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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-8015

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

ONEIL MARKEITH WATSON,

Defendant – Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District 

Judge. (2:08-cr-00045-RBS-FBS-1; 2:09-cv-00195-RBS-FBS)

Submitted: May 26, 2010 Decided: June 8, 2010

Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Oneil Markeith Watson, Appellant Pro Se. D. Monique Broadnax, 

Special Assistant United States Attorney, James Ashford 

Metcalfe, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, 

for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Oneil Markeith Watson seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 

Supp. 2009) motion. 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). 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 

grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive 

procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion 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 conclude that Watson has not made the requisite showing. 

Accordingly, we deny Watson’s motion for transcripts at the 

Government’s expense, deny a certificate of appealability, and 

dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the 

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 
3

materials before the court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

DISMISSED
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY

2000 TRAVERWOOD ROAD

ANN ARBOR, MI 48105-2498

 OFFICE OF

AIR AND RADIATION

July 18, 2011

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Meeting with Nissan on December 7, 2010

FROM: Don Kopinski

TO: Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0162

This memorandum documents a meeting held on December 7, 2010 between Nissan, DoT, and

EPA staff. The following people attended:

Nissan: Jeff Marsee, Takuya Ikeda, Asae Miyake, Brian Bolton

EPA: Tony Fernandez, Byron Bunker, Jeff Cherry, Cle Jackson, Don Kopinski

DoT: Maurice Hicks, Ryan Harrington, Kevin Green, Angel Jackson

The discussion focused on requirements for Class 2b and 3 vehicles in the HD GHG/fuel 

consumption rule, including credits for FFVs, full useful life and warranty requirements, and air 

conditioning leakage.
No. 55963.

protest 159995-K (New York).

#### Dr. Roman Martins *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protest.
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13**  **- 6272** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. MALIK X. SHAKUR, a/k/a Willie Lamb , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Columbia
. Cameron McGowan Currie , District Judge. ( 3:08

- cr - 00485

- CMC

- 2; 3:11

- cv - 70102

- CMC )

Submitted : April 18, 2013 Decided: April 23, 2013

Before WILKINSON, GREGORY , and DAVIS , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Malik X. Shakur, Appellant Pro Se. Nancy Chastain Wicker, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not b inding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Malik X. Shakur seeks to appeal the district court ’ s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for reconsideration of the district court ’ s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. A. § 2255 ( West Supp. 2012 ) motion and for denying his first motion for reconsideration . The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (B) (2006).
A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “ a

s ubstantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. ” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006)
. When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district cour t’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 grounds, the prisoner must demonst rate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion 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 conclude that Shakur has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We3 dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argumen t would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
Exhibit 32.1 - Chief Executive Officer Certification (Section 906)

                        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 Neighborhood Connections, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2005 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report").
I, Ruth Selmon, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and
belief:

               (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 Company.

/s/ Ruth Selmon
---------------------------
    Ruth Selmon
    Chief Executive Officer
    Chief Financial Officer

Date  August 19, 2005
      ---------------
<PAGE>
##### 



Exhibit 31.2
 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a)
      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;
andc)
    
    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
  a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal
controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the
registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; andb)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a
significant role in the registrants internal controls over financial reporting.
  /s/ Mark J. DeCesaris

Mark J. DeCesaris
acting Chief Financial 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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ERIC HODGSON, ) 2:04-cv-2436-GEB-GGH

)

Plaintiff, )

) ORDER

v. )

)

MBNA AMERICA BANK, N.A., )

)

Defendant. )

)

On August 11, 2005, Plaintiff’s counsel caused a proposed

order to be filed, in which it is stated “that the case has settled

and the parties are circulating a settlement agreement that will

result in the immediate dismissal of this action” and that counsel “is

willing to postpone” its motion to withdraw as counsel “in order to

accommodate the completion of the settlement.” Therefore, the motion

to withdraw is rescheduled for hearing on August 29, 2005, at 10:00

a.m. 

Furthermore, since the Court has been notified that this

action has settled, the parties have until 4:30 p.m. on August 26,

2005, to either file a document dismissing this action or to lodge a

proposed order which could effect dismissal. See L.R. 16-160(b). (“A 

Case 2:04-cv-02436-GEB-GGH Document 42 Filed 08/12/05 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

27

28

2

failure to file dispositional papers on the date prescribed by the

Court may be rounds for sanctions.”).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 12, 2005

/s/ Garland E. Burrell, Jr.

