alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# National preparedness month exposition on DSCR

/ Published Sept. 18, 2018
RICHMOND, VA, 
In recognition of September as National Preparedness Month, Defense Logistics Agency Installation Operations Richmond’s Security and Emergency Services hosted a preparedness exposition in the new Center Restaurant Sept. 13, Defense Supply Center Richmond.

During the exposition, representatives from Emergency Management, Police, Fire and Emergency Services, Antiterrorism, Criminal Intelligence, Physical Security and Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear and Explosives answered questions and explained how their departments and programs contribute to the overall preparedness and safety of the installation.

Those who attended the two-hour event learned how to improve personal preparedness in the workplace, at home or in public locations. They were also able to learn how to prepare for and respond to emergencies, including natural, manmade disasters and potential terrorist attacks.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 174 (Tuesday, September 9, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 47473]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-23760]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. ER97-2701-000]


Allegheny Power Service Corporation; Notice of Filing

September 3, 1997.
    Take notice that on August 7, 1997, Allegheny Power Service 
Corporation tendered for filing an amendment in the above-referenced 
docket.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedures (18 CFR 385.211 and 18 CFR 385.214). All such 
motions or protests should be filed on or before September 16, 1997. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants 
parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must 
file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-23760 Filed 9-8-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsNonlinear aerodynamic wing designThe applicability of new nonlinear theoretical techniques is demonstrated for supersonic wing design. The new technology was utilized to define outboard panels for an existing advanced tactical fighter model. Mach 1.6 maneuver point design and multi-operating point compromise surfaces were developed and tested. High aerodynamic efficiency was achieved at the design conditions. A corollary result was that only modest supersonic penalties were incurred to meet multiple aerodynamic requirements. The nonlinear potential analysis of a practical configuration arrangement correlated well with experimental data.Document ID19880004697Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsBonner, Ellwood*(Rockwell International Corp. Los Angeles, CA, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 5, 2013Publication DateDecember 1, 1985Publication InformationPublisher: NASASubject CategoryAerodynamicsReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.26:3950NASA-CR-3950Accession Number88N14079Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 505-43-23-10CONTRACT_GRANT: NAS1-15820Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19880004697.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
DOE STANDBY AND OFF MODE POWER MEASUREMENTS

DISHWASHER POWER MEASUREMENTS (W)

Off/Inactive Delay Start Cycle Finished

Unit 1 0.09 1.11

Unit 2 1.58 2 1.99

Unit 3 0.03 2.06 2.19

Unit 4 1.42 4.22 4.18

Unit 5 1.87 1.88 1.81

Unit 6 0.41 0.89

Unit 7 1.65 1.83 1.62

Unit 8 0

Unit 9 N/A 2.1 2.03

Unit 10 0 0

Unit 11 0.36 0.41

Unit 12 0.15 0.27 0.26

Unit 13 0.19 0.32 0.24

Unit 14 0

AVERAGE 0.69 1.91 1.56

DEHUMIDIFIER POWER MEASUREMENTS (W)

Off/Inactive Bucket Full Bucket Removed Delay Start

Unit 1 2.46 2.48 2.48

Unit 2 0.50 0.93 0.93

Unit 3 0.50 0.92 0.92

Unit 4 1.04 1.10 1.10

Unit 5 0.88 1.82 1.82 1.84

Unit 6 0.45 0.63

Unit 7 0.88 1.81

Unit 8 2.32 2.59 3.30

Unit 9 0.00

Unit 10 2.41 2.47 2.52

Unit 11 0.00 0.19

Unit 12 1.03 1.37 1.24

Unit 13 0.45 1.10 1.15

AVERAGE 1.04 1.46 1.81 1.54

1.63

Mode

Mode
OVEN POWER MEASUREMENTS (W)

