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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-6768

SAMUEL ANTHONY WILDER, Petitioner - Appellant,

v. STAN BURTT, Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (3:08-cv-00136-MBS)

Submitted: October 15, 2009 Decided: October 21, 2009

Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Samuel Anthony Wilder, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Samuel Anthony Wilder seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district

court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000);

Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Wilder has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Wilder’s motion for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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
No. 50417.

#### Protests 957942-G, etc., of Bullocks, Inc., et al. (Los Angeles, etc.).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

The protests were dismissed.
No. 67830.

#### Frank P. Dow Co., Inc., and Meurer Lamp and Shade Co. *v.*United States,

protest 62/2911 (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of iron works similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Hensel, Bruckmann & Lorhacher, Inc.*v. *United States*(47 Cust. Gt. 112, C.D. 2289), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
NOTE PAYABLE

                           By and between
                International Mercantile Corporation
                              And
                     Red River Trading Company


This note payable is effective this 7th day of September, 1999, by and
between International Mercantile Corporation, a Missouri corporation
(the Buyer) and Red River Trading Company, Inc., a Maryland corporation
(the Seller).

Red River Trading Company has entered into a sales agreement with
International Mercantile Corporation for tangible personal property as
reflected in the attached bill of sale.  The total purchase price of
said property being $150,000.  Both parties agree to the following
payment terms:
        Annual Payment:   $25,000 plus accrued interest
        Interest Rate:    8.0% compounded annually
        Payment Dates:    January of each year, beginning January 2000.
        Term:             Six (6 ) years


All property is sold in as is condition.


For: 	Red River Trading Company, Inc.  (Seller)


/s/Timothy Jewell                                       ----------
By:  Timothy Jewell, President				Date



For:	International Mercantile Corporation (Buyer)


/s/Frederic Richardson                                  ---------
By:  Frederic Richardson, Chairman                      Date





<PAGE>   EX-10.5
No. 64842.

#### Capitol Records, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 59/33041, etc. (New York).

*361Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of recording tapes similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Electric & Musical Industries (US), Ltd.*v. *United States*(42 Cust. Ct. 87, C.D. 2070), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
No. 49616.

#### Protests 76306-K, etc., of Stone & Downer Co. (Boston).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

It was stipulated that the gutta-percha is the same in all material respects as that passed upon in *United States*v. *United States Rubber Co.*(31 C. C. P. A. 174, C. A. D. 269). In accordance therewith the claim for free entry under paragraph 1697 was sustained.
17.04
No. 56386.

protests 174121-K, etc. (New York).

#### Frederick B. Cooper Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

It was stipulated that the issue and merchandise herein are the same in all material respects as those involved in *Axel Stokby et al.*v. *United States*(4 Cust. Ct. 343, C. D. 358), except that in the liquidation of the entries covered by the instant protests, an allowance was made for gelatinous substance equal to 10 percent of the content of the tins, whereas there should have been a larger percentage allowed for the gelatinous substance. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following the decision cited the merchandise was held dutiable at 3)4 cents per pound under paragraph 703, Tariff Act of 1930, upon the basis of the net weight of the contents of the cans, less such percentage allowance for the gelatinous substance contained in the respective tins, as set forth in the decision.
Case 2:01-cv-01229-SD   Document 57   Filed 01/12/04   Page 1 of 2

Case 2:01-cv-01229-SD   Document 57   Filed 01/12/04   Page 2 of 2
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### F LORIDA



### S ECOND 

### D ISTRICT

TYRAIL RAHEEM KENDRICK

,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Appellee.

No. 2D 2022

- 0970

August 16 , 2024

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Samantha L.

Ward

, Judge.

Rachael E. Reese and Olivia M. Goodman of O'Brien Hatfield Reese, P.A.,

Tampa, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and J. Wade Stidham,

Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

SILBERMAN, LaROSE, and BLACK, JJ., Concur.

Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
```
Navy Aviation: V-22 Development--Schedule Extended, Performance Reduced,
and Costs Increased (Letter Report, 01/13/94, GAO/NSIAD-94-44).

Major elements of the Navy's V-22 Osprey remain inadequate or untested
after eight years of development.  In May 1986, the Navy anticipated
full-scale development of the V-22 to be completed in June 1992 at a
total cost of $1.8 billion.  In October 1992, when the full-scale
development contract was terminated, the V-22 had been in development
for six years at a cost of $2 billion.  Even so, the V-22 was more than
3,500 pounds heavier than its specifications called for, which limited
its operational capabilities.  Design and operational work was not
completed on such critical components as the wing, the main landing
gear, flight controls, and the rotor drive system.  The price tag for
purchasing each of the tilt-rotor aircraft, which are designed to take
off and land like helicopters and to fly like fixed-wing planes, could
reach $64 million.  GAO recommends that the Navy use more-realistic
capability assumptions in its new cost, operational, and effectiveness
analysis of the V-22 variant and the helicopter alternatives.  GAO also
recommends that if the V-22 variant is chosen as a cost-effective
candidate, the Navy eliminate or significantly reduce the overlap in its
development and production to ensure that operational requirements are
met before procurement funds are requested or a commitment is made to
production.

--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------

 REPORTNUM:  NSIAD-94-44
     TITLE:  Navy Aviation: V-22 Development--Schedule Extended, 
             Performance Reduced, and Costs Increased
      DATE:  01/13/94
   SUBJECT:  Naval aircraft
             Short takeoff/landing aircraft
             Vertical takeoff/landing aircraft
             Helicopters
             Aircraft research
             Cost effectiveness analysis
             Aircraft components
             Defense capabilities
             Naval aviation
             Testing
IDENTIFIER:  V-22 Aircraft
             Osprey Aircraft
             CH-46 Helicopter
             
************************************************************************

We regret that the full text of this item is presently unavailable.

See the GAO FAQ - Section 2.0 for printed copy ordering information.
The FAQ is automatically retrieved with all WAIS search results or 
can be obtained by sending e-mail to: [email protected]
```
<PAGE>






                                                                   EXHIBIT 32.1


    WRITTEN STATEMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, I, the
undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of C2, Inc. (the
"Corporation"), hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that the Quarterly Report
on Form 10-Q of the Corporation for the quarter ended September 30, 2003 (the
"Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Corporation.




/s/  William T. Donovan
--------------------------------------------
William T. Donovan
President, Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer

Date:    November 3, 2003


                                       27
1 

### Ogulei, David

From: **Dennis J Warchol <dennis.warchol@veoliaes.com>** Sent: **Wednesday, November 06, 2013 8:36 AM** To: **Ogulei, David** Subject: **Title V Permit Application**



### Nancy Paddock will be giving you are call this morn ing between 10:30 AM and 11 AM to discuss you quest ions. I think we have them all figured out. Are you available or is a better time. Thanks

**SERVICE FIRST SAFETY ALWAYS**

**Dennis J. Warchol EHS Manager** 

**Veolia ES Technical Solutions, L.L.C. Trade Waste Incineration Facility**  **#7 Mobile Avenue Sauget, IL 62201**  **618-271-2804 (ext.169) 618-271-2128 (fax)**  **Dennis.warchol@VeoliaES.com www.VeoliaES.com** 

**This e-mail message from Veolia ES Technical Soluti ons, LLC is for the sole use of the intended recipi**  **ent(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. A**  **ny unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribu tion is prohibited. If**  **you are not the intended recipient, please communic ate with the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all**  **copies of the original message and delete it from all computers.**
Exhibit
32







CERTIFICATION





The
undersigned certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, that:





(1) The
accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended September 27, 2008,
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 accompanying Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.





Date:  December
      23, 2008
                  /s/ Terry M. DauenhauerPresident
      and Chief Executive OfficerDate:  December
      23, 2008
                  /s/ Randy L. AcresChief
      Financial Officer














79
No. 76-459.

No. 76-478.

