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

No. 17
- 7108

JASON W. MCDONALD , Petitioner

- Appellant ,

v. HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections , Respondent

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia , at Roanoke

. Jackson L. Kiser , Senior District Judge. ( 7:16

- cv - 00448

- JLK

- RSB )

Submitted : June 28, 2018 Decided: July 27, 2018

Before TRAXLER, WYNN, and FLOYD , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. Jason W. McDonald, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Jason W. McDonald seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting
Re spondent’s motion to dismiss and dismissing McDonald’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a ce rtificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012). A certificate of appealabilit y will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural ground s, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and c onclude that McDonald has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are ade quately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
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

ROBERT RAMESES

Petitioner, No. CIV S-04-1173 GEB GGH P

vs.

GARY LACEY, et al., 

Respondents. ORDER

 /

By order filed on August 12, 2005, the court directed respondent to either file a

motion to dismiss the petition for failure to exhaust state court remedies as to the sole claim

pending in the original petition within 30 days. On September 7, 2005, petitioner filed an

amended petition along with a request for an extension of time to file a memorandum of points

and authorities. On September 8, 2005, respondent filed a response noting that as of August 10,

2005, petitioner’s petition before the state supreme court was denied, and stating that the claim in

the original petition was thereby exhausted, eliminating any basis for respondent either to file a

motion to dismiss or a waiver on grounds of nonexhaustion. 

\\\\\

\\\\\

\\\\\

Case 2:04-cv-01173-GEB -GGH Document 31 Filed 09/14/05 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

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that respondent’s reply, filed on September 8,

2005, has discharged the court’s order filed on August 12, 2005.

DATED: 9/13/05

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

GGH:009

rame1173.pst2

Case 2:04-cv-01173-GEB -GGH Document 31 Filed 09/14/05 Page 2 of 2
No. 57711.

#### Tropical Sun Co. and Perryman, Mojonier Company *v.*United States,

protests 173554-K and 173555-K (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of chairs the same in all material respects as those involved in *Calif-Asia Co., Ltd.*v. *United States*(39 C. C. P. A. 133, C. A. D. 475), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
No. 49640.

#### Protests 40699-K, etc., of H. A. Astlett & Co. (Boston).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel sole crepe rubber similar to that the subject of *United States*v. *F. Lester Kittle, Inc.*(31 C. C. P. A. 233, C. A. D. 276) was held entitled to free entry as claimed.
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

JEFFREY MARSHALL,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S 04-1694 LKK PAN P

vs.

SHERIFF GARY R. STANTON, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner without counsel, has filed this civil rights action seeking

relief 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 April12, 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. Plaintiff

has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 72-

304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire

file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by

proper analysis.

Case 2:04-cv-01694-LKK -EFB Document 35 Filed 08/05/05 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

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed April 12, 2005, are adopted in full;

and

2. Claims against defendants Fuller, Ferrer, Joe Headley, Childers, M. E. Cullin,

Molby, Castro, Rivera, Garrison, Cathline Bidiou, Schultz, K. Purcells and Kevin O’Rourke are

dismissed without prejudice.

DATED: August 5, 2005.

/s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

/mars1694.805

Case 2:04-cv-01694-LKK -EFB Document 35 Filed 08/05/05 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly report of Luna Innovations Incorporated (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending
June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Dale E. Messick, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to
§ 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.



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ DALE E. MESSICK    
|Dale E. Messick        
|Chief Financial Officer

August 7, 2008
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

 Henceforth the parties shall use the complete case number as set forth in this order to

1

identify this action.

 See Footnote 1, supra. 2

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MITCHELL J. KLEMASKE,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1750 LKK JFM P1

vs.

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF 

CORRECTIONS AND 

REHABILITATION, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

ROBERT HECKER, et al.,

Plaintiffs, No. CIV S-05-2441 LKK JFM P2

vs.

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF 

CORRECTIONS AND 

REHABILITATION, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER SETTING STATUS CONFERENCE

 /

Case 2:04-cv-01750-LKK-JFM Document 47 Filed 05/04/06 Page 1 of 3
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

Pursuant to the provisions of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16 and Local Rule

16-240, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. A Status (Pretrial scheduling) Conference is set in each of the above-captioned

cases for June 1, 2006, at 11:00 a.m. in Courtroom # 25 before the undersigned.

