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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-1363

BANK OF AMERICA, NA, 

Plaintiff - Appellee, 

v. 

NELSON L. BRUCE, 

Defendant - Appellant, 

and

SOUTH CAROLINA HOUSING TRUST FUND; CHARLESTON AREA CDC; 

SC HOUSING CORP; CAPITAL RETURN INVESTMENTS LLC; REMINISCE 

HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION INC, 

Defendants. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at 

Charleston. Richard Mark Gergel, District Judge. (2:17-cv-02617-RMG) 

Submitted: June 14, 2018 Decided: June 18, 2018

Before TRAXLER, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. 

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 
2

Nelson L. Bruce, Appellant Pro Se. Brandon Stuart Vesely, ALBERTELLI LAW,

Tampa, Florida, for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
3

PER CURIAM: 

Nelson L. Bruce seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the 

recommendation of the magistrate judge and remanding this foreclosure proceeding to 

the South Carolina state court from which it was removed. 

Generally, “[a]n order remanding a case to the State court from which it was 

removed is not reviewable on appeal or otherwise.” 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d) (2012). 

The Supreme Court has instructed that “§ 1447(d) must be read in pari materia with 

[28 U.S.C.] § 1447(c), so that only remands based on grounds specified in § 1447(c) are 

immune from review under § 1447(d).” Things Remembered, Inc. v. Petrarca, 516 U.S. 

124, 127 (1995). Thus, “§ 1447(d) is tightly circumscribed to cover only remand orders 

within the scope of . . . § 1447(c), based on (1) a district court’s lack of subject matter 

jurisdiction or (2) a defect in removal other than lack of subject matter jurisdiction [raised 

by a timely motion].” Doe v. Blair, 819 F.3d 64, 66 (4th Cir. 2016) (internal quotation 

omitted). “Whether a district court’s remand order is reviewable under § 1447(d) is not 

determined by whether the order explicitly cites § 1447(c) or not.” Borneman v. United 

States, 213 F.3d 819, 824 (4th Cir. 2000). 

Here, the district court remanded on the basis that it lacked subject matter 

jurisdiction. Accordingly, we are without jurisdiction to review the remand order and 

dismiss this appeal. 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. 

DISMISSED
Outlook for the 24‐Hour PM2.5 NAAQS values at the Tacoma South L monitor

The low 2010 and 2011 98th percentile 24‐Hour PM2.5 values brought the 2011 design value (DV) under

the NAAQS.  This means the 2012 PM2.5 DV will almost certainly also be below the NAAQS. For the 2012

DV to exceed the NAAQS, the 2012 98th percentile would have to exceed 49 ug/m3

.  49 ug/m3 is the

highest 98th percentile value ever recorded at South L, and occurred over a decade ago (in 2000), which

was well before the current standard of 35 ug/m3 and the current thresholds for calling burn bans.  

Data from the first half of the 2012 burn season can be used to make an improved prediction for the

2012 98th percentile, and also the 2012 DV. For context, the current 8th highest value for 2012 (from Jan‐

Feb 2012) is 19.4 ug/m3

, and there were 3 exceedance days, with one being an exceptional event

(caused by widespread power outages) which potentially could be excluded from the 98th percentile and

DV calculation.  

For the following estimate I was conservative and did not exclude the potential exceptional event. I

estimated the likely 98th percentile for 2012 by taking data from the first half of 2012 and combining it

with randomly generated Nov‐Dec 2012. The random Nov‐Dec 2012 was generated from daily values

from 12 previous years’ of Nov‐Dec. Performing this random generation of a potential Nov‐Dec 1012

10,000 times ( a 10,000 trial Monte Carlo simulation) yields a probability of the 2012 98th percentile

exceeding 49 ug/m3 of < 0.2%. Thus, the probability of the 2012 DV exceeding the NAAQS is < 0.2%.
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.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).

The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the office of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than March 16, 2007.

**A. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City**                     (Donna J. Ward, Assistant Vice President) 925 Grand Avenue, Kansas City, Missouri 64198-0001:                

*1. Jeffrey G. Dawson Revocable Trust dated 6-10-05*, Mound City, Kansas, Jeffrey G. Dawson, trustee, to retain voting shares of Cunningham Agency, Inc., and thereby indirectly retain voting shares of Farmers and Merchants Bank of Mound City, both in Mound City, Kansas.                

**B. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas**                     (W. Arthur Tribble, Vice President) 2200 North Pearl Street, Dallas, Texas 75201-2272:                

*1. J & V Grist Family, Ltd.*, Andrews, Texas, and general partner, John E. Grist, Andrews, Texas; to acquire voting shares of Andrews Holding Company, Andrews, Texas, and thereby indirectly acquire voting shares of Commercial State Bank, Andrews, Texas.                

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, February 26, 2007.