#### Communications Workers of America *v.*Western Electric Co., Inc., et al.; and Colorado Department of Labor and Employment et al. *v.*Western Electric Co., Inc., et al.

Appeals from Sup. Ct. Colo, dismissed for want of substantial federal question.

Mr. Justice Brennan and Mr. Justice Stewart would note probable jurisdiction and set cases for oral argument.
No. 47833.

Suit 4389.

#### *United States*v. *Ayrton Metal Co., Inc.*

*C.*D. 577 reversed November 4, 1942. C. A. D. 221.
GAO-03-1075R Congressional Medal of Honor Society of the United States of America 

United States General Accounting Office

Washington, DC 20548 

August 7, 2003 

The Honorable F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr. 

Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary 

House of Representatives 

Subject: Federally Chartered Corporation: Review of the Financial Statement Audit 

Reports for the Congressional Medal of Honor Society of the United States 

of America for 2000-2002

Dear Mr. Chairman: 

As requested, we reviewed the audit reports covering the financial statements of the 

Congressional Medal of Honor Society of the United States of America, a federally 

chartered corporation, for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2001, and 2000. The 

society’s purposes are to preserve the dignity and honor of the Medal, protect its 

recipients from exploitation, foster patriotism, and inspire youth to worthy 

citizenship. 

Federally chartered corporations are required under 36 U.S.C. 10101 to 

• present the corporation’s assets and liabilities and reasonable detail on the 

corporation’s income and expenses in annual financial statements, and 

• obtain an annual financial audit by an independent public accountant. 

The objective of our review was to determine whether the audit reports complied 

with the financial reporting requirements of the law. In carrying out our work, we 

reviewed the corporation’s financial statements and the accompanying notes, 

performed certain analytical procedures related to information presented in the 

financial statements, and reviewed the auditors’ reports. However, we did not review 

the auditors’ working papers, and we are not rendering an audit opinion. Our review 

disclosed no reportable instances of noncompliance with the financial reporting 

requirements of the law. 
Page 2 GAO-03-1075R Congressional Medal of Honor Society of the United States of America 

The audit reports included the auditors’ opinions that the financial statements of the 

corporation were presented fairly in accordance with U.S. generally accepted 

accounting principles. We are returning the audit reports you sent with your letter. 

Sincerely yours, 

Jeanette M. Franzel 

Director 

Financial Management and Assurance 

w/o Enclosures 

(194261)
No. 54002.

#### Birnbaum Pressel Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 68126-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
##### 



Exhibit 32 SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS Darrin J. Campbell, Chief Executive Officer and Peter T. Reno, Chief Financial
Officer of Anchor Glass Container Corporation, hereby certify that: 1. The quarterly report of the registrant on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended September 30, 2004 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 quarterly report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
registrant as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the quarterly
report. Date: November 12, 2004 /s/Darrin J. Campbell  Name: Darrin J. Campbell
Title: Chief Executive Officer
 /s/ Peter T. Reno  Name: Peter T. Reno
Title: Chief Financial Officer
No. P68/258.

protest 64/3030 (Los Angeles).

#### International Customs Service, Inc., a/c Micro Auto Imports *v.*United States,

Maletz, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protest consists of motor brushes in chief value of carbon, which are part of electric motors and are dedicated to use on or with such electric motors, similar in all material respects to those ¡the subject of *James G. Wiley*Co., *a/c Ungar Electric*Tools, *Inc.*v. *United States*(49 Cust. Ct. 199, Abstract 66961), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Before the Second Division,

April 8, 1948

No. 52259.

protests 512151-G, etc. (New York).

#### S. Ontra & Bro., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

*300Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BENJAMIN ADAMS,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-0694 DFL KJM P

vs.

TERESA SCHWARTZ, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C.

§ 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1)(B) and Local General Order No. 262.

