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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-7206

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

GARRICK L. WILSON,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Florence. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge.

(CR-02-146; CA-04-612-4-25)

Submitted: November 4, 2004 Decided: November 10, 2004

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Garrick L. Wilson, Appellant Pro Se. Alfred William Walker Bethea,

Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina,

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Garrick L. Wilson seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255

(2000). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a

§ 2255 proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). 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) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his

constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive

procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or

wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003);

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d

676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the

record and conclude that Wilson has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we deny Wilson’s motion for 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 the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7545

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

BRUCE ERIC BYRD,

 Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Baltimore. Joseph R. Goodwin, District Judge. 

(1:11-cr-00657-JRG-2; 1:13-cv-02775-JRG)

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.

Bruce Eric Byrd, Appellant Pro Se. John Francis Purcell, Jr., 

Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Bruce Eric Byrd seeks to appeal the district court’s order 

denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order 

is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a 

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (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 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 

Byrd 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 
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
IIB 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 979 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 2, 2015 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources 

AN ACT 

To designate a mountain in the John Muir Wilderness of 

the Sierra National Forest as ‘‘Sky Point’’. 

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


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 979 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. FINDINGS. 

2 Congress finds the following: 

3 (1) Staff Sergeant Sky Mote, USMC, grew up 

4 in El Dorado, California. 

5 (2) Staff Sergeant Mote graduated from Union 

6 Mine High School. 

7 (3) Upon graduation, Staff Sergeant Mote 

8 promptly enlisted in the Marine Corps. 

9 (4) Staff Sergeant Mote spent 9 years serving 

10 his country in the United States Marine Corps, in11 cluding a deployment to Iraq and two deployments 

12 to Afghanistan. 

13 (5) By his decisive actions, heroic initiative, and 

14 resolute dedication to duty, Staff Sergeant Mote 

15 gave his life to protect fellow Marines on August 10, 

16 2012, by gallantly rushing into action during an at17 tack by a rogue Afghan policeman inside the base 

18 perimeter in Helmand province. 

19 (6) Staff Sergeant Mote was awarded the Navy 

20 Cross, a Purple Heart, the Navy-Marine Corps Com21 mendation Medal, a Navy-Marine Corps Achieve22 ment Medal, two Combat Action Ribbons, and three 

23 Good Conduct Medals. 

24 (7) The Congress of the United States, in ac25 knowledgment of this debt that cannot be repaid, 

26 honors Staff Sergeant Mote for his ultimate sacrifice 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

HR 979 RFS 

1 and recognizes his service to his country, faithfully 

2 executed to his last, full measure of devotion. 

3 (8) A presently unnamed peak in the center of 

4 Humphrey Basin holds special meaning to the 

5 friends and family of Sky Mote, as their annual 

6 hunting trips set up camp beneath this point; under 

7 the stars, the memories made beneath this rounded 

8 peak will be cherished forever. 

9 SEC. 2. SKY POINT. 

10 (a) DESIGNATION.—The mountain in the John Muir 

11 Wilderness of the Sierra National Forest in California, lo12 cated at 37°15′16.10091′′N 118°43′39.54102′′W, shall be 

13 known and designated as ‘‘Sky Point’’. 

14 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg15 ulation, document, record, or other paper of the United 

16 States to the mountain described in subsection (a) shall 

17 be considered to be a reference to ‘‘Sky Point’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives June 1, 2015. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
IV 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 301 

Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to prohibit the consideration of an implementing bill with respect to a trade agreement unless 

the final legal text of the agreement has been made available to the 

public for a period of not less than 60 days prior to the date on 

which the implementing bill is introduced in the House. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 4, 2015 

Ms. KAPTUR (for herself, Mr. HUNTER, Mr. GRAYSON, Ms. SLAUGHTER, Mr. 

RYAN of Ohio, Mr. TONKO, Mr. TAKAI, Mr. NOLAN, Mr. SHERMAN, Mr. 

YOHO, Mr. BROOKS of Alabama, Mr. MCKINLEY, Mr. JONES, Ms. PINGREE, Mr. POCAN, Mr. RUSSELL, and Mr. PERRY) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Rules 

RESOLUTION 

Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to 

prohibit the consideration of an implementing bill with 

respect to a trade agreement unless the final legal text 

of the agreement has been made available to the public 

for a period of not less than 60 days prior to the date 

on which the implementing bill is introduced in the 

House. 