Robert deV. Frierson,

Deputy Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. E7-3572 Filed 2-28-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
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

6

United States District Court

Eastern District of California 

Mauricio R. Munoz,

Petitioner, No. Civ. S 04-1658 LKK PAN P

vs. Order

John Marshall, Warden,

Respondent.

-oOoJuly 8, 2005, petitioner filed a motion for release pending

resolution of his habeas petition without the proof of service

required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 5 and Local Rule 5-135. Petitioner

shall file proof of service within ten days.

So ordered.

Dated: August 30, 2005. 

 /s/ Peter A. Nowinski 

 PETER A. NOWINSKI

 Magistrate Judge

Case 2:04-cv-01658-LKK -EFB Document 18 Filed 08/31/05 Page 1 of 1
No. 66818.

#### Murbas Trading Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 60/11811, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Richardson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise is the same in all material respects as that involved in *Dalton Cooper, Inc., et al.*v. *United States*(41 Cust. Ct. 271, C.D. 2051), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.

Donlon, J., dissented for the reasons set forth in her dissenting opinion in C.D. 2051, *supra.*
Aug 17 2010 

Mr. Richard D. Blosser 

3037 Lakeview Terrace 

Fullerton, CA 92835 

Dear Mr. Blosser 

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your petition for reconsideration from 

§ 61.303(b)(2), Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we cannot process your 

request. 

Why We Cannot Process Your Request 

We entered your June 14, 2010, petition for reconsideration into the public docket (No. FAA2008-1223), but we are unable to process your request any further. Again, the information you 

sent does not comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 11.101 (copy enclosed). For us to 

consider your petition, you must show the following: 

 That you have a significant additional fact and why you did not present it in your original 

petition.

 That we made an important factual error in our denial of your original petition; or

 That we did not correctly interpret a law, regulation, or precedent.

In your letter, you stated your belief that we have made a factual error in our determination of 

public interest. You maintain that documented past volunteer pilot services in support of local 

law enforcement actions is evidence of public interest. However, the purpose of your request to 

be exempted from aviation medical standards and be allowed to exercise pilot privileges with a 

known disqualifying medical condition is incompatible with aviation safety. Therefore, your 

intent to volunteer pilot services does not constitute a fact relevant to either your airman medical 

qualifications or the broader public interest of requiring that pilots be medically qualified in 

order to maintain the safety of the national air space. 

Therefore, no further action will be taken on your petition and the docket will be closed. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

Dr. Frederick E. Tilton 

Federal Air Surgeon 

Enclosure
Exhibit 10.2


AMENDMENT NO. 1


 


TO


 


CONSULTING AGREEMENT


 


This AMENDMENT NO.
1 TO CONSULTING AGREEMENT (“Amendment”) is made on this 25th day of October, 2016, by and between JOSEPH DWYER (d/b/a
DWYER HOLDINGS LLC) (the “Consultant”) and MISONIX, INC. (the “Company”).


 


WHEREAS, the
Company and the Consultant entered into a Consulting Agreement dated as of September 13, 2016 (the “Consulting Agreement”)
pursuant to which the Consultant provides certain services to the Company;


 


WHEREAS, the
Company and the Consultant wish to amend the Consulting Agreement to reflect certain additional provisions with respect to the
obligations of the Company following the Term and any Renewal Term (as such terms are defined in the Consulting Agreement).


 


NOW, THEREFORE,
in consideration of the foregoing recitals and other good and valuable consideration the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby
acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:


 


1.    Unless
otherwise provided, capitalized terms in this Amendment shall have the same meanings ascribed to them in the Consulting Agreement.


 


2.    The
last sentence of Section 6 of the Consulting Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:


 


“During the Term
and any Renewal Term and for a period of at least five years after the expiration or termination of this Agreement, the Company
shall provide the Consultant with coverage under its directors’ and officers’ liability policy that is no less favorable
in any respect than the coverage then provided to any other present or former executive, officer or director of the Company. Should
the Consultant be required or requested by the Company to provide documentary evidence or testimony in connection with any claim
or legal matter arising from or connected with the services provided under this Agreement, the Company agrees to pay all reasonable
expenses (including reasonable fees incurred for legal counsel) in complying therewith and, following the Term and any Renewal
Term, $400 per hour for sworn testimony or preparation therefor payable in advance.”


 


3.    Except
as expressly amended hereby, the terms and conditions of the Consulting Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.


 




    	 	 	 



     


    

 


4.    This
Amendment may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original but all of which, when taken together
shall constitute one and the same agreement. Facsimile execution and delivery of this Amendment is legal, valid and binding execution
and delivery for all purposes. This Amendment shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of New
York applicable to contracts made and to be performed entirely within such state.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
the parties hereto have executed this Amendment as of the date first above written.    


 


	MISONIX, INC.	 
	 	 	     
