alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
March 9, 1970

No. 70-16

#### Richard G. Augenblick, Formerly CDR, U. S. Navy v United States.

Tried by general court-martial upon a charge alleging sodomy committed with an enlisted member of the Air Force, petitioner was convicted of lewd acts in violations of Article 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC § 934. A sentence of dismissal was approved below, and this Court denied his Petition for Review on January 11, 1963. A Petition for Reconsideration of that action was denied January 29, 1963. United States v Augenblick, 13 USCMA 706, and 708 (1963).

Petitioner has now filed a “Petition for Writ of Coram Nobis to Correct Constitutional Error”. Reduced to its essentials, the Petition avers: (1) that the offense was not service-connected within the meaning of O’Callahan v Parker, 385 U. S. 258 (1969); and (2) that the crime of which he was convicted is not a lesser included offense under the crime alleged in the specification.

In Mercer v Dillon, 19 USCMA 264, 41 CMR 264 (1970), this Court held that the limitations upon the jurisdiction of courts-martial effected by O’Callahan v Parker, supra, are not applicable to trials con*639ducted and finalized prior to that decision. Thus, this general court-martial had jurisdiction of the offense charged.

The second facet of accused’s Petition is disposed of by United States v Headspeth, 2 USCMA 635, 10 CMR 133 (1953).

Accordingly, it is, by the Court, this 9th day of March, 1970,

ORDERED:

That said Petition be, and the same is, hereby denied.

Judge Ferguson would order briefs and arguments on the question of:

> Whether an offense under Article 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice, may ever be a lesser included offense of a charge under Article 125, of the Code, inasmuch as an added element, to wit: “all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces” not present in an offense charged under Article 125, supra, is required for a finding of guilty of a violation of Article 134, supra. See Article 79, Code, supra, and paragraph 158, Manual for Courts-Martial.
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 companies listed in this notice have given notice under section 4 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843) (BHC Act) and Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 225) to engage                     *de novo*, or to acquire or control voting securities or assets of a company, including the companies listed below, that engages either directly or through a subsidiary or other company, in a nonbanking activity that is listed in § 225.28 of Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.28) or that the Board has determined by Order to be closely related to banking and permissible for bank holding companies. Unless otherwise noted, these activities will be conducted throughout the United States.                

                    Each notice is available for inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notice also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the question whether the proposal complies with the standards of section 4 of the BHC Act. 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 the applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than May 31, 2007.

**A. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta**                     (David Tatum, Vice President) 1000 Peachtree Street, N.E., Atlanta, Georgia 30309:                

*1. CapitalSouth Bancorp*, Birmingham, Alabama; to acquire 100 percent of the voting shares of Monticello Bancshares, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire Monticello Bank, both of Jacksonville, Florida, and engage in operating a savings association, pursuant to section 225.28(b)(4)(ii) of Regulation Y.                

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, May 1, 2007.

Robert deV. Frierson,

Deputy Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc.E7-8532 Filed 5-3-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed November 20 , 2014

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 14

- 00156

- CV

DONALD R. HODGES , Appellant

V.

JAMES E. OSBORNE, SR ., AS INDEPENDENT AD MINISTRATOR FOR THE ESTATE OF JAMES E. OSBORNE, JR., DECEAS ED , Appellee s

On Appeal from the 149th District Court Brazoria County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 63717

MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is an appeal from a judgment signed February 3, 2014 . On November
10, 2014, the parties requested this co urt to dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1. The motion is granted.
Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Christopher and Busby.
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 China BAK Battery, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ended June 30, 2005
as filed with the Securities Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report). I, Li Xiangqian, 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; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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

Date: August 22, 2006



By:

/s/ Li XiangqianLi Xiangqian Chief Executive
Officer
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

March 24, 2010 

y0317 

Order 

 

March 24, 2010 

139076 & (27) 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 139076 

 COA: 290120 

Macomb CC: 2003-002729-FC 

CLIFFORD GOODMAN, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 By order of December 21, 2009, the defendant’s former appellate counsel was 

directed to file a supplemental brief. On order of the Court, the brief having been 

received, the application for leave to appeal the May 12, 2009 order of the Court of 

Appeals is again considered, and it is DENIED. The defendant’s attorney acknowledges 

that the delay in filing the defendant’s May 23, 2005 application for leave to appeal in 

COA No. 262929 was due to the attorney’s erroneous calculation of the appellate filing 

deadline, and he admits his sole responsibility for the error. Accordingly, the defendant 

had been deprived of his direct appeal as a result of constitutionally ineffective assistance 

of counsel. See Roe v Flores-Ortega, 528 US 470, 477; 120 S Ct 1029; 145 L Ed 2d 985 

(2000); Peguero v United States, 526 US 23, 28; 119 S Ct 961; 143 L Ed 2d 18 (1999). 