On July 29, 2005, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein

which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to

the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. Neither party has filed

objections to the findings and recommendations.

The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be

supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY

ORDERED that:

/////

Case 2:04-cv-00694-RRB -KJM Document 19 Filed 09/19/05 Page 1 of 2
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

2

1. The findings and recommendations filed July 29, 2005 are adopted in full; and 

2. Defendants’ December 30, 2004 motion to dismiss is granted as to defendant

Mehta, but denied as to defendant Fisher.

DATED: 9/16/2005

DAVID F. LEVI

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-00694-RRB -KJM Document 19 Filed 09/19/05 Page 2 of 2
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 38 (Tuesday, February 27, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 8793]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-3277]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-60,837]


Bright Horizons/MSX/Norfolk Assembly Plant, a/k/a Ford Family 
Service & Learning Center, Norfolk, VA; Notice of Termination of 
Investigation

    Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an 
investigation was initiated on January 26, 2007, in response to a 
worker petition filed on behalf of workers at Bright Horizons/MSX/
Norfolk Assembly Plant, Norfolk, Virginia.
    The petitioners have requested that the petition be withdrawn. 
Consequently, the investigation has been terminated.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 15th day of February, 2007.
Richard Church,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
 [FR Doc. E7-3277 Filed 2-26-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
Exhibit 99.2
                            Certification Pursuant to
                             18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
                             as Adopted Pursuant to
                  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of American Express
Certificate Company (the "Company") for the annual period ended December 31,
2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), Philip C. Wentzel, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
hereby certifies, 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.


     /s/ Philip C. Wentzel
     -----------------------
Name:    Philip C. Wentzel
Title:   Chief Financial Officer
Date:    March 20, 2003
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains restated summary financial information
extracted from the consolidated balance sheets and consolidated
statements of operations of the Company's Form 10-K for the year
ended June 30, 1998, and is qualified in its entirety by reference to
such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                             808
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      344
<ALLOWANCES>                                         8
<INVENTORY>                                        292
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  1605
<PP&E>                                            1188
<DEPRECIATION>                                     447
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    2975
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              642
<BONDS>                                            544
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                         11
<COMMON>                                            87
<OTHER-SE>                                        1153
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      2975    
<SALES>                                           1698
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  1698
<CGS>                                              898
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     1401
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  48
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    271 
<INCOME-TAX>                                        96
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                175 
<DISCONTINUED>                                      15 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0 
<NET-INCOME>                                       190 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.57 
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.53 
        

</TABLE>
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 

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

VANCE EDWARD JOHNSON, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

D.L. RUNNELS, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:04-cv-776-TLN-EFB P 

ORDER 

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 

U.S.C. § 1983. On January 28, 2014, after receiving the parties’ confidential settlement 

statements, the court scheduled a settlement conference for March 13, 2014, at the U.S. District 

Court, 501 “I” Street, Sacramento, California 95814. ECF No. 257. On the same day, the court 

issued a writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum to secure plaintiff’s attendance, in person, at the 

conference. ECF No. 258. Nearly a month later, with the conference set for fewer than three 

weeks out, plaintiff notified the court of his preference to attend the hearing via video conference, 

out of fear that his property at the prison may be disturbed during his absence. ECF No. 259. 

While that motion was pending, the court received notice that the process of relocating plaintiff to 

Sacramento was already underway. 

///// 

///// 

Case 2:04-cv-00776-TLN-EFB Document 260 Filed 03/06/14 Page 1 of 2
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 

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s last minute request to appear via 

video (ECF No. 259) is denied as moot. The Clerk of the Court shall serve a courtesy copy of 

this order on the Out-to-Court Desk, California State Prison - Sacramento, P.O. Box 290007, 

Represa, California 95671. 

DATED: March 6, 2014. 

Case 2:04-cv-00776-TLN-EFB Document 260 Filed 03/06/14 Page 2 of 2