Sabbath Off/Inactive Delay Start Cycle Finished

Unit 1 1.28 2.01

Unit 2 9.51 7.84 9.58

Unit 3 9.96 3.73 9.72

Unit 4 1.35

Unit 5 1.47 2.10 1.68

Unit 6 1.14

Unit 7 1.28 2.00 1.53

Unit 8 3.29 3.27 3.40

Unit 9 3.37 3.47

Unit 10 10.66 10.78

Unit 11 2.04 2.05 2.04

Unit 12 8.20 8.38

AVERAGE 7.59 3.80 5.35 1.75

COOKTOP POWER MEASUREMENTS (W)

Sabbath Off/Inactive

Unit 1 2.99

Unit 2 0.00

Unit 3 19.10

Unit 4 0.00

Unit 5 0.00

Unit 6 0.60

Unit 7 2.36

Unit 8 0.00

AVERAGE #DIV/0! 3.13

Mode

Mode
RANGE POWER MEASUREMENTS (W)

Sabbath Off/Inactive Delay Start Cycle Finished

Unit 1 5.18

Unit 2 3.31 3.28 4.15

Unit 3 0.96 0.33 0.95 0.8

Unit 4 4.75 4.52

Unit 5 4.65 4.64 4.76

Unit 6 4.40 4.46 4.65

Unit 7 4.52 4.48 4.56

Unit 8 2.06

Unit 9 0.00

Unit 10 2.01

Unit 11 2.08 2.07 2.09

Unit 12 2.10

Unit 13 2.09 2.09

Unit 14 2.03 2.02 2.03

Unit 15 2.06

Unit 16 4.49 4.37 4.46

Unit 17 2.30 2.37

Unit 18 0.00

Unit 19 4.48 4.66

Unit 20 1.48 2.13 1.72

Unit 21 2.16 2.14 2.22 2.19

AVERAGE 3.72 2.68 2.95 2.52

Mode
Exhibit 99.1

                    AMERICAN PHYSICIANS SERVICE GROUP, INC.
                   NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
                           December 31, 2002 and 2001

                                Certification of
                             Chief Executive Officer
                   of American Physicians Service Group, Inc.


This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 and accompanies the annual report on Form 10-KSB (the "Form 10-KSB") for
the year ended December 31, 2002 of American Physicians Service Group, Inc., a
Texas corporation (the "Issuer").

      I, Kenneth S. Shifrin, the Chief Executive Officer of Issuer certify that
      to the best of my knowledge:

         (i)  the Form 10-KSB fully complies with the requirements of section
              13(a) or section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15
              U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

         (ii) the information contained in the Form 10-KSB fairly presents, in
              all material respects, the financial condition and results of
              operations of the Issuer.

      Dated:  March 31, 2003.

                          /s/ Kenneth S. Shifrin
                          ------------------------------
                          Kenneth S. Shifrin
                          Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer

                          American Physicians Service Group, Inc.



Subscribed and sworn to before me this 31st day of March 2003.



Name:    /s/ Nancy M. Nelson
         ---------------------
         Nancy M. Nelson

Title: Notary Public

My commission expires:
August 1, 2003
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                           2,370
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                             638
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                   150
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     31,457
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                             386
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                               394
<LOANS>                                        161,208
<ALLOWANCE>                                        995
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 201,147
<DEPOSITS>                                     153,992
<SHORT-TERM>                                    17,500
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              3,277
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            20
<OTHER-SE>                                      26,358
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 201,147
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 12,883
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                1,979
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                14,862
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               7,420
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               7,961
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            6,901
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  11
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  3,020
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,010
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       5,010
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,227
<EPS-BASIC>                                     2.17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.07
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.63
<LOANS-NON>                                        410
<LOANS-PAST>                                       659
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                    116
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 1,003
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        8
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  995
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                               995
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            182


</TABLE>
S. 176

One Hundred Ninth Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,

the third day of January, two thousand and six

An Act

To extend the deadline for commencement of construction of a hydroelectric project

in the State of Alaska.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF TIME FOR FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY

COMMISSION PROJECT.

