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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22-7379

MARCUS ALBINUS JOSEPH, a/k/a Marcus A. Joseph, a/k/a Marcus Albines 

Joseph,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

WARDEN WALLACE, Kirkland Correctional Institution,

Respondent - Appellee.

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

Anderson. Richard Mark Gergel, District Judge. (8:22-cv-03282-RMG)

Submitted: April 25, 2023 Decided: April 28, 2023

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, THACKER, Circuit Judge, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit 

Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Marcus Albinus Joseph, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 22-7379 Doc: 9 Filed: 04/28/2023 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Marcus Albinus Joseph, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order 

accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation, construing Joseph’s 28 U.S.C. § 2241 

petition as a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition, and dismissing the petition as unauthorized and 

successive. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate 

of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A). 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). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this 

standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists could find the district court’s assessment 

of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong. See Buck v. Davis, 580 U.S. 100, 115-17 

(2017). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must 

demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable and that the petition 

states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 

134, 140-41 (2012) (citing Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)). 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Joseph 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 materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

DISMISSED

USCA4 Appeal: 22-7379 Doc: 9 Filed: 04/28/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
-84 -82 -80 -78 -76 -74 -72

 36

 38

 40

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★ ▲

▲

▲ ▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 500

18 12 06 00

06/25

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 25 Jun 07

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 39.41 N 77.38 W Meters AGL
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 240 (Monday, December 15, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65737-65738]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-32903]


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

NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION


Electronic Records Work Group; Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: NARA will hold the initial meeting of the Electronic Records 
Work Group on December 19, 1997, to discuss issues related to the 
operation of the Work Group. The public is invited to observe the 
meeting; however, seating is limited. The Electronic Records Work Group 
will focus on identifying workable alternatives to the disposition 
practices currently authorized under NARA's General Records Schedule 20 
for Electronic Records. Members of the Work Group are experts drawn 
from NARA and other Federal agencies. The Work Group will solicit 
technical assistance on specific issues from experts with practical 
experience in the private sector and the archives of other governments. 
Additional information about the Electronic Records Work Group is 
available on NARA's GRS 20 Internet Web page at <<a href="http://www.nara.gov/
records/grs20/">http://www.nara.gov/
records/grs20/</a>>.


[[Page 65738]]


DATES: The meeting is scheduled for December 19, 1997, from 11 a.m-
12:30 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in Lecture Room A, National 
Archives at College Park, 8601 Adelphi Rd., College Park, MD 20740-
6001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jean Cooke at 301-713-7110, extension 
228.

    Dated: December 12, 1997.
John W. Carlin,
Archivist of the United States.
[FR Doc. 97-32903 Filed 12-12-97; 12:17 pm]
BILLING CODE 7515-01-P
#### FRANKLIN PRESS, INC. v. NATIONAL DIVERSIFIED CORPORATION et al.

No. 54330.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 8, 1974.

In re: Franklin Press, Inc. applying for Certiorari, or Writ of Review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of East Baton Rouge. 286 So.2d 469.

Writ denied. On the facts found by the Court of Appeal, the result is correct.
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. George GONZALES v. Hon. Frank V. ZACCARIA, Judge, 24th Judicial District Court, Parish of Jefferson.

No. 60890.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 9, 1977.

In re: George Gonzales applying for writ of mandamus. Parish of Jefferson.

Writ denied as moot.
**EXHIBIT 31.2****CERTIFICATION**I, Barry A. Fromberg, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Dean Holding Company; 2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in lightof the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this quarterly report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of Dean Holding Company as of, and for, the periodspresented in this quarterly report; 4. Dean Holding Company’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 Dean Holding Company and have: a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto Dean Holding Company and its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is beingprepared;  b. Evaluated the effectiveness of Dean Holding Company’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures as of the period covered by this quarterly report based on suchevaluation; and  c. Disclosed in this quarterly report any change in Dean Holding Company’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during Dean Holding Company’s most recent fiscal quarterthat has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, Dean HoldingCompany’s internal control over financial reporting.5. Dean Holding Company’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to Dean Holding Company’sauditors and the audit committee of Dean Holding Company’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect Dean HoldingCompany’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in Dean Holding Company’s internal control over financial reporting.              /s/ BARRY A. FROMBERG   Barry A. Fromberg   *Chief Financial Officer*   August 15, 2005
Exhibit 32   Certifications   In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2007 of American General Finance, Inc. as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of Frederick W. Geissinger, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Donald R. Breivogel, Jr., Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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, as amended; 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/Frederick W. GeissingerFrederick W. GeissingerPresident and Chief Executive Officer/s/Donald R. Breivogel, Jr.Donald R. Breivogel, Jr.Senior Vice President and Chief Financial
OfficerDate:November 8, 2007   46
SCWC-15-0000680 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAIʻI 

STATE OF HAWAIʻI, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v. 

REGGIE JOHNSON, Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant. 