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-02436-GEB-GGH Document 42 Filed 08/12/05 Page 2 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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LOUIE VILLALBA,

Petitioner,

v.

MIKE KNOWLES, et al.,

Respondents.

No. CIV S-04-2608 LKK DAD P

ORDER RESPONDENTS’ REQUEST

FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

GOOD CAUSE HAVING BEEN SHOWN, Respondents are granted a thirty-day

extension of time, to and including November 2, 2005, within which to file their response to the

Petition.

DATED: October 3, 2005.

DAD:4

vill2608.eot

Case 2:04-cv-02608-LKK -DAD Document 10 Filed 10/04/05 Page 1 of 1
**Exhibit 31.1****Certification**     I, Paul A. Lang, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Arch Western Resources, LLC;     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  (b) [Reserved.]  (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  (d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial 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 hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.       /s/ Paul A. Lang         Paul A. Lang    President  Date: November 14, 2006
No. 65509.

#### Geo. H. Bowman & Son *v.*United States,

protests 148714-K, 148715-K, and 148716-K (Baltimore).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of Rockingham earthenware similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Justin Tharaud & Son, Inc., et al.*v. *United States*(44 Cust. Ct. 216, C.D. 2177), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No. 50989.

#### Protest 41994-K of Samuel Shapiro & Co., Inc. (Baltimore).

Opinion by

Eicwall, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel the court found that the facts herein agreed upon were such as to bring the case within the holding in *John Barr*v. *United States*(11 Cust. Ct. 88, C. D. 801), which record was incorporated herein. (See *John Barr*v. *United States,*324 U. S. 83, decided February 5, 1945.) In accordance therewith it was held that the currency of the invoices should be converted at the buying rate in the New York market at noon on the day of exportation (the “free” rate of exchange for pounds sterling), as certified by the Federal Reserve bank and set forth by the collector on the entry. The protest was sustained to this extent.
-----------

8 

o 

CO 


LO
 ---or­ d:, 

LO 

(\J 

N 

,­

(\J 

LL 

LO 


CO 


LO 

CJ) 

d:, 

LO 

(\J 

N 

,­

(\J 

1-- March 11, 2010 CJ) 

,­

The Honorable Ray LaHood 

United States Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Dear Secretary' LaHood: 

On behalf Kintetsu International, I am writing to express our strong support for 

the application of Delta Air Lines for new nonstop service between Seattle and Haneda. 

Approval ofDelta's new service would be a major benefit for our region, where 

many corporations have strong trade and market presence with Japan. The growth of our 

business ties with Japan has created demand for increased capacity to Tokyo. Our 

business travelers look to the convenience of flying into Tokyo's downtown Haneda 

airport. 

Seattle.is a proven and successful gateway to Asia. This summer Delta is adding 

new service to Beijing and Osaka, building SEA-TAC into an important West Coast 

gateway. The addition of Haneda as a destination is a natural fit that would clearly 

benefit our business travelers. 

Thank you for consideration of this request. 

Frank Lee 


Presi,dent . 


Kintets-qInternatioIlal .... 


Go Anywhere 

wwwkintetsu.com 

Chicago Cincinnati Los Angeles New Jersey New York San Jose
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

United States District Court

Eastern District of California 

Brady Armstrong,

Plaintiff, No. Civ. S 04-2136 GEB PAN P

vs. Order

D. L. Runnels, et al.,

Defendants.

-oOoDefendants move to stay discovery pending service of the

first-amended complaint. The court has ordered service thereof

and so the request is moot.

Accordingly, defendants’ June 23, 2005, motion is denied. 

The time to respond to any outstanding discovery request by

either party is extended 30 days after service of this order.

So ordered.

Dated: September 6, 2005. 

 /s/ Peter A. Nowinski 

 PETER A. NOWINSKI

 Magistrate Judge

Case 2:04-cv-02136-GEB-EFB Document 39 Filed 09/06/05 Page 1 of 1
October 31, 1951

No. 55969.

protest 133973-K.

