnership.








/s/WILFRED N. COOPER, JR.


Wilfred N. Cooper, Jr.


President and Chief Executive Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc.





Date: November 05, 2010
# Official Journal L 221/2010

| | ISSN 1725-2555
  doi:10.3000/17252555.L_2010.221.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 221 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 5324 August 2010 |

ISSN 1725-2555

doi:10.3000/17252555.L_2010.221.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 221

English edition

Legislation

Volume 5324 August 2010

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS |
| | * | Council Decision 2010/464/CFSP of 6 August 2010 on the signing and conclusion of the Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Uganda on the Status of the European Union-led Mission in Uganda | 1 |
| Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Uganda on the Status of the European Union-led Mission in Uganda | 2 |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | | Commission Regulation (EU) No 754/2010 of 23 August 2010 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables | 8 |
| | | Commission Regulation (EU) No 755/2010 of 23 August 2010 amending the representative prices and additional import duties for certain products in the sugar sector fixed by Regulation (EC) No 877/2009 for the 2009/10 marketing year | 10 |
| | | DIRECTIVES |
| | * | Commission Directive 2010/58/EU of 23 August 2010 amending Council Directive 91/414/EEC as regards an extension of the use of the active substance iprodione (1) | 12 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS

*

Council Decision 2010/464/CFSP of 6 August 2010 on the signing and conclusion of the Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Uganda on the Status of the European Union-led Mission in Uganda

1

Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Uganda on the Status of the European Union-led Mission in Uganda

2

REGULATIONS

Commission Regulation (EU) No 754/2010 of 23 August 2010 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

8

Commission Regulation (EU) No 755/2010 of 23 August 2010 amending the representative prices and additional import duties for certain products in the sugar sector fixed by Regulation (EC) No 877/2009 for the 2009/10 marketing year

10

DIRECTIVES

*

Commission Directive 2010/58/EU of 23 August 2010 amending Council Directive 91/414/EEC as regards an extension of the use of the active substance iprodione (1)

12

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A19D0561. DENNIS MITCHELL BATTS v. THE STATE.

On June 12, 2017, Dennis Mitchell Batts entered a negotiated guilty plea to

trafficking in methamphetamine, and was sentenced to 30 years to serve 15. There is

no indication that Batts filed a direct appeal from his judgment of conviction. On

September 25, 2017, Batts filed a motion to modify his sentence. The trial court

denied Batts’ motion on December 15, 2017, and on June 10, 2019, Batts filed a

“Petition for Writ of Certiorari” in the Georgia Supreme Court, which docketed the

filing as an application for discretionary appeal. However, the Georgia Supreme

Court then transferred the application here concluding that there was no basis for the

exercise of itsjurisdiction because Batts had no appeal decided by this Court. We also

lack jurisdiction.

As the Supreme Court stated in its order transferring this application, Batts is

“seeking review of his 2017 guilty plea conviction to trafficking inmethamphetamine

and a subsequent order denying his motion to modify sentence.” Ordinarily, if a party

applies for discretionary review of a directly appealable order – such as an order

denying a timely motion for sentence modification – we grant the application under

OCGA § 5-6-35 (j). To fall within this general rule, however, the application must be

filed within 30 days of entry of the order to be appealed. OCGA § 5-6-35 (d); Hill v.

State, 204 Ga. App. 582, 582 (420 SE2d 393) (1992). The requirements of OCGA §

5-6-35 are jurisdictional, and this Court cannot accept an application for appeal not

made in compliance therewith. Boyle v. State, 190 Ga. App. 734, 734 (380 SE2d 57) 

August 16, 2019
(1989). Batts’s “petition” was filed 542 days after the denial of the motion to modify

his sentence. His filing is therefore untimely and is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

08/16/2019
STIPULATION FOR ORDER OF 

NATURALIZATION - 1 

Northwest Immigrant Rights Project 

615 2nd Ave, Suite 400 

Seattle, WA 98104 

(206) 957-8611 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

 Judge Lasnik 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 

SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 

MIKHAIL STEPCHUK, et al., 

 Plaintiffs, 

 v. 