For purposes of MCR 6.502(G)(1), the Court notes that the defendant’s January 30, 2009 

application for leave to appeal was properly denied under the standard applicable to 

direct appeals. 

 Costs are imposed against attorney Joseph L. Stewart, only, in the amount of $250, 

to be paid to the Clerk of this Court.
No. 75-6988.

#### Kaup *v.*Gunn, Warden.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Before the Second Division,

March 24, 1943

No. 48125.

#### Protest 925835-G of Schear & Schrader (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel the electric Christmas wreaths in question are similar to those involved in *United States*v. *Minami*(29 C. C. P. A. 169, C. A. D. 188). The claim at 35 percent under paragraph 353 was therefore sustained.
III 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 34 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 31, 2007 

Received 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Honoring the life of Percy Lavon Julian, a pioneer in the 

field of organic chemistry research and development and 

the first and only African American chemist to be inducted into the National Academy of Sciences. 

Whereas Percy Julian was born on April 11, 1899, in Montgomery, Alabama, the son of a railway clerk and the first 

member of his family to attend college, graduating from 

DePauw University in 1920, receiving a M.S. degree 

from Harvard University in 1923 and a Ph.D. from the 

University of Vienna in 1931; 

mstockstill on PROD1PC62 with BILLS

2 

HCON 34 RDS 

Whereas in 1935 Dr. Julian became the first to discover a 

process to synthesize physostigmine, the drug used in the 

treatment of glaucoma; 

Whereas Dr. Julian later pioneered a commercial process to 

synthesize cortisone from soy beans and yams, enabling 

the widespread use of cortisone as an affordable treatment of arthritis; 

Whereas Dr. Julian was the first African American chemist 

elected to the National Academy of Sciences in 1973 for 

his lifetime of scientific accomplishments, held over 130 

patents at the time of his death in 1975, and dedicated 

much of his life to the advancement of African Americans 

in the sciences; and 

Whereas Dr. Julian’s life story has been documented in the 

PBS NOVA film ‘‘Forgotten Genius’’: Now, therefore, be 

it 

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 

2 concurring), That the Congress honors the life of Percy 

3 Lavon Julian, a pioneer in the field of organic chemistry 

4 research and development and the first and only African 

5 American chemist to be inducted into the National Acad6 emy of Sciences. 

Passed the House of Representatives January 31, 

2007. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC62 with BILLS
112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 1296 

AN ACT 

To revise the boundaries of John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier 

Resources System Sachuest Point Unit RI–04P, Easton 

Beach Unit RI–05P, Almy Pond Unit RI–06, and Hazards Beach Unit RI–07 in the State of Rhode Island. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

†S 1296 ES

1 SECTION 1. REPLACEMENT OF JOHN H. CHAFEE COASTAL 

2 BARRIER RESOURCES SYSTEM MAP. 

3 (a) DEFINITION OF MAP.—In this section, the term 

4 ‘‘Map’’ means the map that— 

5 (1) is subtitled ‘‘Sachuest Point Unit RI–04P, 

6 Easton Beach Unit RI–05P, Almy Pond Unit RI– 

7 06, Hazards Beach Unit RI–07’’; 

8 (2) is included in the set of maps entitled 

9 ‘‘John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources Sys10 tem’’ (referred to in section 4(a) of the Coastal Bar11 rier Resources Act (16 U.S.C. 3503(a)) as the set 

12 of maps entitled ‘‘Coastal Barrier Resources Sys13 tem’’); and 

14 (3) relates to certain John H. Chafee Coastal 

15 Barrier Resources System units in the State of 

16 Rhode Island. 

17 (b) REPLACEMENT.—The Map is replaced by the 

18 map entitled ‘‘John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources 

19 System Sachuest Point Unit RI–04P, Easton Beach Unit 

20 RI–05P, Almy Pond Unit RI–06, and Hazards Beach 

21 Unit RI–07’’ and dated September 30, 2009. 

22 (c) AVAILABILITY.—The Secretary of the Interior 

23 shall keep the replacement map referred to in subsection 

24 (b) on file and available for inspection in accordance with 
3 

†S 1296 ES

1 section 4(b) of the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (16 

2 U.S.C. 3503(b)). 

Passed the Senate February 1, 2012. 

Attest: 

Secretary. 
112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 1296 

AN ACT 

To revise the boundaries of John H. Chafee Coastal 

the State of Rhode Island. Unit RI–06, and Hazards Beach Unit RI–07 in RI–04P, Easton Beach Unit RI–05P, Almy Pond Barrier Resources System Sachuest Point Unit
Exhibit
32.1











CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350)








In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Walgreen Co., an Illinois corporation
(the "Company"), on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended November 30, 2008 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Alan G. McNally,
acting Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of 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/ Alan G.
McNally


Alan G.
McNally


Chairman
and acting Chief Executive Officer


Dated:  January
6, 2009





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Walgreen Co. and will be retained by Walgreen Co. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14

- 30957 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.