	By:	 /s/ Stavros G. Vizirgianakis	 
	Name: Stavros G. Vizirgianakis	 
	Title: Interim Chief Executive Officer	 
	 	 
	/s/ Joseph Dwyer	 
	Joseph Dwyer
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 43 (Tuesday, March 6, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9948-9949]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-3838]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding 
Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for 
approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 
1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 225), and all other 
applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company 
and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the 
power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the 
banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, 
including the companies listed below.
    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings 
required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the 
Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The application also will be available 
for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested 
persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated 
in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the 
acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether 
the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards 
in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, 
nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States. 
Additional information on all bank holding companies may be obtained 
from the National Information Center website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these 
applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the 
offices of the Board of Governors not later than April 2, 2007.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (Tracy Basinger, Director, 
Regional and Community Bank Group) 101 Market Street, San Francisco, 
California 94105-1579:
    1. Banner Corporation, Walla Walla, Washington; to merge with San 
Juan Financial Holding Company, and thereby indirectly acquire 
Islanders Bank, both of Friday Harbor, Washington.
    2. Franklin Resources, Inc., San Mateo, California; to acquire 8.11 
percent of the voting shares of Coast Financial Holdings, Inc., and 
thereby

[[Page 9949]]

indirectly acquire voting shares of Coast Bank of Florida, both of 
Bradenton, Florida.
    3. Wells Fargo & Company, San Francisco, California; to merge with 
Placer Sierra Bancshares, Sacramento, California, and thereby 
indirectly acquire Placer Sierra Bank, Auburn, California.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, March 1, 2007.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. E7-3838 Filed 3-5-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
Exhibit 31(b)
                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Anthony Christon, certify that:

1.       I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Jaclyn, Inc.;

2.       Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.       Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.       The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

         (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

         (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

         (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most
recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and

5.       The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):

         (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

         (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control
over financial reporting.

Date: September 27, 2005           /s/ ANTHONY CHRISTON
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                                   Anthony Christon, Principal Financial Officer
# Table 1

USSGL Guide to Cancellations, Partial Adjustments, and Specific Permanent Reductions (Cheat Sheet)	

Page &P	IRC Meeting Handout December 5, 2019
No. 65500.

#### American Bayard Cycle Co. *v.*United States,

protest 59/14564 (Cleveland).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues herein are similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *Schmidt Pritchard & Co. et al.*(47 C.C.P.A. 152, C.A.D. 750), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Before the First Division,

July 28, 1944

No. 49645.

#### Protests 60950-K, etc., of Pacific Customs Brokerage Co. (Portland, Maine).

Opinion by

Walker, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel the protests were sustained as to certain of the dimension stock similar in all material respects to that involved in *United States*v. *Pacific Customs Brokerage Co.*(31 C. C. P. A. 102, C. A. D. 256).
1 A t t a c h m e n t

H e r e i s o u r N e t

w o r k Ass e ssm e n t as r

e q u e st e d

. Le t m e k n o w i f y

o u h a v e a n y q u e st io n s o r

c o n c e rn s. F W : 2010 N e t w o r k A s s e ss m e n t

B R IG E TTE T O LL S T R U P

t o :

K a t h e r i n e H o a g

05 / 02 / 2011 03 : 00 P M

H i d e D e t a i l s

F r o m: "B R I G ETTE T O L L S T R U P " < B T O LL S T R U P @ a i r qu a l it y.o r g>

To : K a t h e r i n e H o a g /R 9 / U S E P A / U S @E P A

H i s t o r y : Th i s m e ss a g e h a s b e e n r e p li e d t o a nd f o rwa r d e d

.

N e t w o r k A ss e ss me n t 2 0 10 S M A Q M D. pdf
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 Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration 

                    This notice corrects the Notice of Determinations Regarding Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance which was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on February 27, 2007 (72 FR 8794-8795).                 

This revises the reporting period dates on pages 8794-8795 to read February 12 through February 16, 2007 instead of January 12 through January 16, 2007. 

Signed in Washington, DC, this 1st day of March 2007. 

Ralph DiBattista, 

Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. 

[FR Doc. E7-4058 Filed 3-7-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SANDRA DEANNE SHAYNE,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-04-1492 MCE DAD P

vs.

DEBORAH JACQUES, et al.,

Respondents. ORDER

 /

Good cause appearing, Respondents’ September 21, 2005 request for an enlargement

of time is granted. Therefore, the answer to Petitioner’s petition for writ of habeas corpus shall

be filed no later than October 21, 2005.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: September 22, 2005.

/shay1492.111ans

Case 2:04-cv-01492-MCE -DAD Document 19 Filed 09/23/05 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 of m-Wise, Inc. ("the Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof ("the Report"), I, Zach Sivan, Chief Executive Officer, 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 comply 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 Company.








/s/ Zach Sivan





Zach Sivan, 
Chief Executive Officer


Dated: May 16, 2011