1 Resolved, 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•HRES 301 IH 

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This resolution may be cited as the ‘‘Trade Review 

3 Accountability Needs Sunlight and Preview of Any Regu4 lations and Exact Negotiated Components Resolution’’ or 

5 ‘‘TRANSPAREN–C Resolution’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON CONSIDERATION OF ANY IMPLE7 MENTING BILL SUBMITTED WITH RESPECT 

8 TO A TRADE AGREEMENT OR TRADE AGREE9 MENTS UNLESS THE FINAL LEGAL TEXT OF 

10 SUCH AGREEMENT OR AGREEMENTS HAS 

11 BEEN MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC. 

12 Rule XXI of the Rules of the House of Representa13 tives is amended by adding at the end the following new 

14 clause: 

15 ‘‘12. Notwithstanding sections 151, 152, or 153 of 

16 the Trade Act of 1974, it shall not be in order in the 

17 House to consider any implementing bill submitted with 

18 respect to a trade agreement or trade agreements entered 

19 into under any law unless the final legal text of such 

20 agreement or agreements has been made available to the 

21 public for a period of not less than 60 days prior to the 

22 date on which the implementing bill is introduced in the 

23 House.’’. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 6 (Wednesday, January 9, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 1859]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-00218]


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

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK

[Public Notice 2013-0101]


Agency Information Collection Activities: Comment Request

AGENCY: Export-Import Bank of the United States.

ACTION: Submission for OMB Review and Comments Request.

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

    Form Title: EIB 92-32 Notification by Insured of Amounts Payable 
Under Single-Buyer Export Credit Insurance Policy
SUMMARY: The Export-Import Bank of the United States (Ex-Im Bank), as a 
part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent 
burden, invites the general public and other Federal Agencies to 
comment on the proposed information collection, as required by the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
    This form represents the exporter's directive to Ex-Im Bank to whom 
and where the insurance proceeds should be sent. The forms are 
typically part of the documentation required by financial institution 
lenders in order to provide financing of an exporter's foreign accounts 
receivable. Foreign accounts receivable insured by Ex-Im Bank represent 
stronger collateral to secure the financing. By recording which 
policyholders have completed this form, Ex-Im Bank is able to determine 
how many of its exporter policyholders require Ex-Im Bank insurance 
policies to support lender financing.
    The application can be reviewed at: www.exim.gov/pub/pending/eib92-32.pdf Single Buyer Export Credit Insurance Policy.

DATES: Comments should be received on or before March 11, 2013 to be 
assured of consideration.

ADDRESSES: Comments maybe submitted electronically on 
www.regulations.gov or by mail to Arnold Chow, Export-Import Bank of 
the United States, 811 Vermont Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20571.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    Titles and Form Number: EIB 92-32 Single Buyer Export Credit 
Insurance Policy.
    OMB Number: 3048-XXXX.
    Type of Review: New.
    Need and Use: The information requested enables the applicant to 
provide Ex-Im Bank with the information necessary to obtain 
legislatively required assurance of repayment and fulfills other 
statutory requirements.
    Annual Number of Respondents: 150.
    Estimated Time per Respondent: 1 hour.
    Frequency of Reporting or Use: Annually.
    Government Review Time: 1 hour.
    Total Hours: 150 hours.
    Cost to the Government: $16,320.

Sharon A. Whitt,
Agency Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. 2013-00218 Filed 1-8-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6690-01-P
November 25, 1998

19895

#### Loo v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., Inc.

Vacated
##### Table of Contents



SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
 FORM 10-Q/A
 Amendment No. 1
 þ
    
    Quarterly Report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
 For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2005
 or
 o
    
    Transition Report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934
 For the transition period from to
 Commission File Number 0-19598
 infoUSA INC.
  DELAWARE
    
    47-0751545(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)
    
    (I.R.S. Employer Identification
Number)5711 SOUTH 86TH CIRCLE, OMAHA, NEBRASKA
    
    68127(Address of principal executive offices)
    
    (Zip Code)
  
   þ o
  o o o
 þ o
 o o




---



EXPLANATORY NOTE
  TABLE OF CONTENTS  SIGNATURESINDEX TO EXHIBITSCertification of CEO Pursuant to Section 302Certification of CFO Pursuant to Section 302    Table of Contents  
 SIGNATURES
  infoUSA INC.Date: February 21, 2006
    /s/ Stormy L. DeanStormy L. Dean, Chief Financial Officer(principal financial officer) 2




---



##### Table of Contents



INDEX TO EXHIBITS
 31.1*
    
    
    
    Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.31.2*
    
    
    
    Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
 
 *
    
    Filed herewith
Navigate to Homepage
Search
Main navigation
  

        
              Explore the Capitol Campus
                          Art
                            Buildings & Grounds
                            Capitol Hill Facts
                            Visitor Resources
                            Our Blog
                            What We Do
                          Areas of Expertise
                            Programs & Ceremonies
                            Projects
                            Publications
                            Strategic Objectives
                            About Us
                          Who We Are
                            History of the AOC
                            News & Notices
                            Organizational Structure
                            Partnerships & Recognition
                            Work With UsSearch Breadcrumb
    HomeExplore the Capitol CampusThe Art Collection
William Edgar Borah Statue
        
                  The Basics
      
Artist
      
Bryant Baker

Materials
    Bronze

Year
    1947

Location
      
U.S. Capitol Visitor Center

This statue of William Edgar Borah was given to the National Statuary Hall Collection by Idaho in 1947.

