alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               JAN-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                    OCT-31-1998
<CASH>                               1,644
<SECURITIES>                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                            0
<ALLOWANCES>                             0
<INVENTORY>                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                         0
<PP&E>                             898,763
<DEPRECIATION>                      41,034
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                     922,452
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>            1,560,492
<BONDS>                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                    0
<PREFERRED>                              0
<COMMON>                            25,245
<OTHER-SE>                               0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>       922,452
<SALES>                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                         0
<CGS>                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                      140,001
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                  56,563
<INCOME-PRETAX>                   (196,564)
<INCOME-TAX>                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>               (196,564)
<DISCONTINUED>                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                          0
<CHANGES>                                0
<NET-INCOME>                      (196,564)
<EPS-BASIC>                       (0.008)
<EPS-DILUTED>                       (0.008)


</TABLE>
Annapolis , MD Site

Information Provided by Nick Scappini, HaloSource

08/26/2010 11:50 AM

Jesse this site was in Annapolis, MD and we had over 45 people in attendance

- We had the AA county soil

conservation staff, all the AA county sediment control site inspectors, MDE staff and the head guy for the

state of Md, 3 general contractors, 5 engineering companies, the head of Toll Brothers land development.

The water coming o ff of the holding pond was 300

- 400NTU and we were discharging at 15NTU.

MD10

MD11 MD12MD13 MD14

MD15 MD16

MD17 MD18MD19 MD2

MD20 MD21

MD22 MD23MD24 MD25

MD26 MD27

MD3 MD4MD5 MD6

MD7 MD8

MD9
Exhibit 31.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF
THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
      (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)
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal
control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the
preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles;(c)
    
    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(d)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants third fiscal quarter that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting; and
  (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.
  /s/ Joseph F. Furlong, IIIJoseph F. Furlong, IIIChief Executive Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-6829

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

HARRINGTON CAMPBELL,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. 

Catherine C. Blake, Senior District Judge. (1:07-cr-00232-CCB-1)

Submitted: December 19, 2023 Decided: December 27, 2023

Before HARRIS, QUATTLEBAUM, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Harrington Campbell, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6829 Doc: 16 Filed: 12/27/2023 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Harrington Campbell appeals the district court’s omnibus order denying without 

prejudice Campbell’s petitions for a writ of error coram nobis, as well as his motions for 

other forms of relief, and the court’s later order denying Campbell’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) 

motion to alter or amend judgment. In relevant part, the court denied the coram nobis 

petitions after acknowledging that Campbell advanced arguments related to his convictions 

that were more properly brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, and that Campbell’s initial 

§ 2255 motion was dismissed on timeliness grounds. Although Campbell was released 

from prison in June 2022, he is still serving his supervised-release term and, as such, is 

considered “in custody” for the purpose of § 2255. See United States v. Swaby, 855 F.3d 

233, 239 (4th Cir. 2017). Because the more usual remedy is available, we agree with the 

district court that Campbell cannot seek relief from his convictions through a coram nobis 

petition. See United States v. Lesane, 40 F.4th 191, 195-96 (4th Cir. 2022). Finally,

because Campbell did not advance any viable bases for his Rule 59(e) motion, we discern 

no abuse of discretion in the court’s denial of that motion. See United States v. Taylor, 54 

F.4th 795, 802 (4th Cir. 2022) (providing standard of review). 

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s orders. United States v. Campbell, 

No. 1:07-cr-00232-CCB-1 (D. Md. filed Apr. 24, 2023 & entered Apr. 25, 2023; May 9, 

2023). We deny Campbell’s motion for a certificate of appealability (COA) and 

supplemental motion for a COA; for transcripts at government expense; and to allow the 

docket to reflect that the district court denied a COA in this case. We dispense with oral 

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6829 Doc: 16 Filed: 12/27/2023 Pg: 2 of 3
3

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

AFFIRMED

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6829 Doc: 16 Filed: 12/27/2023 Pg: 3 of 3
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                      CHAMPION INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION
                              One Champion Plaza
                              Stamford, CT  06921


                                        March 29, 1999


Champion International Corporation
One Champion Plaza
Stamford, CT  06921

Dear Sirs:

     As Senior Vice President and General Counsel of Champion International
Corporation (the "Company"), I advise you as follows in connection with legal
and administrative claims and proceedings which are pending or known to be
threatened against the Company.

     I call your attention to the fact that, as Senior Vice President and
General Counsel of the Company, I have general supervision of the Company's
legal affairs.  In such capacity, I have reviewed litigation and claims
threatened or asserted involving the Company and have consulted with outside
legal counsel with respect thereto where I have deemed it appropriate.

     There are currently no material legal or administrative claims or
proceedings pending or known to be threatened against the Company.

     I hereby consent to the reference to this opinion in the Company's Annual
Report to Shareholders for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1998, and in the
Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1998
(the "Form 10-K"), and to the filing of this opinion as an exhibit to the Form
10-K.
 
                                             Very truly yours,



                                             /s/ Stephen B. Brown
                                             Senior Vice President
                                             and General Counsel
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7721

JUAN ANTONIO PARTIDA-RODRIGUEZ,

 Petitioner – Appellant,

v.