2. The parties are not required to submit to the court or serve upon the parties a

status report, but counsel shall attend the Status Conference prepared to briefly set out their

views on the following matters:

 a. Service of process;

 b. Possible joinder of additional parties;

 c. Any expected or desired amendment of the pleadings;

 d. Jurisdiction and venue;

 e. Anticipated motions and the scheduling thereof;

 f. Anticipated discovery and the scheduling thereof;

 g. Future proceedings, including setting appropriate cutoff dates for discovery

and law and motion and the scheduling of a pretrial conference and trial;

 h. Modification of standard pretrial procedures specified by the rules due to the

relative simplicity or complexity of the action or proceedings;

 i. Whether these matters are to be tried before this court or the district court. 

See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c);

 j. Whether the counsel will stipulate to the trial judge acting as settlement

judge and waiving any disqualifications by virtue of his so acting, or whether they prefer to have

a Settlement Conference before another judge;

 k. Any other matters that may add to the just and expeditious disposition of this

matter.

/////

/////

Case 2:04-cv-01750-LKK-JFM Document 47 Filed 05/04/06 Page 2 of 3
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

3

3. Counsel are reminded of their continuing duty to notify chambers immediately

of any settlement or other disposition (see Local Rule 16-160).

DATED: May 4, 2006.

12

heck2441.sc

Case 2:04-cv-01750-LKK-JFM Document 47 Filed 05/04/06 Page 3 of 3
Exhibit 32.2

Section 1350 Certification of Principal Financial Officer


The  undersigned the Executive Vice  President,  Finance,  and Secretary of Jaco
Electronics,  Inc.  (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, to the best of my knowledge,  that:  (1) the Annual Report on Form 10-K of
the Company for the year ended June 30, 2006 (the "Annual Report")  accompanying
this  certification  fully  complies with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or
15(d)  of  the  Securities  Exchange  Act of  1934,  as  amended;  and  (2)  the
information  contained in the Annual  Report  fairly  presents,  in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of
the  dates  and for the  periods  presented  as  required  by such  report.  The
foregoing  certification is based upon, among other things, my  responsibilities
as  principal  financial  officer  of the  Company,  my own  due  diligence  and
representations   made  by  certain  other  members  of  the  Company's   senior
management.


Date:  September 28, 2006

                              /s/ Jeffrey D. Gash
                              --------------------------------------------------
                              Jeffrey D. Gash
                              Executive Vice President, Finance and Secretary
                              (Principal Financial Officer)
For inclusion in docket no. EPA–HQ–OAR–2007–0492, Review of Particulate Matter National Ambient Air

Quality Standards (NAAQS)

EPA Meeting Summary

Date of Meeting: October 16, 2012

Topic: Discuss PM NAAQS proposed rule section on initial area designations

Attendees: Representatives from the following state and local air agencies:

Connecticut (Anne Gobin)

New York (Dave Shaw)

Maryland (Tad Aburn)

Allegheny County, PA (Jim Thompson)

Georgia (Jac Capp)

Indiana (Keith Baugues)

Louisiana (Tegan Treadaway)

Kansas (Rick Brunetti)

Linn County, Iowa (Jim Hodina)

Colorado (Garry Kaufman)

California

– CARB (Lynn Terry)

Sacramento, CA (Larry Greene)

Great Basin Air District, CA (Ted Schade)

Puget Sound, WA (Craig Kenworthy)

Nancy Kruger (National Association of Clean Air Agencies)

EPA representatives: Michael Ling, Rich Damberg, Anna Wood, Rhea Jones, Beth Palma, Scott Mathias,

James Hemby, Sara Schneeberg

Summary of Meeting: EPA staff summarized the initial area designation process as outlined in the June

2012 PM NAAQS proposal. EPA reviewed the timing of a typical 2

‐ year area designation schedule, which

would include the submittal of area designation recommendations, including area boundaries, by States

and Tribes within 1 year of promulgating a new or revised standard (e.g., by December 2013, assuming

promulgation of the PM standard in December 2012); EPA issuance of letters to States and Tribes at

least 120 days prior to finalizing designations (August 2014); and EPA issuance of final designations

(December 2014).

State and local air agency representatives asked questions and made suggestions about the future

designations process for the new/revised PM NAAQS. EPA indicated that it would issue designations

guidance shortly after the promulgation of any new or revised PM NAAQS, and would continue

consulting with states throughout the designations process.
Exhibit 32.2

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 Quarterly Report of Elite Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2007 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
Report), I, Mark I. Gittelman, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer 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:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the consolidated financial condition of the Company as of the
  dates presented and the consolidated result of operations of the Company for the periods presented.

|                        |  |                                         
|----------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------
|Date:
November 14, 2007 |  | /s/
	    Mark I. Gittelman              
|                        |  | Mark I. Gittelman                       
|                        |  | Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of
|                        |  | Elite Pharmaceuticals, Inc.             