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS 

(CAAP-15-0000680; CR. NO. 14-1-0195) 

ORDER REJECTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI 

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.) 

 

 Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant’s application for writ 

of certiorari, filed on April 23, 2017, is hereby rejected. 

 DATED: Honolulu, Hawaiʻi, May 31, 2017. 

 /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald 

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama 

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna 

/s/ Richard W. Pollack 

/s/ Michael D. Wilson 

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCWC-15-0000680

31-MAY-2017

09:02 AM
**Exhibit 24.9****POWER OF ATTORNEY**     KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that Paul Michalowski, a member of the Board of Directors ofML Life Insurance Company of New York (the “Company”), whose signature appears below, constitutesand appoints Barry G. Skolnick, Frances Grabish and Kirsty Lieberman, respectively, and each ofthem, his true and lawful attorney-in-fact and agent, with full power of substitution andresubstitution, for his and in his name, place and stead, in any and all capacities, to sign anyand all Registration Statements and Amendments thereto, and to file the same, with all exhibitsthereto, and other documents in connection therewith, under the Investment Company Act of 1940,where applicable, and the Securities Act of 1933, respectively, with the Securities ExchangeCommission, for the purpose of registering any and all variable life and variable annuity separateaccounts (collectively “Separate Accounts”), of the Company that may be established in connectionwith the issuance of any and all variable life and variable annuity contracts funded by suchSeparate Accounts, granting unto said attorney-in-fact and agent, and each of them, full power andauthority to do and perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done.Effective Date: January 6, 2006     /s/ Paul Michalowski     Paul MichalowskiState of New Jersey
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 5 (Wednesday, January 8, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 1126]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-322]


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


DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Notice of Closed 
Meeting

    Pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
Initial Review Group (IRG) meeting:

    Name of IRG: Clinical Trials Review Committee
    Date: February 23-26, 1997
    Time: 7:00 p.m.
    Place: Hyatt Regency One Bethesda Metro Center Bethesda, 
Maryland 20814
    Contact Person: Dr. Joyce A. Hunter 6701 Rockledge Drive, Rm. 
7192, MSC 7924 Bethesda, Maryland 20892 (301) 435-0287
    Purpose/Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    The meeting will be closed in accordance with the provisions set 
forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5, U.S.C. 
Applications and the discussions could reveal confidential trade 
secrets or commercial property such as patentable material and 
personal information concerning individuals associated with the 
applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly 
unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Programs Nos. 93.837, Heart 
and Vascular Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung Diseases Research; and 
93.839, Blood Diseases and Resources Research, National Institutes 
of Health)

    Dated: December 30, 1996.
Paula N. Hayes,
Acting Committee Management Officer, NIH.
[FR Doc. 97-322 Filed 1-7-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
#### Louise Kitchens PATTERSON et al. v. Earnest HARRIS et al.

No. 50416.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

June 14, 1978.

Tullos & Tullos, Eugene C. Tullos, Raleigh, for appellants.

B. L. Riddick, Jackson, for appellees.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Copiah County; Joe N. Pigott, Judge.

Before ROBERTSON, P. J., and SUGG and BROOM, JJ.

Affirmed.
#### J. M., a juvenile, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 77-1471.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

March 28, 1978.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Elliot H. Scherker, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and William M. Grodnick, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before PEARSON, NATHAN and HUB-BART, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed on the authority of *Doerr v. State,*348 So.2d 938 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977).
#### GENERAL DISTRIBUTOR CORPORATION, Appellant, v. CURTISS NATIONAL BANK OF MIAMI SPRINGS, Appellee.

No. 69-1071.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Oct. 27, 1970.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 18, 1970.

Jerry Larotonda, Miami, for appellant.

Broad & Cassel, and Lewis Horwitz, Miami Beach, for appellee.

Before PEARSON, C. J., and HEN-DRY and SWANN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant sued the appellee alleging a conversion of personal property. This appeal is from a final judgment for the defendant. The judgment was entered after a trial before the court sitting without a jury. The only point presented on this appeal is simply that the trial judge made a wrong determination upon the facts. We affirm the judgment upon the rule that where the judgment is reasonably supported by facts in the record, an appellate court will not substitute its judgment for that of the trial court. Old Equity Life Ins. Co. v. Levenson, Fla.App.1965, 177 So.2d 50.

Affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2633 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2633

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase and expand the 
                 credit for carbon oxide sequestration.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 16, 2021

  Mr. Schweikert (for himself, Mr. Wenstrup, and Mrs. Miller of West 
  Virginia) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase and expand the 
                 credit for carbon oxide sequestration.

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

SECTION 1. IMPROVEMENTS TO CREDIT FOR CARBON OXIDE SEQUESTRATION.