FRANK PERRY,

 Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, 

Chief District Judge. (3:14-cv-00408-FDW)

Submitted: April 16, 2015 Decided: April 20, 2015

Before AGEE and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Juan Antonio Partida-Rodriguez, Appellant Pro Se. Nicholaos 

George Vlahos, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, 

North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Juan Antonio Partida-Rodriguez seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012)

petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice 

or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012). 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) (2012). 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). 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. Slack, 

529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that 

Partida-Rodriguez has not made the requisite showing. 

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave 

to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND THE RELATED CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS FOR THE NINE MONTHS IN THE PERIOD ENDED SEPTEMBER 30,
1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                           8,834
<SECURITIES>                                     8,396
<RECEIVABLES>                                   13,640
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,125
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                32,220
<PP&E>                                           8,477
<DEPRECIATION>                                   6,127
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  35,525
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           14,096
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        39,489
<OTHER-SE>                                    (18,234)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    35,525
<SALES>                                         16,358
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                16,358
<CGS>                                            1,746
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    5,118
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                16,670
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   243
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (784)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (4,345)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       114
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,459)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,478)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.46)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.46)
        

</TABLE>
# C_2016202EN.01005401.xml

| 7.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 202/54 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 202/54

---

Article 15

(ex Article 255 TEC)

(ex Article 255 TEC)

1.   In order to promote good governance and ensure the participation of civil society, the Union's institutions, bodies, offices and agencies shall conduct their work as openly as possible.

2.   The European Parliament shall meet in public, as shall the Council when considering and voting on a draft legislative act.

3.   Any citizen of the Union, and any natural or legal person residing or having its registered office in a Member State, shall have a right of access to documents of the Union's institutions, bodies, offices and agencies, whatever their medium, subject to the principles and the conditions to be defined in accordance with this paragraph.

General principles and limits on grounds of public or private interest governing this right of access to documents shall be determined by the European Parliament and the Council, by means of regulations, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure.

Each institution, body, office or agency shall ensure that its proceedings are transparent and shall elaborate in its own Rules of Procedure specific provisions regarding access to its documents, in accordance with the regulations referred to in the second subparagraph.

The Court of Justice of the European Union, the European Central Bank and the European Investment Bank shall be subject to this paragraph only when exercising their administrative tasks.

The European Parliament and the Council shall ensure publication of the documents relating to the legislative procedures under the terms laid down by the regulations referred to in the second subparagraph.

---
```

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 50 (Monday, March 16, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 13538]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-05934]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9922-70-OEI]

Agency Information Collection Activities OMB Responses

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This document announces the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) responses to Agency clearance requests in compliance with the 
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). An agency may not 
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a 
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB 
control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA regulations are listed 
in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Courtney Kerwin (202) 566-1669, or 
email at kerwin.courtney@epa.gov and please refer to the appropriate 
EPA Information Collection Request (ICR) Number.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

OMB Responses to Agency Clearance Requests

OMB Approvals

    EPA ICR Number 0976.17; 2015 Hazardous Waste Report, Notification 
of Regulated Waste Activity, and Part A Hazardous Waste Permit 
Application and Modification (Renewal); 40 CFR parts 262, 262.41, 263, 
264, 264.75, 265, 266, 270, 273, and 279; 42 CFR parts 262, 263, 264, 
265, 266, 270, 273, and 279; was approved with change on 1/28/2015; OMB 
Number 2050-0024; expires on 1/31/2017.

Comment Filed

    EPA ICR Number 2465.02; NSPS for Greenhouse Gas Emissions for New 
Electric Utility Generating Units (40 CFR part 60, subpart TTTT) 
(Proposed Rule); 40 CFR part 60, subpart TTTT; OMB filed comment on 1/
20/2015.

Courtney Kerwin,
Acting Director, Collections Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2015-05934 Filed 3-13-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2


                          GOODY'S FAMILY CLOTHING, INC.
                            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 Goody's Family Clothing, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending November 2, 2002, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Edward R. Carlin, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 result of operations of
         the Company.


/s/ Edward R. Carlin
--------------------

Edward R. Carlin
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary
November 22, 2002
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.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         November 24, 2023.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on November 17, 2023, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 17 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2024-59, CP2024-60.                

Sean C. Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2023-25895 Filed 11-22-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
Exhibit 31.1

     CERTIFICATIONS OF CEO PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

I, Victor Zaccaglin, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Calprop Corporation;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. 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 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 control 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 (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual
report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(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.

August 24, 2004

/s/ Victor Zaccaglin
-----------------------
Victor Zaccaglin
Chairman of the Board
Chief Executive Officer
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

EXHIBIT 10(b)  


  
 

  Consent of Independent Accountants    
  


        We hereby consent to the use, in this Registration Statement on Form N-4 (File No. 333-76952) of our report dated
March 1, 2002, relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedules of Protective Life and Annuity Insurance Company, which appears in such Registration
Statement. We also consent to the use in this Registration Statement of our report dated April 2, 2002, on our audits of the financial statements of Variable Annuity Account A of Protective
Life, which appears in such Registration Statement. We also consent to the reference to us under the heading "Independent Accountants" in such Registration Statement. 


PricewaterhouseCoopers
LLP

Birmingham, Alabama

April 22, 2002 









QuickLinks


Consent of Independent Accountants
#### STATE OF CONNECTICUT *v.*MARK JENKINS

(AC 19516)

Landau, Spear and Freedman, Js.

Argued April 24

officially released May 30, 2000

Per Curiam.

The judgment is affirmed.