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

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                            JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                     12,144,000
<SECURITIES>                                        0         
<RECEIVABLES>                               6,179,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                  269,000
<INVENTORY>                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           20,887,000 
<PP&E>                                  1,186,652,000
<DEPRECIATION>                             48,783,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          1,218,391,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                     530,968,000
<BONDS>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                      383,000
<OTHER-SE>                                457,642,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>            1,218,391,000
<SALES>                                             0 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                          145,452,000
<CGS>                                               0         
<TOTAL-COSTS>                             127,103,000 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         23,190,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (3,889,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (3,889,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                          (25,344,000)
<CHANGES>                                           0 
<NET-INCOME>                             (29,233,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (.78)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (.78)
        

</TABLE>
## IN THE COU RT O F CR IM IN AL AP PE ALS OF TE XAS
N O . A P - 75, 892

EX PA R TE K A R L W A Y N E T H O M A S , A ppl i c ant

ON AP P LI CAT I ON F OR A W RI T OF HABE AS CORP US CAUS E N O. 3 1 9 0 6 I N T HE 3 3 DI S TR I CT COURT RD FROM BURNET CO UNTY

P er cur i am . O P I N I O N Pur s u a n t to th e p r o v is io n s o f A rti c le 1 1
. 0 7 o f th e T e xa s Co d e o f Cr im in a l Pr o c edure , the cler k of the trial c ourt transmitted to this C ourt this a pplication for a

writ of habe as cor

pus. Ex pa rte Y oung , 4 18 S.W. 2d

82 4, 82 6 ( Te x. Cr im. Ap p. 19 67 ). Ap pli c a nt wa s c on vic te d o f a g g ra vate d a ssa ult and sente nced to ten and a half y ear s’ imprisonment. Ap pli c a nt co nte nd s th a t his c ouns e l r e nd e re d in e ff e c tiv e a ssi sta

nc e be c a us e sh e fa ile d to timely file notice of

appea l. We rema

nded thi s application to t he trial c ourt for f indings of f

act a nd conclusions of law
. The trial c ourt has deter

mined that trial counsel f

ailed to timely

file notice of

appea l. We find,there fore , that Applicant is entitled to the opportunity to f ile an out-of- time appea l of the judg ment of conviction in Cause No. 31906 from the 33 J udicial District Court of Bur net County . Applicant rd is ordere d returne d to that time at w hich he may g ive a written notice of appea l so that he may then, with the aid of c ounsel, obtain a mea ningf ul appea l. All tim e limits shall be calculate d as if the
se nte nc e ha d b e e n im

po se d o n th e date on

wh ic h th e mand a te of

thi s Co ur

t is sues. W e ho ld t

hat, should Applicant desire t o prosec ute an appea l, he must take affirmative steps to file a wr itten notice of a pp e a l in the tr ia l c ourt

wi thi n 3 0 d a y s a ft e r t

he mand a te of

thi s Co ur t is su e s.

Deliver ed: April 9, 2008 Do No t Pu

bli sh
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

October 1, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 04-20193

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JOSE PRISCILIANO BAEZ-LEON,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-03-CR-311-1

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

Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jose Prisciliano Baez-Leon (Baez) was convicted of illegal

reentry after deportation, and he was sentenced to 30 months’

imprisonment, three years’ supervised release, and a $100 special

assessment that was ordered remitted on motion of the Government. 

Baez contends that the district court erred by characterizing his

state felony conviction for simple possession of marijuana as an

“aggravated felony” for purposes of U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2. However,

this issue is foreclosed by our precedent. See United States v.
No. 04-20193

-2-

Caicedo-Cuero, 312 F.3d 697, 706-11 (5th Cir. 2002), cert.

denied, 538 U.S. 1021 (2003); United States v. Hinojosa-Lopez,

130 F.3d 691, 693-94 (5th Cir. 1997). 

Baez also argues that the “felony” and “aggravated felony”

provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b) are unconstitutional. 

He acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed, but he seeks to

preserve the issue for possible Supreme Court review in light of

Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000). As Baez concedes,

this issue is foreclosed. See Almendarez-Torres v. United

States, 523 U.S. 224, 247 (1998); United States v. Dabeit, 231

F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000).

Baez also contends that, based on this court’s recent

decision in United States v. Ferguson, 369 F.3d 847 (5th Cir.

2004), the district court plainly erred in prohibiting him from

using tobacco products as a special condition of his supervised

release. Because Baez’s use of tobacco is not reasonably related

to his violation of illegal reentry after deportation and because

there is no indication that the condition was necessary for

deterrence, public safety, or medical care, we agree that the

district court plainly erred in prohibiting Baez’s tobacco use

during his supervised release. See Ferguson, 369 F.3d at 853-54. 

Accordingly, we VACATE the sentence in part and REMAND for the

district court to modify the special conditions of Baez’s

supervised release in a manner consistent with this opinion. 

AFFIRMED IN PART. VACATED AND REMANDED IN PART.
<PAGE>

                        Amendment to Employment Agreement



This Amendment is entered into as of January 2, 2002 by and between ICT Group,
Inc, a Pennsylvania corporation (hereinafter called "Company") and Vincent
Paccapaniccia an individual (hereinafter called "Employee").

Whereas, Company and Employee have entered into that certain employment
agreement dated August 24, 1998 (hereinafter the "Employment Agreement"); and

Whereas, in consideration of the continued employment of Employee, and deeming
it to be in Company's best interest, Company and Employee now wish to amend a
certain provision of the Employment Agreement.

Now, therefore in consideration of the covenants and promise contained herein,
and intending to be legally bound hereby, Company and Employee hereby agree as
follows:

1.       Section 6 (a), Post-Termination Payments: Section 6 (a) of the
         Employment Agreement is hereby amended by deleting Section 6 (a) in its
         entirety and replacing it with a new Section 6 (a) to read as follows:
         "(a) If Employee is terminated by Company pursuant to Paragraph 10
         hereof, Company shall pay to Employee a monthly severance payment in an
         amount equal to Employee's monthly salary at the time of termination
         for twelve (12) months."
2.       Effective Date: The change to the Employment Agreement set forth in
         this Amendment shall become effective on January 2, 2002.
3.       No Other Changes: Except as set forth herein, the Employment Agreement
         shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect.

In Witness Whereof, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment as of the
date and year first above written.


ICT Group, Inc.                             EMPLOYEE

By:                                         Signature
    ----------------------------                      --------------------------

Name:                                       Name:
     ---------------------------                 ------------------------------
Title: Chief Executive Officer
Ryder Scott Company
Petroleum Consultants

1100 Louisiana                                         Fax (713) 651-0849
Suite 3800  Houston, TX  77002-5218              Telephone (713) 651-9191






                      CONSENT OF PETROLEUM CONSULTING FIRM




      We consent to the  reference to our name included in this Annual Report on
Form  10-K  for  the  year  ended December 31, 2000 for Dyco Oil and Gas Program
1984-2 Limited Partnership.



                                    //s// Ryder Scott Company, L.P.

                                    RYDER SCOTT COMPANY, L.P.






Houston, Texas
January 31, 2001
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8 Nos. 333-91525, 333-59253 and 333-89884) pertaining toThe SCPIE Holdings Inc. Employee Stock Purchase Plan and The 2001 Amended and Restated Equity Participation Plan of SCPIE Holdings Inc., as amended, respectively, of our report dated February 20, 2004, with respect to the consolidated financialstatements and schedules included in its Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2003. 