This certification has been furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Elite Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and will be retained by Elite Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.

---
EXHIBIT 32.1

    CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly report of AMP Productions, Ltd. on Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Thomas E. Mills, Chief
Executive Officer, President, Principal Accounting Officer 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:

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

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


February 11, 2011



By   /s/ Thomas Mills
     Thomas E. Mills
     President,  Chief  Executive  Officer,
     Chief  Financial  Officer,  and
     Principal Accounting Officer
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

Order Granting Leave to File Supplemental Answer

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SACRAMENTO DIVISION

FILIA UIPI,

Petitioner,

v.

DIANA BUTLER,

Respondent.

CASE NO. CIV S-04-1301 MCE KJM P

ORDER

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, Respondent is granted leave to file a

Supplemental Answer to the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. Petitioner may file a reply

within 30 days from the date of service of this order. The Clerk is directed to file the

Supplemental Answer attached to Respondent’s request for leave.

DATED: July 26, 2005.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

uipi1301.ext.wpd

Case 2:04-cv-01301-MCE -KJM Document 8 Filed 07/27/05 Page 1 of 1
##### 



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 Clearant, Inc. (the Company) for the
quarter ended September 30, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), I, Alain Delongchamp, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); 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/ ALAIN DELONGCHAMP
    
    May 16, 2005Alain Delongchamp
    
    DateChief Executive Officer
July 31, 1944

No. 49659.

Suit 4457.

#### Oakland *Food Products Co. et al.*v. *United States.*

C. D. 769 affirmed. C. A. D. 281.
```

                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

To the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission

Arthur Andersen LLP ("Andersen") has represented to Kaiser Aluminum &
Chemical Corporation that the audit of its consolidated financial statements as
of December 31, 2001 and for the year then ended was subject to Andersen's
quality control system for the U.S. accounting and auditing practice to provide
reasonable assurance that the engagement was conducted in compliance with
professional standards and that there was appropriate continuity of Andersen
personnel working on audits, availability of national office consultation and
availability of personnel at foreign affiliates of Andersen to conduct the
relevant portions of the audit.
```
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

LEON WILSON CROCKETT, No. CIV S-04-1489-FCD-CMK

Plaintiff, 

vs. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

JACK SUTER, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, brings this civil

rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On August 25, 2004, the court dismissed plaintiff’s

complaint with leave to amend and directed plaintiff to file an amended complaint within 30 days. 

On January 19, 2005, plaintiff was again directed to file an amended complaint within 30 days. 

To date, plaintiff has failed to comply. 

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

Case 2:04-cv-01489-FCD-CMK Document 13 Filed 09/22/05 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

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff shall show cause in

writing, within 20 days of the date of service of this order, why this action should not be

dismissed for lack of prosecution and failure to comply with rules and court orders. See Local

Rule 11-110. 

DATED: September 21, 2005.

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-01489-FCD-CMK Document 13 Filed 09/22/05 Page 2 of 2
No. 58544.

protests 133970-K (A) and 133970-K (B) (Providence).

#### Maurice Lobsitz *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

It was stipulated that for duty purposes the clean content of the wool in question was determined in accordance with the instructions contained in T. D. 53159, which was issued following *United States*v. *Fred Whitaker Company, Inc.*(40 C. C. P. A. 19, C. A. D. 492). In that case, it was held that the statutory language, clean content of wool, as used in paragraph 1102 (b), was construed to mean the product commercially usable as wool and from which all the weight of grease and foreign material has been removed, including the wool fibers which are unavoidably and irrevocably lost as a result of commercially applied cleaning processes. Accordingly, the wool in question was held dutiable at the rate applied by the collector on the basis of the percentages of clean content as set forth in the column headed “T. D. 53159 Clean Content” in the schedule attached to and made a part of the decision in this case.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          22,741
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  409,937
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     47,034
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               576,530
<PP&E>                                       1,971,601
<DEPRECIATION>                                 550,626
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,305,805
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          796,811
<BONDS>                                        553,816
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      7,000
<COMMON>                                       160,123
<OTHER-SE>                                     446,009      
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,305,805
<SALES>                                      2,145,118
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,145,118
<CGS>                                        1,724,671
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,002,869
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              43,495
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                113,158
<INCOME-TAX>                                    35,661
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             77,497
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    77,497
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.48
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.45
        

</TABLE>
No. 58555.

protests 217720-K, etc. (New York).

#### Julius Wile Sons & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *R. C. Williams & Co., Inc.*(40 C. C. P. A. 130, C. A. D. 508) and *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.