alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________

GREGORY DOUGLAS SMITH,

Claimant-Appellant

v.

DENIS MCDONOUGH, Secretary of Veterans Affairs,

Respondent-Appellee

______________________

2022-2213

______________________

Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims in No. 21-1244, Judge William S. Greenberg.

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

CAROLYN CLARK,

Claimant-Appellant

v.

DENIS MCDONOUGH, Secretary of Veterans Affairs,

Respondent-Appellee

______________________

2022-2225

______________________

Case: 22-2212 Document: 48 Page: 1 Filed: 08/03/2023
2 SMITH v. MCDONOUGH

Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for 

Veterans Claims in No. 21-1124, Judge Grant Jaquith, 

Judge Joseph L. Falvey, Jr., and Judge William S. Greenberg.

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

ROGER WARREN BEAUDOIN,

Claimant-Appellant

v.

DENIS MCDONOUGH, Secretary of Veterans Affairs,

Respondent-Appellee

______________________

2022-2212

______________________

Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for 

Veterans Claims in No. 21-2078, Judge Michael P. Allen.

______________________

ON MOTION

______________________

O R D E R

Upon consideration of Roger Warren Beaudoin and the 

Secretary of Veterans Affairs’ joint motion to dismiss Appeal No. 2022-2212 under Rule 42(b) of the Federal Rules 

of Appellate Procedure,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) The motion is granted. Appeal No. 2022-2212 is 

dismissed. The revised caption and official short caption 

for the remaining two consolidated appeals are reflected in 

this order.

Case: 22-2212 Document: 48 Page: 2 Filed: 08/03/2023
SMITH v. MCDONOUGH 3

(2) Each side to bear its own costs as to Appeal No. 

2022-2212. 

(3) The Clerk of Court shall forward a copy of this order to the merits panel assigned to this case. 

August 3, 2023

 Date

FOR THE COURT

/s/ Jarrett B. Perlow

Jarrett B. Perlow

Clerk of Court

ISSUED AS A MANDATE (AS TO NO. 2022-2212 ONLY): 

August 3, 2023 

Case: 22-2212 Document: 48 Page: 3 Filed: 08/03/2023
#### Steve AMECK, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 71-44.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

June 1, 1971.

Phillip A. Hubbart, Public Defender, and Alan S. Becker, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and J. Robert Olian, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before PEARSON, C. J., and CHARLES CARROLL and HENDRY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

On this appeal by the' defendant below from conviction of possession and sale of marijuana, upon which he was sentenced to 90 days in jail and placed on probation for two years, the appellant seeks reversal on the contentions that the trial court unduly and improperly restricted cross-examination of a witness and that the evidence as to identity was insufficient. We have considered appellant’s contentions in the light of the record and briefs, and conclude that no reversible error has been shown.

Affirmed.
#### George WASHINGTON, Jr., Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-1160.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

April 13, 1971.

George Washington, Jr., in pro. per.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., for appel-lee.

Before PEARSON, C. J., and CHARLES CARROLL and SWANN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This court, proceeding in the manner outlined and recommended by the Supreme Court of the United States in Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493, having deferred ruling on a motion of the public defender to withdraw as counsel for the indigent defendant-appellant, and having furnished appellant with a copy of the public defender’s memorandum brief, and having allowed the appellant a reasonable specified time within which *627to raise any points that he chose in support of his appeal, and the appellant having failed to respond thereto, on consideration thereof upon full examination of the proceedings we conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous. Whereupon, the public defender’s said motion to withdraw is granted, and the judgment appealed is hereby affirmed.
**Exhibit 31.1**
 **CERTIFICATION**
 
 I, John L. Larsen, certify that:
 
 1.
I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Crested Corp.; 
 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 officers 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)) for the registrant and have: 
 a.
Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 
 b.
Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 
 c.
Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and; 
 5.
The registrant's other certifying officers 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): 
 a.
All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant'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 a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting. 
 DATED this 14 day of May, 2005.
 