 

 

Los Angeles, California 

March 26, 2004
**UNPUBLISHED**

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13-1500**

WILLIAM HENRY HARRISON; GOD DYHU K. HARRISON; BIGAL M.A. HARRISON,
Plaintiffs – Appellants,

v.
TROOPER J. M. WOODWARD, Virginia State Police; SERGEANT SMITH, Virginia State Police

- Nine Mile Road Barracks; CAPTAIN GARY B. PAYNE, Virginia State Police; VIRGINIA STATE POLICE; CANAL INSURANCE COMPANY; BOB CARLTON, Agent of Canal Insurance,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond . Henry E. Hudson, District Judge. (3:13-cv-00131-HEH)

Submitted: August 13, 2013 Decided: August 23, 2013

Before NIEMEYER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William Henry Harrison, God Dyhu K. Harrison, Bigal M.A. Harrison, Appellants Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

Appellants appeal the district court ’ s order s
dismissing this civil rights action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.

12(b)(6) and denying their motion for reconsideration

. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,

we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.

Harrison v. Woodw ard , No. 3:13

- cv

- 00131

- HEH (E.D. Va. Mar. 5 &

Apr. 9, 2013) . We dispense with oral argument because the facts

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

AFFIRMED
**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 Communicate.com Inc. (“Communicate”) on
      Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2006 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, David
      M. Jeffs, President, Chief Executive Officer of Communicate and the sole member
      of the Board of Directors, certify, pursuant to s.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 represents, the financial condition
      and result of operations of Communicate.








*/s/
      David M. Jeffs*


David
      M.
      Jeffs


Chief
      Executive Officer






November
      14, 2006













**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 Communicate.com Inc. (“Communicate”) on
      Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30s, 2006 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, J.
      Cameron Pan, Secretary, Treasurer, and Chief Financial Officer of Communicate,
      certify, pursuant to s.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 represents, the financial condition
      and result of operations of Communicate.






*/s/
      J. Cameron Pan*


J.
      Cameron Pan


Chief
      Financial Officer






November
      14, 2006
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JOE PIAZZA, Jr.,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; et

al.,

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 11-55621

D.C. No. 2:07-cv-01202-DOC-CW

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

David O. Carter, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted November 13, 2012** 

Before: CANBY, TROTT, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.

Joe Piazza, Jr., appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing

his action brought under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau

FILED

NOV 27 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 11-55621

of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971) and the Federal Torts Claim Act alleging

constitutional violations. We dismiss.

We lack jurisdiction to consider Piazza’s challenges to the underlying

judgment because Piazza failed to file a timely notice of appeal as to the

underlying judgment. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a) (notice of appeal must be filed

within sixty days after judgment if one of the parties is the United States); see also

Munden v. Ultra-Alaska Assocs., 849 F.2d 383, 386 (9th Cir. 1988) (the appellate

court will not “strain to characterize artificially” a postjudgment filing “merely to

keep the appeal alive”).

DISMISSED.
### Fw: OIRA Concluding Review of SO2 NAAQS Final Rule

Lydia Wegman

to:

Tricia Crabtree, Joseph-J Dougherty

06/02/2010 08:06 PM

Show Details

History: This message has been forwarded.

From: "Laity, James A." [James_A._Laity@omb.eop.gov]

Sent: 06/02/2010 07:53 PM AST

To: Lydia Wegman; Charlotte Bertrand; Bridgid Curry

Cc: "Sunstein, Cass R." <Cass_R._Sunstein@omb.eop.gov>; "Hertz, Jessica R." <Jessi ca_R._Hertz@omb.eop.gov>;

"King, Heidi R." <Heidi_R._King@omb.eop.gov>; "Schwab, Margo" <Margo_Schwab@omb.eop.gov>; "Clark, Michael

C." <Michael_C._Clark@omb.eop.gov>; "Poster, Dianne L. " <Dianne_L._Poster@ceq.eop.gov>; "Neyland, Kevin F."

<Kevin_F._Neyland@omb.eop.gov>; Ron Evans; Gina McCarthy; "Mancini, Dominic J."