Notwithstanding the time period specified in section 13 of the

Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 806) that would otherwise apply

to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission project numbered

11480, the Commission may, at the request of the licensee for

the project, and after reasonable notice, in accordance with the

good faith, due diligence, and public interest requirements of that

section and the Commission’s procedures under that section extend

the time period during which the licensee is required to commence

the construction of the project for 3 consecutive 2-year periods

beyond the date that is 4 years after the date of issuance of

the license.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
II 

Calendar No. 331 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1792 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

205 West Washington Street in Knox, Indiana, as the ‘‘Grant W. Green 

Post Office Building’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 29, 2005 

Mr. LUGAR (for himself and Mr. BAYH) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

DECEMBER 16, 2005 

Reported by Ms. COLLINS, without amendment 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 205 West Washington Street in Knox, Indiana, as the ‘‘Grant W. Green Post Office Building’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. GRANT W. GREEN POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

4 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

5 Postal Service located at 205 West Washington Street in 
2 

•S 1792 RS 

1 Knox, Indiana, shall be known and designated as the 

2 ‘‘Grant W. Green Post Office Building’’. 

3 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg4 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

5 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

6 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Grant W. Green Post 

7 Office Building’’. 

Calendar No. 331 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1792 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States PostPost Office Building’’. Street in Knox, Indiana, as the ‘‘Grant W. Green al Service located at 205 West Washington 

DECEMBER 16, 2005 

Reported without amendment
#### Douglas McArthur STUBBS v. STATE.

No. 38893.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Nov. 1969.

Appealed dismissed without opinion. 222 So.2d 228.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1989 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        S.1989

                       One Hundred Ninth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
             the third day of January, two thousand and six

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
57 Rolfe Square in Cranston, Rhode Island, shall be known and designated 
                as the ``Holly A. Charette Post Office''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. HOLLY A. CHARETTE POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 57 Rolfe Square in Cranston, Rhode Island, shall be known 
and designated as the ``Holly A. Charette Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Holly A. 
Charette Post Office''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed June 29 , 2023

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 21

- 00492

- CR

JOSHUA OFARON WILLIAMS , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 209th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Ca use No. 1632019

MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant appeals his conviction for m urder

. 0F 1 See Tex . Penal Code Ann. §
19.02 (b)

. Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which counsel concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brie f meet s the requirements
of Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by presenting a professional

1 Appellant a lso pleaded true to a prior conviction f or felony possession with inten t to deliver a controlled substance.2 evaluation of the record and dem onstrating why there are no arguable grounds to
be advanced. See High v. State , 573 S.W.2d 807 , 811

– 13 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978 )

.
A c o py of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. See Stafford
v. State , 813 S.W.2d 503, 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). As of this date, more than 60 days ha v e pas s ed and no pro se response has been filed.
We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree the appeal is w holly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in
the record. We are not to address the merits of e a ch cl a im raised in an Anders brief or a pro se response when we have determined there are no arguable grounds for
review. See Bleds oe v. State , 178 S.W.3d 824, 827

– 28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER C U RIAM

Panel consists of J ustices Wise , Bourliot, and Spain. Do Not Publish

— Tex. R. App

. P. 47.2( b).
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

February 3, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 04-20999

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

OSCAR RENE ROMERO,

Defendant-Appellant.

--------------------

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:04-CR-243-ALL

--------------------

Before SMITH, GARZA and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Oscar Rene Romero appeals the 88-month sentence he received

following his conviction by a jury of possessing with the intent

to distribute and importation of more than 500 grams of cocaine,

in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841, 952, and 960. He contends,

inter alia, that the district court erred in sentencing him

pursuant to the mandatory Guidelines regime held unconstitutional

in United States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct. 738, 764-65 (2005). The

sentencing transcript is devoid of evidence that the district
No. 04-20999

-2-

court would have imposed the same sentence under an advisory

regime, and, therefore, the Government has not borne its burden

of establishing beyond a reasonable doubt that the district

court’s error was harmless. See United States v. Garza, 429 F.3d

165, 170 (5th Cir. 2005); United States v. Walters, 418 F.3d 461,

464 (5th Cir. 2005). We further hold that Romero’s remaining

contentions, all of which arise from the jury’s determination of

the amount of drugs involved in his offense, are unavailing. As

to those contentions, the judgment of the district court is

AFFIRMED. 