 
 
 /s/ John L. LarsenJohn L. LarsenChief Executive Officer
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7326

CHRISTINE ANN CARRIGAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-00- 2009) Submitted: November 9, 2000 Decided: November 16, 2000 Before WILKINS, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Christine Ann Carrigan, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Ann Norman Bosse, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on September 1, 2000, the district court’s records show that it was entered on the docket sheet on September 5, 2000. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date that the order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date of the district court’s decision. See Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986). 2 PER CURIAM: Christine Ann Carrigan seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on her petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254(West 1994 & Supp. 2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Carrigan v. Attorney General of Maryland , No. CA-00-2009 (D. Md. Sept. 5, 2000). * 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
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 28 (Tuesday, February 11, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 6248]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-3350]


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

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
[FEMA-1157-DR]


North Dakota; Amendment to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster for the 
State of North Dakota (FEMA-1157-DR), dated January 12, 1997, and 
related determinations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 30, 1997

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Magda Ruiz, Response and Recovery 
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, 
(202) 646-3260.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the incident 
period for this disaster is closed effective January 31, 1997.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 83.516, Disaster 
Assistance)
Catherine H. Light,
Deputy Associate Director, Response and Recovery Directorate.
[FR Doc. 97-3350 Filed 2-10-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6718-02-P
#### Dawson Eugene HAVIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-336.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Nov. 15, 1972.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
\ 

In The Matter Of: 

SERVED: MARCH 24, 2014 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC ·r -~ · I; · f .. ) _ .. ~ -:-

_, ...... t 

Docket No. FAA-2012-0477 

LIBERTY 

FOUNDATION, INC. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. 2011-GL-03-0070 

Respondent 

ORDER EXTENDING DEADLINE FOR FILING 

LISTS OF WITNESSES AND EXHIBITS 

On August 27,2014, an Order Cancelling November 2013 Hearing and 

Granting/Denying Other Relief was filed. Among other things, this Order set a new deadline of 

March 25, 2014, for the parties to file their lists of witnesses and exchange exhibits. 

On March 18, 2014, the FAA telephoned the Office of Hearings requesting a status 

update regarding a decision on the FAA's Motion for Summary Judgment, because of the impact 

a decision would have on the FAA's List of Witnesses and Exhibits. 

On March 21,2014, the Office of Hearings attorney staff e-mailed the parties that the 

Judge would issue an Order extending the deadline on March 24, 2014. 

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 13.205(a)(6), and after reviewing all relevant caselaw, decisions, 

regulations, statutory authority, motions, pleadings, and being fully advised; 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 

The March 25, 2014 deadline for the parties to file their List of Witnesses and Exhibits is 

extended to April 4, 2014. · 

Attachment: Service List 
•, 

' 

l 

SERVICE LIST- BY U.S. MAIL 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration1 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1 000 

Mr. Christopher Stevenson 

Complainant's Counsel 

Office of the Regional Counsel 

P.O. Box 20636 

Atlanta, GA 30320 

TEL: 404-305-5200 

FAJ(: 404-305-5223 

Mr. Stuart A. Goldstein 

Respondent's Counsel 

Stuart A. Goldstein, P.A. 

7300 North Kendall Drive, Suite 380 

Miami, FL 33156 

TEL: 305-670-1222 

FAX: 305-400-0685 

Judge J.E. Sullivan 

U S. Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-2142 

FAJ(: 202-366-7536 

ONE COPY 

FDMS No. FAA-2012-0477 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal 

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S. W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl 000, Washington, 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
#### Bertha C. FERGUSON v. STATE of Mississippi.

No. 50737.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Sept. 13, 1978.

Farese, Farese & Farese, John B. Farese, Ashland, for appellant.

A. F. Summer, Atty. Gen., by Pete J. Cajoleas, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.

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

Appeal from Circuit Court, Marshall County; W. W. Brown, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

PATTERSON, C. J., SMITH, P. J., and WALKER, BROOM, LEE and BOWLING, JJ., concur.
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Michael C. Howard and Virginia D. Hamilton , Appellant s

No. 06

- 20

- 00085

- CV v. Matterhorn Energy, LLC, and Mike Cherry
, Appellee s Appeal from the 71st District Court of Harrison Cou nt y, Texas (Tr. Ct

. No. 19

- 0998 ). Opinion delivered by Justice Stevens
, Chief Justice Morriss and Justice Burgess participating

.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find reversible error in the judgment of
the court below. Ther e fore, we reverse the portion of th e trial cou rt’s judgment that failed to
dismiss Le ssee s ’ tortious interference with an e xist ing contract, tortio us i nterference with prospective business relations, and business disparageme nt claims based on communication s made in Lessors’ petition and lis penden s. We affirm the denial of Lessors’ TCPA m otion to dismiss Lessees’ breach o f co ntra ct claim and the tor ti o u s interference with an existing contract, tortious interference with pros pective business relations, and business disparagement claims
based on com muni cations directly made to third parties. W e rem and the case to the trial cour t for f urther proceedings c onsi stent with this opinion. We further order that the appell ant s and appellee s shall each pay one

- half of all costs incurred by reason of this app eal.

