alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7128

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus EZEL CROMER, a/k/a Man Cromer, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CR-96-768, CA-98-1430-8-13) Submitted: October 8, 1998 Decided: Octcober 28, 1998 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ezel Cromer, Appellant Pro Se. Beth Drake, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). The district court found that this was a second or successive motion for which Appellant had failed to receive permission from this Court to file. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we denya certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Cromer , Nos. CR-96- 768; CA-98-1430-8-13 (D.S.C. July 21, 1998). 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
#### UNITED STATES, Appellee v RUDOLPH J. BLOCKER, Private, U. S. Marine Corps, Appellant

18 USCMA 368, 40 CMR 80

No. 21,717

May 23, 1969

*Lieutenant Donald B. Brant, Jr.,*JAGC, USNR, was on the pleadings for Appellant, Accused.

*Colonel C. R. Larouche,*USMC, was on the pleadings for Appellee, United States.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM:

We granted the accused’s petition for review to consider whether the sentence instructions were sufficiently “shape[d] ... to the evidence” to apprise the court members adequately of the matters they could consider in assessing an appropriate sentence. United States v Wheeler, 17 USCMA 274, 278, 38 CMR 72.

Unlike *Wheeler,*the instructions in this case are not limited to the maximum permissible punishment and the mechanics of voting, but several substantial matters of mitigation were disregarded in the instructions. On this record, we cannot safely conclude that the imbalance in the instructions was harmless error. United States v Cottrell, 17 USCMA 485, 38 CMR 283; United States v Heagy, 17 USCMA 492, 38 CMR 290.

The decision of the board of review as to the sentence is reversed, and the record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for sub*369mission to the board of review for reconsideration of the sentence in light of *Wheeler.*

DARDEN, Judge

(dissenting):

I dissent.

In summarizing, the president of the court-martial mentioned Blocker’s good combat record and his having pleaded guilty as items members of the court should consider in his favor in deciding a sentence. The only item the president mentioned against him was the record of his previous conviction by court-martial. The president omitted reference to a favorable letter from the minister at the home of the accused and to Blocker’s having had family problems when he returned from overseas. Defense counsel read the letter in full, however, and informed the court about Blocker’s family problems and his interest in the Marine Corps that was evidence by his having completed two schools.

Considering the accused’s prior conviction for absence without leave, breach of restriction, willful disobedience of an order, and using provoking words, together with the two present absence offenses covering eighteen-day and nearly seven-month periods, I hardly believe the court was likely to award a more lenient sentence if the president had reminded them of a letter from the minister and of Blocker’s statement that he had family problems. In my opinion, the president was not preju-dicially unfair in his summary. Consequently, I would affirm the decision of the board of review.
Before the Second Division,

April 11, 1945

No. 50116.

#### Protests 62823-K, etc., of J. J. Edel et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

It was stipulated that certain items of the merchandise are similar in all material respects to the merchandise the classification of which was involved in Abstract 38647, which record was admitted in evidence herein. In accordance therewith the protests were sustained.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

,

Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

Decem ber 1 4 , 2016 

# Order

Clerk December 14 , 2016

15 4 5 4 9 ( 2 1 )

KIMBERLY MARIE MARIK

,

P laintiff

- Appell ee

, SC: 15 4 5 4 9

v COA: 3 3 3687

Macomb CC , Family Division :

11

- 037046

- DC

PETER BRIAN MARIK

,

Defendant

- Appell ant

. _________________________________________/

On order of the C hief Justice , the joint motion of the Michigan Coalition of

Family Law Appellate Attorneys and the Legal Services Association of Michigan to

participate as amici curiae and to file a brief in support of the application for leave to

appeal is GRANTED. The amicus brief submitted on December 6

, 2016, is accepted for

filing

.
No. 45065.

#### Protests 740997-G, etc., of M. Zwiebel (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

It was stipulated that the squawker balloons in question are in part of bamboo similar to those the subject of Abstract 40493. The claim at 45 percent under paragraph 409 was therefore sustained.
#### John Johnston and Thomas F. Reilly, *Appellants, v.*Walter S. Allen, *Respondent.*

Judgment affirmed, with costs.
----

**Exhibit 23.****2**

Dr. Roger SteiningerChief Consulting Geologist

Consent of Expert

To:        

Gryphon GoldCorporation

United States Securities and ExchangeCommission

I, Roger Steininger, do hereby consent to thefiling of the written disclosure of the technical report titled the *TechnicalReport on the Mineral Resources of the Borealis Gold Project Located in MineralCounty, Nevada, USA*(the "Technical Report") dated April 28, 2008 and any extracts from ora summary of the Technical Report in the Quarterly Report for Gryphon GoldCorporation on Form 10Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2009 ("QuarterlyReport"), andto the filing of the Technical Report with the United States Securitiesand Exchange Commission.