#### Zoltan Erdosi *v.*United States,

Motion of Government for rehearing denied.
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

[Proposed] Order Granting Defendants’ Motion for a Protective Order

1

BILL LOCKYER

Attorney General of the State of California

JAMES M. HUMES

Chief Assistant Attorney General

FRANCES T. GRUNDER

Senior Assistant Attorney General

MONICA N. ANDERSON

Supervising Deputy Attorney General

VAN KAMBERIAN, State Bar No. 176665

Deputy Attorney General

1300 I Street, Suite 125

P.O. Box 944255

Sacramento, CA 94244-2550

Telephone: (916) 324-3892

Fax: (916) 324-5205

Attorneys for Defendants Johns, Cervantes, Dickinson,

Rodriguez, Sandy, Hughes, Justin, Mabon, Brown and

Hickman

SA2005300248

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SACRAMENTO DIVISON

LESLIE JAMES JONES,

Plaintiff,

v.

LIEUTENANT E. SANDY, et al.,

Defendants.

CASE NO. CIV-S-04-1933 DFL GGH P

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’

MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE

ORDER 

Good cause appearing, Defendants are relieved of their obligation to respond to

Plaintiff’s Requests for Production of Documents, Requests for Interrogatories and Requests for

Admissions pending the Court’s ruling on Defendants’ motion to dismiss and issuance of a

discovery order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 9/13/05 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows

_____________________________________ 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

jones1933.po.wpd

Case 2:04-cv-01933-ALA Document 30 Filed 09/14/05 Page 1 of 1
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- 

Alan J. Kessel (Cal. Bar No.: 130707) 

Keli N. Osaki (Cal. Bar No.: 179920) 

Brandon Q. Tran (Cal. Bar No.: 223435) 

BUCHALTER NEMER 

A Professional Corporation 

18400 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 800 

Irvine, California 92612-0514 

Telephone: (949) 760-1121 

Facsimile: (949) 720-0182 

E-mail: btran@buchalter.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff DIRECTV, INC. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SACRAMENTO DIVISION 

DIRECTV, INC., a California corporation, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

WENDELL MCGOWEN, 

Defendant. 

Case No.: CIV-S-04-2035 MCE KJM 

Hon. Morrison C. England, Jr. 

ORDER ON STIPULATION FOR 

VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF 

DEFENDANT WENDELL MCGOWEN 

AND REQUEST TO RETAIN 

JURISDICTION

ORDER

HAVING READ AND CONSIDERED the forgoing Stipulation for Voluntary 

Dismissal of Defendant WENDELL MCGOWEN and Request to Retain Jurisdiction, and such 

other pleadings, documents and records deemed appropriate by the Court, and good cause 

appearing therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 

(1) Defendant WENDELL MCGOWEN is hereby dismissed from this action 

without prejudice; 

(2) Each of said parties to bear its/his own costs and attorneys’ fees; and 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

Case 2:04-cv-02035-MCE -KJM Document 17 Filed 09/28/05 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

27

28 

-2- 

/ / / 

(3) The Court shall retain jurisdiction over Plaintiff DIRECTV, Inc. and 

Defendant WENDELL MCGOWEN to enforce the terms described above of the Settlement 

Agreement between those parties dated August 23, 2005 and hereby refers any further 

proceedings in this action to enforce such terms of the Settlement Agreement to a Magistrate 

Judge of this District. 

Dated: September 28, 2005 

__________________________________ 

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 2:04-cv-02035-MCE -KJM Document 17 Filed 09/28/05 Page 2 of 2
No. 50476.

#### Protests 25761-K, etc., of Foster Canning Co., Inc. (Galveston).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of dog food similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Corporacion Argentina de Productores de Carnes*v. *United States*(32 C. C. P. A. 175, C. A. D. 304), which record was admitted in evidence herein, the protests were sustained as claimed.
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. 1350)

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Wells Real Estate Investment Trust II, Inc. for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
Report), the undersigned, Leo F. Wells, III, Principal Executive Officer of the Registrant, and Douglas P. Williams, Principal Financial Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to
§906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of our knowledge and belief:



| | (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 Registrant.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                           
|---------------------------
|                           
|/s/ LEO F. WELLS, III      
|Leo F. Wells, III          
|Principal Executive Officer
|August 8, 2007             
|                           
|                           
|/s/ DOUGLAS P. WILLIAMS    
|Douglas P. Williams        
|Principal Financial Officer
|August 8, 2007