<Dominic_J._Mancini@omb.eop.gov>

Subject: OIRA Concluding Review of SO2 NAAQS Final Rule

Lydia:

OIRA is concluding review of the SO2 NAAQS Final Rule with a finding of consistent with change. It has been a

pleasure working with you and I want to express my personal thanks to you and your staff for their

professionalism and hard work on a tight schedule to address interagency comments. I hope you and they are

able to take a well

‐ deserved rest.

Jim Laity

OIRA Desk Officer 

### Page 1 of 1

6/2/2010 file://C:\Documents and Settin g s\tcrabtre\Local Settin g s\Tem p \notesFCBCEE\~web2946.htm
Exhibit 31.1



CERTIFICATION



I, Mark R. Richards, President and Chief Executive Officer of Appleton Papers Inc., certify that:



1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of
Appleton Papers 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(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, 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 (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



5. The registrants other certifying officer(s) 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 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.



Date: November 14, 2005



|           |  |                                      
|---------- |  | -------------------------------------
|Signature: |  | /s/ Mark R. Richards                 
|           |  | Mark R. Richards                     
|           |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 257 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        S.257

                       One Hundred Fourth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
  the fourth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-five

                                 An Act

 
 To amend the charter of the Veterans of Foreign Wars to make eligible 
                               for member-

 ship those veterans that have served within the territorial limits of 
                              South Korea.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That section 5 of the 
Act of May 28, 1936 (36 U.S.C. 115), is amended to read as follows:
    ``Sec. 5. A person may not be a member of the corporation created 
by this Act unless that person--
        ``(1) served honorably as a member of the Armed Forces of the 
    United States in a foreign war, insurrection, or expedition, which 
    service has been recognized as campaign-medal service and is 
    governed by the authorization of the award of a campaign badge by 
    the Government of the United States; or
        ``(2) while a member of the Armed Forces of the United States, 
    served honorably on the Korean peninsula or in its territorial 
    waters for not less than 30 consecutive days, or a total of 60 
    days, after June 30, 1949.''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13** 
**- 7803** 

ARTHUR R. MOSELEY, a/k/a Shahid Majid ,
Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v.

JUDGE NEWMAN; ASSISTANT SOLICITOR KIMBERY BARR; ASSISTANT SOLICITOR SECRETARY LINDA WOODS; PUBLIC DEFENDER M. AMANDA SHULA; VERDELL BARR, Former Private Counsel; SHARON STAGGERS, Town Clerk ,
Defendant s
- Appellee s
.

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

. G. Ross Anderson, Jr. , Senior Dist rict Judge. ( 0 :1 3

- cv
- 0 1680

- GRA )

Submitted : January 21, 2014 Decided: January 24, 2014

Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and THACKER , Circuit Judges.

Affirm ed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Arthur R. Moseley , Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Arthur R. Moseley appeals the district court ’ s order
dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (200 6 )
complaint. 1 The district court referred this case to a
magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) ( 201 2 ).
The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and

advised Moseley that failure to file timely objections to this
recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court
order based upon the recommendation.
The timely filing of specific objections to a
magistrate judge ’ s recommendation is necessary to preserve
appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when
the parties have been warned of the consequences of
noncompliance. Wright v. Collins , 76 6 F.2d 841, 845

- 46 (4th
Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn , 474 U.S. 140 (1985).
Moseley has waived appellate review by failing to file
objections after receiving proper notice. 2 Accordingly, we deny

1 The district court’s dismissal without prejudice is an appealable final order under Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392 , 10 F.3d 1064, 1066

- 67 (4th Cir. 1993), as Moseley would not be able to save his action by merely amending his complaint.

2 To the extent Moseley challenges on appeal the district court’s denial of his motion for an extension of time to file objections, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding no good cause for the extension. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(A) (providing standard); Carefirst of (Continued)3 the motion for a transcript at the government’s expens e and
affirm the judgment of the district court.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal contentions are adequately prese nted in the materials

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

AFFIRMED

Md., Inc. v. Carefirst Pregnancy Ctrs., Inc. , 334 F.3d 390, 396 (4th Cir. 2003) (stating standard of review for denial of motion for extension of time).