    (a) Increase in Applicable Dollar Amount.--Section 45Q(b)(1)(A) of 
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
            (1) in clause (i)(I) and (ii)(I), by striking ``$50'' and 
        inserting ``$85'', and
            (2) in clause (i)(II) and (ii)(II), by striking ``$35'' and 
        inserting ``$50''.
    (b) Repeal of Placed-In-Service Deadline; Expansion of Facilities 
to Which Credit Applies.--Section 45Q(d) of such Code is amended to 
read as follows:
    ``(d) Qualified Facility.--For purposes of this section, the term 
`qualified facility' means any industrial facility or direct air 
capture facility which captures--
            ``(1) in the case of a facility which emits not more than 
        500,000 metric tons of carbon oxide into the atmosphere during 
        the taxable year, not less than 10,000 metric tons of qualified 
        carbon oxide during the taxable year which is utilized in a 
        manner described in subsection (f)(5),
            ``(2) in the case of an electricity generating facility 
        which is not described in paragraph (1), not less than 100,000 
        metric tons of qualified carbon oxide during the taxable year,
            ``(3) in the case of a direct air capture facility, not 
        less than 10,000 metric tons of qualified carbon oxide during 
        the taxable year, or
            ``(4) in the case of any facility not described in 
        paragraph (1), (2), or (3), not less than 25,000 metric tons of 
        qualified carbon oxide during the taxable year.''.
    (c) Extension of Credit Period.--Paragraphs (3)(A) and (4)(A) of 
section 45Q(a) of such Code are each amended by striking ``12-year'' 
and inserting ``20-year''.
    (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2020.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 23.2

            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (No. 33-39865, 33-39866, 333-45971, 333-91967 and
333-113059) and Form S-3 (No. 33-65176, 333-40118 and 333-45975) of Hector
Communications Corporation of our report dated February 11, 2005 relating to the
financial statements of Midwest Wireless Holdings L.L.C., which appears in this
Form 10-K.



/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
------------------------------
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Minneapolis, Minnesota
March 29, 2005
#### Dorothy DOUGLAS, a widow, Appellant, v. Roscoe T. ANTHONY, Jr., and Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company, a corporation, Appellees.

No. 70-436.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

April 19, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
**EXHIBIT 15**

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

Board of Directors and Shareholders

Cubic Corporation

Wehave reviewed the condensed consolidated balance sheet of Cubic Corporation asof December 31, 2006, and the relatedcondensed consolidated statements of income and cash flows for the three-monthperiods ended December 31, 2006 and 2005. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’smanagement.

Weconducted our reviews in accordance with standards of the Public CompanyAccounting Oversight Board (United States). A review of interim financial information consists principally ofapplying analytical procedures, and making inquiries of persons responsible forfinancial and accounting matters.  It issubstantially less in scope than an audit conducted in accordance with thestandards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), theobjective of which is the expression of an opinion regarding the financialstatements taken as a whole. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.

Basedon our reviews, we are not aware of any material modifications that should bemade to the condensed consolidated financial statements referred to above forthem to be in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.

Wehave previously audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public CompanyAccounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheet ofCubic Corporation as of September 30, 2006 and the related consolidated statementsof income, changes in shareholders’ equity and cash flows for the year thenended (not presented herein) and in our report dated November 29, 2006, weexpressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial statements. Inour opinion, the information set forth in the accompanying condensedconsolidated balance sheet at September 30, 2006, is fairly stated, in allmaterial respects, in relation to the consolidated balance sheet from which ithas been derived.
|                        | /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP |
|------------------------|---------------------------|
| San Diego,  California |                      |
| January 30, 2007       |                      |

 

----
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Jennifer Michelle MOHR, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 00-50509.

D.C. No. CR-99-03634-IEG.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submission Deferred May 8, 2001.

Submitted and Decided Aug. 20, 2002.*

Before D.W. NELSON, FERNANDEZ and RYMER, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2)

*752MEMORANDUM **

The decision below is AFFIRMED. *See United States v. Mendoza-Paz,*286 F.3d 1104, 1109-10 (9th Cir.2002) (holding that 21 U.S.C. § 960 is constitutional on its face); *United States v. Carranza,*289 F.3d 634, 644 (9th Cir.2002) (“The base offense level for guideline sentencing may be determined by the volume of the drug actually imported, whether or not the defendant knows either the volume or the nature of the substance — if he knows only that he is importing a controlled substance.”).

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
#### BASSWOOD, INC., of Florida, a Florida corporation, Appellant, v. Benjamin BOTWINICK, and Sarah Botwinick, his wife, Appellees.

No. 71-963.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Nov. 29, 1972.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Okeechobee County; D. C. Smith, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
#### Robert SANDERS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-393.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Sept. 18, 1970.

Robert E. Jagger, Public Defender, and James L. DeMoully, Asst. Public Defender, Clearwater, for appellant. \

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen.,',Tallahassee, and Michael N. Kavouklis, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lakeland, for appellee. .

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed on the authority of Steinhauser v. State, Fla.App.1969, 228 So.2d 446.

HOBSON, C. J., and PIERCE and MANN, JJ., concur.