Accordingly, Romero’s sentence is VACATED, and the case is

REMANDED for further proceedings. See id. at 466. 

AFFIRMED IN PART; SENTENCE VACATED AND REMANDED IN PART FOR

FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.
JOSEPH PRATT,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D13-3962

_____________________________/

Opinion filed April 6, 2015.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County.

Dawn Caloca-Johnson, Judge.

William R. Waters, Jr. of Waters & Associates, P.A., Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Justin D. Chapman, Assistant Attorney 

General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

WOLF, MAKAR, and OSTERHAUS, JJ., CONCUR.
Exhibit 21

US ONCOLOGY HOLDINGS, INC. AND US ONCOLOGY, INC.

Subsidiaries of the Registrant

(All are Delaware entities unless otherwise indicated)

US Oncology, Inc.

AccessMed Holdings, LLC

AccessMed, LLC

US Oncology Corporate, Inc.

AOR Real Estate, LLC

RMCC Cancer Center, LLC

AOR Management Company of Indiana, LLC

AOR Holding Company of Indiana, LLC

AOR of Indiana Management Partnership

AOR Management Company of Missouri, LLC

AOR Management Company of Arizona, LLC

AOR Management Company of Oklahoma, LLC

AOR Management Company of Pennsylvania, LLC

AOR Management Company of Virginia, LLC

AOR of Texas Management, LLC (1)

AORT
Holding Company, Inc.

AOR Synthetic Real Estate, LLC

Physician Reliance Network, LLC

US Oncology Research, LLC (1)

Physician Reliance, LLC (1)

Iowa
Pharmaceutical Services, LLC

New Mexico Pharmaceutical Services, LLC

North Carolina Pharmaceutical Services, LLC

SelectPlus Oncology, LLC

Nebraska Pharmaceutical Services, LLC

US
Oncology Pharmaceutical Services, LLC

East Indy CC, LLC (2)

Greenville Radiation Care, Inc.

St. Louis Pharmaceutical Services, LLC

Texas Pharmaceutical Services, LLC

TOPS
Pharmacy Services, Inc. (1)

Cancer Treatment Associates of Northeast Missouri, Ltd., LP

Southeast Texas Cancer Centers, LP (1)

AOR
Real Estate of Greenville, LP

KCCC JV, LLC

Oregon Cancer Center, Ltd. (4)

Colorado Cancer Centers, L.L.C.

The Carroll County Cancer Center, LP (3)

MDH-USO Management Company, LP

MDH-USO General, LLC

Metropolitan Integrated Cancer Care, LCC

Pharmacy Holdings, LLC

US Oncology Specialty, LP

Oncology Rx Care
Advantage, LP

US Oncology Integrated Solutions, LP

Oncology Today, LP

USON Insurance Company

USON Risk Retention Company, Inc.

US Oncology Reimbursement Solutions, LLC

Oncology, LLC

Unity Oncology,
LLC



|(1) | Organized in the State of Texas
|--- | -------------------------------



|(2) | Organized in the State of Indiana
|--- | ---------------------------------



|(3) | Organized in the State of Maryland
|--- | ----------------------------------



|(4) | Organized in the State of Oregon
|--- | --------------------------------
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 10**  **- 6916** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. ISADORE LAMONT LAMKIN, a/k/a LL , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Columbia
. Ma tthew J. Perry, Jr. , Senior District Judge. ( 3:02

- cr - 00852

- MJP

- 1; 3:07

- cv - 70035

- MJP )

Submitted : February 2 8 , 2011 Decided: March 7, 2011
Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and KING and DIAZ, Circuit Judge s .
Dismiss ed by un published per curiam opinion
.
Isadore Lamont Lamkin , Appellant Pro Se. Stacey Denise Haynes , Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia , Sou th Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit
.2 PER CURIAM: Isadore Lamont Lamkin seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. A. § 2255 ( West Supp. 2010 ) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S .C. § 2253(c)(1) (200 6 ). 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) (200 6 ). 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). Whe n 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 Lamkin has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we 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 materials3 before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process. DISMISSED