William Edgar Borah was born on June 29, 1865, on a farm in Jasper, Illinois. His schooling included the Wayne County common schools and the Southern Illinois Academy at Enfield. Graduating from the University of Kansas at Lawrence in 1889, he studied law and was admitted to the bar in September 1890. After practicing law in Lyons, Kansas, and Boise, Idaho, Borah was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1907 and served until 1940.

A member of the Republican National Committee from 1908 to 1912, he was a delegate to the 1912 Republican National Convention. As a Senator he was dedicated to principles rather than party loyalty. He disliked entangling alliances in foreign policy and became a prominent isolationist. He encouraged the formation of a series of world economic conferences and favored a low tariff. From 1925 to 1933, Borah served as the Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Domestically, he sponsored bills that created the Department of Labor and the Children's Bureau. He was one of the Senators responsible for uncovering the scandals of the Harding Administration. Borah supported Roosevelt's New Deal, especially old age pensions and the reduced gold content of the dollar.

Known for his integrity, eloquent speaking ability, and genuine concern for his constituents, William E. Borah died in Washington, D.C., on January 19, 1940. Serve. Preserve. Inspire.

              Contact Us
                            Accountability
                            Hill Staff Resources
                            AOC Staff Resources
Utility
  

        
              Privacy Policy
                            Image Terms of Use
                            Inspector General
                            U.S. Botanic Garden
                            U.S. Capitol Visitor CenterFacebook
	Twitter
	Flickr
	YouTube
	Instagram
	Subscribe
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, David J. Pecker, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewedthis annual report on Form 10-K of American Media Operations, 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, notmisleading 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, andfor, the periods presented in this report; 

 

4. Theregistrant’s other certifying officer(s) 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, orcaused 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 endof 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 fiscalquarter 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 

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internalcontrol 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 overfinancial 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 significantrole in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 99.2

                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 DynTek, Inc., a Delaware corporation
(the "Company"), on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, the Chief Financial Officer, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss.1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
that:

(1) the Report of the Company filed today pursuant to Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"), fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act; 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/   James Linesch
                                                   -----------------------------
                                                   James Linesch
                                                   Chief Financial Officer
                                                   May 20, 2003





                                      -25-
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 11**  **- 1451** 

EDWARD C. MCREADY , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,
v. MARTIN O'MALLEY, Honorable, in his official capacity as Governor of the State of Maryland; UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF MARYLA ND; WILLIAM E. KIRWAN; UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND UNIVERSITY COLLEGE; SUSAN ALDRIDGE; LAWRENCE E. LEAK; GREG VON LEHMAN; JOHN VOLPE; RHEA REED; RACHEL ZELKIND; SHAWNA ACKER

- BALL; MEGAN FARRELL; THOMAS HOGAN; STATE OF MARYLAND; ELIZABETH MULHERRIN; ADELAIDE A. LAGNESE , Defendants

- Appellees
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Greenbelt
. Roger W. Titus , District Judge. ( 8:08

- cv - 02347

- RWT; 8:08

- cv - 02386

- RWT )

Submitted : February 6, 2012 Decided: March 12, 2 012

Before NIEMEYER, AGEE, and KEENAN , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
. Edward C. McReady, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Faulk, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not b inding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Edward C. McReady appeals the district court ’ s order granting Defendants’ motion for summary judgment in his consolidated civil action s . We have reviewed the record and conclude there is no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See McReady v. O’Malley , Nos. 8:08

- cv - 02347

- RWT; 8:08

- cv - 02386

- RWT (D. Md. Mar. 31, 2011)
. Further, because w e grant McReady’s motion for leave to file an amended informal brief in exc ess of the fifty

- page limitation ordered by the Clerk’s Office , we deny as moot all other pending motions related to the length of McReady’s amended informal brief, including Defendants’ motion to strike McReady’s amended informal brief and McReady’s motio n to strike Defendants’ opposition to his enlarge d informal brief . We also deny as moot M cReady’s motions for summary disposition and expedited review. 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.
AFFIRMED
Breadcrumb

1. Home

2. Print 

3. Pdf 

4. Node 

5. Entity Print 

Privacy Act

Last Modified: 

Print

The Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. § 552a) regulates the collection, maintenance, use,

and dissemination of records about individuals that are retrieved by a personal

identifier.

To ensure compliance with the Federal Fair Information Practice Principles

requirements, APHIS will continue to provide safeguards against invasions of privacy
by limiting the collection of personal data. The data collection must be relevant for

the purposes for which it is collected and shall not be used for any other purpose.

Individuals who are subject to a collection shall have access to that information and

the right to correct any information that is inaccurate.

Featured

What is the Privacy Act? 

Privacy Threshold Analysis, Impact Assessments, System of Records Notices 

Request Access to Privacy Act Records 
Requests for access to Privacy Act records must be in writing in accordance with the

instructions set forth in the system of notice for that system of records.

Privacy Act Resources 

Resources for the Privacy Act