RENDERED MAY 4, 2021 BY ORDER OF THE COURT JOSH R. MORRISS, III CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST: Debra K. Autrey , Clerk
Exhibit
      31.2


CERTIFICATION





I,
      William Kossoff, certify that:





1.
      I have
      reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended March 31, 2007,
      of
      TheRetirementSolution.com, Inc.;





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)) for the registrant and we have:




a)
      designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
      controls and procedures to be designed under my supervision, to ensure that
      material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
      subsidiaries, is made known to me by others within those entities, particularly
      during the period in which this report is being prepared;




b)
      evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and
      procedures and presented in this report my conclusions about the effectiveness
      of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
      by this report based on such evaluation; and




c)
      disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over
      financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter
      that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,
      the
      registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and





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:




a)
      all
      significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
      of
      internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
      adversely affect the registrant’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 a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial
      reporting.


Dated: July 2, 2007
              
              /s/
                William KosoffWilliam
                  Kosoff
                Chief
                  Financial Officer
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Alvis IRRA-ONTIVEROS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 00-50577.

D.C. No. CR-00-01532-JM.

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.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Irra-Ontiveros appeals his guilty plea conviction and sentence for importation of marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960. We deferred submission of this case pending the outcomes of *United States v. Buckland,*277 F.3d 1173 (9th Cir.2002) (en banc) and *United States v. Minore/Chinawat,*292 F.3d 1109 (9th Cir. 2002). We now submit this case and affirm.

Irra-Ontiveros’ contention that *Appren-di v. New Jersey,*530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), renders § 960 unconstitutional is foreclosed by *United States v. Mendoza-Paz,*286 F.3d 1104, 1110 (9th Cir.2002). His argument that the government was required to prove that he knew the type and quantity of the drug he possessed is foreclosed by *United States v. Carranza,*289 F.3d 634, 644 (9th Cir.2002).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 245 (Monday, December 22, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 66880]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-33341]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management
[CA-340-7123-00-6019]


Notice of Public Scoping Meetings South Cow Mountain Recreation 
Area

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTIONS: Notice of intent and scoping period.

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

SUMMARY: The South Cow Mountain Recreation Area is currently managed 
under the Management Framework Plan of 1971 (MFP) and the ORV plan of 
1982. Due to changing public values and the acquisition of additional 
parcels, it is necessary to amend the MFP. No major shift in management 
strategy is anticipated. The aim of the plan amendment is to refine the 
existing successful policies and address social, economic and 
environmental issues resulting from the success of the present 
management strategy. The objectives are to better serve the recreating 
public in an environmentally sound, socially acceptable manner. A 
series of scoping meetings will be held to accept public comment on 
issues that should be addressed in this plan amendment. Written 
comments will also be accepted.

MEETING DATES:

January 6, 1998:
    BLM Clear Lake Field Office, 2550 North State St., Ukiah, CA
January 7, 1998:
    Lark Hall, Room 2004, Santa Rosa Junior College, Santa Rosa, CA
January 8, 1998:
    Golden Gate Club, East Ballroom, Presidio of San Francisco, San 
Francisco, CA
Jan. 14, 1998:
    Supervisors Chambers, Lake County Courthouse, 255 North Forbes, 
Lakeport, CA

    All meetings will be from 7 to 10 p.m.
    Written comments can be sent to: Bureau of Land Management, Clear 
Lake Field Office, 2550 North State St., Ukiah CA 95482, Attention: 
Rich Burns, Field Manager.
    Comments will be accepted until January 30, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim Cooper, Outdoor Recreation Planner 
at the Clear Lake Field Office, or telephone (707) 468-4000.
Philip L. Damon,
Acting Field Manager.
[FR Doc. 97-33341 Filed 12-19-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-40-P
#### Sherman DORFMAN, a/k/a Bud Dorfman, as Executor of the Estate of Meyer Dorfman, Appellant, v. AETNA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.

No. 73-1312.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Feb. 14, 1974.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
**Exhibit 32.2**SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONI, Amy Vidrine Samson, Chief Financial Officer of Crown Crafts, Inc. (the “Company”), do herebycertify, in accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:1. The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ending July 1, 2007 (the“Periodic Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and 2. The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.Dated: August 15, 2007                                /s/ Amy Vidrine Samson   Amy Vidrine Samson, Chief Financial Officer