I also consent to the use of my name in the Quarterly Report.

Dated this 12th of August, 2009.

*/s/ Roger Steininger                           *Dr. Roger Steininger, Ph.D., CPG

 

----
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, John A. Scarlett, M.D., certify, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of Tercica, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2008 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Tercica, Inc.

Date: May 12, 2008



By:

/s/ John A. Scarlett, M.D.John A. Scarlett, M.D.Chief Executive Officer


This certification accompanies the Form 10-Q to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of Tercica, Inc. under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Form
10-Q), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
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 Health and Human Services

###### Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

In accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announces the aforementioned meeting.

*Time and Date:*                         12 p.m.-4 p.m., May 8, 2007 (Closed).                     

*Place:*                         Teleconference.                     

*Status:*                         The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with provisions set forth in Section 552b(c)(4) and (6), Title 5 U.S.C., and the Determination of the Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92-463.                     

*Matters to be Discussed:*                         The meeting will include the review, discussion, and evaluation of applications received in response to PEP 2007-R-04, “Provider and Public Health Input for Vaccine Policy Decisions.”                     

*Contact Person for More Information:*                         Christine J. Morrison, PhD Scientific Review Administrator, Office of the Chief Science Officer, CDC, 1600 Clifton Road NE, Mailstop D-72, Atlanta, GA 30333, Telephone (404)639-3098.                     

                        The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been delegated the authority to sign                         **Federal Register**                         notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, for both CDC and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.                     

Dated: March 26, 2007. 

Elaine L. Baker, 

Acting Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

[FR Doc. E7-6010 Filed 3-30-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
EXHIBIT 23.1





Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm





We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (SEC File No.s. 333-130998, 333-130997, 333-125919) of Protalex, Inc. of our report dated August 19, 2011, with respect to the financial statements, which appear in the Annual Report of Protalex, Inc. on Form 10-K for the year ended May 31, 2011.





/s/SHERB & CO, LLPSHERB & CO, LLP





New York, NY


August 19, 2011
(Reap. Dec. 10500)

#### W. J. Byrnes & Co. of N.Y., Inc., et al. *v.*United States

Entry No. 770642, etc.

(Decided April 30, 1963)

*Barnes, Richardion*<£ *Colburn*for the plaintiffs.

*John W. Douglas,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Bao, Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement enumerated in schedule “A,” annexed to this decision and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court, as follows:

> 1. That the involved merchandise was imported on or after the effective date of the Customs Simplification Act of 1956 and is not identified on the Final List *458published by the Secretary of the Treasury pursuant to said act (T.D. 54521) ; that appraisement was accordingly made under tbe provisions of Section 402 of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended by said Customs Simplification Act.

> 2. That on or about the dates of exportation, the prices at which such or similar merchandise was freely sold or offered for sale in the principal markets of the country of exportation, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade for exportation to the United States, such prices including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other expenses incidental to placing the merchandise in condition packed ready for shipment to the United States were the appraised values less the proportionate part of the amount on the invoices described as buying commission.

> 3. That the appeals on Schedule “A” annexed may be submitted on this stipulation the same being limited to the merchandise and issues described herein-above and abandoned in all other respects.

Upon the agreed facts, I find export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise covered by said appeals for reappraisement and that such values were the appraised values, less the proportionate part of the amount on the invoices described as buying commission.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
Page 1 of 3

Disposition Comments

Docket No: FAA-2013-0704 These comments are in

Directorate ID: 2013-NM-074-AD response to an SNPRM

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

Next Step: FRAN SNPRM

 No Comments/Only Supportive Comments Received – If this box is checked, no signatures are 

required.

 Has the referenced service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? If yes, 

list latest revision and attach a copy. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously 

published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance.

Instructions: Summarize all comments by issue (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of 

each issue. All comments relating to the same issue should be discussed together. Do not list all of the issues 

from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and 

describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA-IR-M-8040.1C Chapter 9.

ISSUE 1: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD: 

If NO, we don’t agree because 

ISSUE 2: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD:
Page 2 of 3

If NO, we don’t agree because 

For additional issues, double-click here
Page 3 of 3

Signature Section

Signature indicates concurrence with this action.