ALBERTO R. GONZALES, et al., 

 Defendants. 

 Case No. C06-570RSL 

 

 ORDER REGARDING 

 NATURALIZATION OF PLAINTIFF 

 MELETE H. BEREKETAB 

 

This Court, having reviewed the stipulation of the parties regarding the naturalization 

application of Plaintiff Melete H. Bereketab, A45-927-629, finds that Plaintiff Bereketab meets all 

the requirements for citizenship and ORDERS the United States Citizenship and Immigration 

Service to naturalize Ms. Bereketab. 

 Robert S. Lasnik 

 United States District Judge

Dated this 16th day of May, 2006. 

A

Case 2:06-cv-00570-RSL Document 7 Filed 05/16/06 Page 1 of 2
STIPULATION FOR ORDER OF 

NATURALIZATION - 2 

Northwest Immigrant Rights Project 

615 2nd Ave, Suite 400 

Seattle, WA 98104 

(206) 957-8611 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

Submitted on May 16, 2006, by: 

 /s/ Kristin B. Johnson 

 Kristin B. Johnson 

 Assistant U.S. Attorney 

 700 Stewart Street, Suite 5220 

 Seattle, WA 98101-1271 

 Telephone: 206-553-7970 

Kristin.B.Johnson@usdoj.gov 

/s/ Christopher Strawn 

Matt Adams 

WSBA No. 28287 

Kristen Kussmann 

WSBA No. 30638 

Emily Headings 

WSBA No. 33106 

Christopher Strawn 

WSBA No. 32243 

NORTHWEST IMMIGRANT 

RIGHTS PROJECT 

615 2nd Ave #400 

Seattle, WA 98104 

Telephone: (206) 957-8611 

Fax: (206) 587-4025 

E-mail: matt@nwirp.org 

 kristen@nwirp.org 

 emily@nwirp.org 

 chris@nwirp.org 

Case 2:06-cv-00570-RSL Document 7 Filed 05/16/06 Page 2 of 2
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

No. 21

- 50420 Summary Calendar
**United States of America,** Plaintiff

— Appellee **,**
versus **Victor Manuel Corona**

**- Leon,**  Defendant

— Appellant

**.** Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 2:20

- CR

- 849

- 1

Before **Jolly, Willett,** and **Engelhardt,** Circuit Judges

. **Per Curiam :**  * Victor Manuel Corona

- Leon appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry following removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He contends for the first time on appeal that the district court erred in assigning him thre e criminal history points for a 2014 illegal

* Pursuant to **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  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 cuit**  **R ule**  47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED April 13, 2022 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 21-50420 Document: 00516278746 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/13/2022No. 21

- 50420

2 reentry offense because that offense was committed by his brother, Martin Corona

- Leon, not him. The clerk of this court has granted his unopposed motion to supplement the record on appeal with district court re cords from the Eastern and Western Districts of Texas relating to convictions for “Martin Corona

- Leon.” We first note that Victor Corona

- Leon’s pro se, post
- judgment filing
serves as an effective notice of appeal. S ee Mosley v. Cozby , 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir. 1987)

. We review his arguments raised for the first time on appeal for plain error

. See Puckett v. United States , 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009)

. To establish plain error, Victor Corona

- Leon must show a forfeited error that is clear or obvious and a ffects his substantial rights. Id

. If he makes that showing, we have discretion to correct the error if it seriously affects the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings. Id

. The presentence report (PSR) indicated that Victor C orona - Leon was convicted of the 2014 illegal reentry offense under the alias “Martin Corona

Leon .” However, the PSR also showed that Victor Corona

- Leon had a long history of using aliases, including the first name Martin. Even if we were to consider the supplemental records, at most they raise some doubt as to whether Victor Corona

- Leon or his brother committed the 2014 illegal reentry offense , and a ny error by the district court in finding that the offense was committed by Victor Corona

- Leon was not clear or obvious. See id. T he district court’s judgment is therefore **AFFIRMED**

. Case: 21-50420 Document: 00516278746 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/13/2022