GERALD CORMIER

,

Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 6:12

- CR

- 344

- 8

Before DAVIS, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Gerald Cormier has moved for leave

to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386
U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011).

Cormier h a s not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the
relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s
assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review.

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED
June 16 , 2015
Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 14-30957 Document: 00513080613 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/16/2015No. 14

- 30957

2 Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is

excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED.

See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2. Case: 14-30957 Document: 00513080613 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/16/2015
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED JOHN PHILLIP BRYANT

,

Petitioner

,

v. Case No. 5D 1 8

- 59 5

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Respondent

. ________________________________/

Opinion filed April 20, 2018

Petition for Belated Appeal A Case of Original Jurisdiction.

John Phillip Bryant

, W e wahitchka

, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General

, Tallahassee, and Kaylee D. Tatman

, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for belated appeal is granted. A copy of this opinion shall be filed

with the trial court and be treated as the notice of appeal from the Apri l 22, 2016

judgment and sentence rendered in C ase N o. 2012

- CF

- 32675

- A

, in the Circuit Court in

and for Brevard County, Florida. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(c)( 6 )(D).

PETITION GRANTED

.

PALMER, WALLIS and EISNAUGLE

, JJ., concur.
1 FW: request for data Subject: Attachments: Faustini et al. ERJ-2013 Coefficients NO2-PM10.xlsx

From: Faustini, Annunziata [ mailto:a.faustini@deplazio.it ] Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 4:58 AM To: Richmond

‐ Bryant, Jennifer < Richmond

‐ Bryant.Jennifer@epa.gov > Subject: Re: request for data


### Dear Jen,

enclosed h ere you will found a work table showing the data you requested, hoping that these information were useful to you.

I would be interested in seei ng your review on this topic; could you give me a signal about when and where it will be available to be consulted ? Thank you for your interest in our work. Annunziata Faustini

Dr Annunziata Faustini Department of Epidemiology Unit of Etiological and Occupational Epidemiology Regional Health Service Lazio Region Via C. Colombo, n. 112 00147 - Roma Scala A – Piano IV http://www.deplazio.net/
Tel: 06.99722170 | Fax: 06.99722111 | e.m ail - a.faustini@deplazio.it

.................................................................................... On 19 April 2016 at 13:18, Richmond-Bryant, Jennifer < Richmond-Bryant.Jennifer@epa.gov > wrote:

Dear Dr. Faustini,

I am a scientist with the U.S. Envi ronmental Protection Agency, and I work on the review of particulate matter. One of your studies (Faustini et al . Air pollution and multiple acute resp iratory outcomes. Eur Respir J 2013; 42: 304-303.) is of interest to our re view. Would it be possible for you to send me the data for the correlations between NO2 and PM10 for each of the six cities from that study? You state that the correlation varied between 0.22 and 0.79, but it would help to have the other four values as well. Thank you for your time and assistance, Jen Richmond-Bryant Jen Richmond-Bryant, Ph.D. | Senior Physical Scientist | Nationa l Center for Environmental Assessment | 109 TW Alexander Drive, MD B243-01, Research Tria ngle Park, NC | office: 919-541-4518 | mobile: 919-360-1466from paper Faustini et al. Air pollution and multiple acute respiratory outcomes. Eur Respir J 2013; 42: 304

‐ 303. Correlations between NO2 and PM10, by city

City study period observa

‐ tions N Pearson's Coeff Milan 2001

‐ 2005 1826 0.79
Turin 2002

‐ 2005 1309 0.72 Bologna 2001

‐ 2005 1439 0.66 Florence 2001

‐ 2005 1814 0.65
Rome 2001

‐ 2005 1823 0.50 Palermo 2002

‐ 2005 1457 0.22 significance 1%
(Reap. Dec. 9443)

#### Robert Hall Clothes, Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 868059.

(Decided June 2, 1959)

*Sharretts, Paley <& Garter*for the plaintiff.

*George Goohran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Wilson, Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation entered into between counsel for the respective parties:

> *657IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the parties hereto, that the merchandise consists of woven wool fabric.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the price, at the time of exportation to the United States of the instant merchandise, at which such or similar merchandise was freely sold 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, 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 was the appraised value less 40%.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that this appeal for re-appraisement be submitted on this stipulation.

On the agreed facts, I find and hold 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 the appraised value, less 40 per centum.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                          20,471
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  145,932
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     47,554
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               229,403
<PP&E>                                         364,482
<DEPRECIATION>                                  85,685
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 612,101
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          132,400
<BONDS>                                        261,359
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           69,000
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         4,326
<OTHER-SE>                                     126,656
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   612,101
<SALES>                                        154,019
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               154,019
<CGS>                                          129,821
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  129,821
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                14,629
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,644
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,925
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,380
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,362
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,362
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.27
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.27
        

</TABLE>