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

ASE Printed Name: Date

Branch Manager Date
Opinion filed May 27 , 2016



### In The 

# Eleventh Court of Appeals

_____ _ _____


### No. 11

- 1 6

- 00 114

- C V

_____ _ _____



### IN THE INTEREST OF X.G.P. , A CHILD

On Appeal from the 266th District Court

Erath County, Texas T rial Court Cause No. CV

- 33116

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

A ppellan t ha s filed in this court a “Notice of Nonsuit” in which she states that
she “no longer desires to prosecute this suit.” We understand the “Notice of
Nonsuit” to be a motion to dismiss this appeal, and we have filed it as such. See

T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.1(a)(1).

The motion to dismiss is granted, and th e appeal is dismissed

.

PER CURIAM

May 27 , 2016

Panel consists of: Wright, C.J., Willson , J., and Bailey , J.
## Williams , Rene e (OST) )\n(iyiL-oi - h07 - QST-f^^ " ^Sl4 -

Subject : FW : Chisan a Essentia l Ai rServic e

From : Brit t M . Larso n [mailto:britt.larson@kl2northstar.org ] Sent : Thursday , Apri l 08 , 201 0 9:3 8 A M To : Little , Cynthi a M (DOT ) Subject : Chisan a Essentia l Ai rServic e M yfamil yha s bee n visitin g Chisan a fo rfou rgenerations . I trave l t o m ypropert yi n Chisan a severa l time s pe ryear , regularl yusin g Essentia l Ai rService . I n th e futur e I pla n t o liv e par t tim e i n Chisana . M ygrandparents , ful l tim e resident s o fChisana , nee d th e Essentia l Ai rprogra m fo racces s t o medica l treatment s an d t o trave l outside . Essentia l Ai r Servic e i s th e ONL

Ypractical , reliable , an d affordabl e yea rroun d mean s o ftranspor t t o Chisana . Trave l i s alread y extremel ylimite d b yChisana' s remot e locatio n an d acces s restriction s o fth e Nationa l Par k Service . I fth e servic e t o Chisan a i s cut , al l visito racces s t o Chisan a wil l b e limite d b yth e soarin g cos t o fai rcharter s o rmaintainin g a privat e plane . Peopl e nee d th e reliabl e an d affordabl e acces s t o propertie s i n Chisan a provide d b yEssentia l Ai rService . I hop e thi s wil l b e take n int o accoun t befor e yo u conside reliminatin g th e Essentia l Ai rServic e t o Chisana . Than k yo u fo ryou rtime , Brit t Larso n P O BO X8426 2 Fairbanks , AK99708 

### (907)322-731 2
Exhibit 32.6

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C.§1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Currency Series, a Series of The Frontier Fund on Form 10-Q for the
period ended September 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned hereby certifies, to the best of his 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 Currency Series.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                                                                                                           
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Robert J. Enck                                                                                                                         
|Robert J. Enck                                                                                                                             
|President and Chief Executive Officer of Equinox Fund Management, LLC, the Managing Owner of Currency Series, a Series of The Frontier Fund
|                                                                                                                                           
|/s/ Brent Bales                                                                                                                            
|Brent Bales                                                                                                                                
|Chief Financial Officer of Equinox Fund Management, LLC, the Managing Owner of Currency Series, a Series of The Frontier Fund              

Date: November 26, 2008
#### McCabe Bros. Co. *v.*United States

No. 6319.

Entry No. 51-S.

Invoice dated Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, September 1944.

Certified September 1944.

Entered at Superior, Wis., September 19, 1944.

(Decided August 12, 1946)

*George D. McClintock*and *Robert J. Christianson (George D. McClintock*of counsel) for the plaintiff.

*Paul P. Rao,*Assistant Attorney General *(Richard H. Welsh,*special attorney), for the defendant.

Kincheloe, Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision upon the following oral stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> It is hereby stipulated and agreed, subject to the approval of the court, that the market value or price at the time of exportation of the merchandise involved herein, at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, plus, when not included in such price, the cost of containers and *283coverings of whatever nature, and all other costs, charges, and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition, packed ready for shipment to the United States is as follows: $26.50 per ton, United States funds, f. o. b. boat, Fort William.

> It is further stipulated and agreed that there was no higher foreign value for the merchandise herein at the time of exportation.

On the agreed facts I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such value is $26.50 per ton, United States funds, f. o. b. boat, Fort William.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Daniel Meyers, certify that:

1.     I
have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of The First Marblehead Corporation;

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 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 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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f))
for the registrant and have:



5.     The
registrant's other certifying officer 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):



Dated:
November 10, 2008

/s/ DANIEL MEYERS Daniel Meyers Chief Executive Officer and President


---



QuickLinks
No. 47437.

#### Protests 36517-K, etc., of Dan Brechner & Co. (New York).

Opinion by

Dallinger, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following in principle *Woolworth*v. *United States*(26 C. C. P. A. 221, C. A. D. 20) the protests were sustained as to this item.