alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14**  **- 6464** 

DAMON L. DOYLE , Petitioner

- Appellant ,
v. A.J. PADULA, Warden , Respondent

- Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Orangeburg
. J. Michelle Childs , District Judge. ( 5:10

- cv - 03242

- JMC )

Submitted : July 17, 2014 Decided: July 28, 2014

Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and KEENAN , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
.

Damon L. Doyle, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Alphonso Simon, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Damon L. Doyle seeks to appeal the district court ’ s order denying relief on his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion. The district court dismissed the motion for lack of jurisdiction because our mandate had issued in Doyle ’s appeal of the district court’s order denyin g his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition, the judgment he sought to vacate under Rule 60(b)
. 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) ; Reid v. Angelone , 369 F.3d 3 63, 369 (4th Cir. 2004). 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 d ebatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85.3 We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that, although the district court’s reason for dismissing Doyle’s Rule 60(b) motion is erroneous, s ee St andard Oil Co. v. United States , 429 U.S. 17, 17 (1976) (holding that i t is well

settled that “ the District Court may entertain a Rule 60(b)
mot ion[,] without leave by this Court[,]” even if the appellate court has already decided an appeal of the complained

- of judgm ent) , an alternative procedural ground for dismissal renders this appeal futile. See Reid , 369 F.3d at 372 n.5. Doyle’s Rule 60(b) motion was tantamount to a second or successive § 2254 petition for which Doyle failed to obtain authorization to file
. Se e United States v. Winestock , 340 F.3d 200, 20 6

- 07 (4th Cir. 2003). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSE D
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS JUL - 6 2020

WACO DIVISION
CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

BY.
INRE ) DEPUTY CLERK
Black 2019 Chevy Tahoe ) CRIMINAL NO. W20-119M
Texas License Plate MHX3766 )
VIN: IGNSKBKCIKR160917 )

GOVERNMENT'S MOTION TO UNSEAL
SEIZURE WARRANT AND AFFIDAVIT

Comes now the United States by and through its undersigned counsel and submits this motion

to unseal the Seizure Warrant and Affidavit and in support thercof states the following:
I.

The warrant and affidavit in the above numbered cause was sealed at the Government's request.

There is no longer any need for the warrant and affidavit to remain under seal. Based on the
foregoing, the Government requests that an order be issued directing the Clerk to unseal the warrant
and affidavit.

WHEREFORE, based on the above, the United States asks the Court to enter an order
unsealing the above numbered seizure warrant and affidavit.

Respectfully submitted,

JOHN F. BASH
UNITD S¥YATESAT)

By: | MARK L. FRAZIER
Assistant United States Attorney
800 Franklin, Suite 280
Waco, TX 76701
(254) 750-1580

{202006269}
Exhibit 32.1  
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 Sequa Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Martin Weinstein, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:   
(1)
The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the 
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; 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/ Martin Weinstein                                         
Martin Weinstein 
Vice Chairman and Chief Executive Officer   
May 9, 2005
WEST\290897588.1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

WACO DIVISION 

BCS SOFTWARE, LLC, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

ITRON, INC., 

Defendant.

Case No. 6:19-cv-00728-ADA 

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 

ORDER GRANTING ITRON, INC.’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR 

INTRA-DISTRICT TRANSFER PURSUANT TO § 1404(A) 

This Court, having considered Itron, Inc.’s Unopposed Motion for Intra-District Transfer 

Pursuant to § 1404(a) hereby orders that the motion is GRANTED. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the above-captioned case be transferred from the Waco 

Division to the Austin Division of the Western District of Texas and remain on the docket of the 

Honorable Alan D Albright. 

SIGNED this _______ day of _______________, 2020. 

_____________________________________ 

HONORABLE ALAN D ALBRIGHT 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:20-cv-00675-ADA Document 23-1 Filed 06/25/20 Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 31.2

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Barry Bilmes, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of 99 Cent Stuff, 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-15e and 15d-15e) 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 on Form 10-K) 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 fulfilling the equivalent function):

     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:  April 11, 2006


/s/Barry Bilmes
----------------------------------
Barry Bilmes
Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                             5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEET AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AND RETAINED EARNINGS AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>  1000
       
<S>                                                 <C>

<PERIOD-TYPE>                                     3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                            45017
<SECURITIES>                                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    273083
<ALLOWANCES>                                       5247
<INVENTORY>                                           0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 403926
<PP&E>                                           367974
<DEPRECIATION>                                   148244
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   839324
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            539511
<BONDS>                                           21736
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<COMMON>                                          17731
<OTHER-SE>                                       213768
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     839324
<SALES>                                               0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 266098
<CGS>                                                 0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    316769
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                      0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 1958
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (68694)<F1>
<INCOME-TAX>                                    (10000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (58694)
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (58694)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (4.50)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (4.50)
<FN>
<F1>Includes General and Administrative Expenses of (16726) and interest income
of 661 not reflected on this tag list.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-6025
WHEELER WILLIAMS, a/k/a Wheeler Robinson, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILLIAM JEDNORSKI, Warden; OFFICER HARRIS; OFFICER ARMSTRONG; OFFICER WILLIAMS, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (CA-95- 383-AMD) Submitted: March 21, 1996 Decided: April 16, 1996 Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion. Wheeler Will iams, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Ric hard Bruce Rosenblatt, Assistant Attorney General, Stuart Milton Nathan, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).1 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (1988); F ED . R. C IV . P. 54(b). 2 See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392 , 10 F.3d 1064 (4th Cir. 1993). 2 PER CURIAM: Appellant, Wheeler Robinson, appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) civil complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion, and find no reversible error. Robinson claims that the Defendants conspired to intimidate him and failed to protect himfrom an assault by an unknown masked man. On these claims, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Williams v. Jednorski , No. CA-95-383-AMD (D. Md. Dec. 18, 1995). Additionally, Robinson claims he was unconstitutionally exposed to asbestos and overcrowded prison conditions. These claims were dismissed without prejudice to his right to refile the claims in a separate action because of his failure toassert these claims in his original complaint. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, and certain interlocutory and collateral orders. 1 Because Robinson may be able to amend these claims, the dismissal Robinson seeks to appeal is not an appealable final order. 2 We dismiss the appeal as to these claims. Additionally, we deny Robinson's motion to appoint counsel. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions3 are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED IN PART, DISMISSED IN PART
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.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### Office of the Secretary

# AGENCY:

National Defense University, DoD.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting. 

# SUMMARY:

Pursuant to Public Law 92-463, notice is hereby given of a forthcoming meeting of the National Security Education Board. The purpose of the meeting is to review and make recommendations to the Secretary concerning requirements established by the David L. Boren National Security Education Act, Title VIII of Public Law 102-183, as amended.

# DATES:

November 8, 2000.

# ADDRESSES:

The Crystal City Marriott Hotel, 1999 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, Virginia 22202.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dr. Edmond J. Collier, Deputy Director, National Security Education Program, 1101 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 1210, Rosslyn P.O. Box 20010, Arlington, Virginia 22209-2248; (703) 696-1991. Electronic mail address: colliere@ndu.edu

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The National Security Education Board meeting is open to the public.

Dated: October 6, 2000.

L.M. Bynum,

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

[FR Doc. 00-26253  Filed 10-12-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001-10-M
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

WACOACO DIVISION

WSOU INVESTMENTS LLC

vs.

§

§

§

§

NO: WA:20-CV-00489-ADA

ZTE CORPORATION, ZTE (USA), INC., §

ZTE (TX), INC.

Defendant

ORDER SETTING Discovery DISCOVERY HEARING

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above entitled and numbered case is SETET for

DISCOVERY HEARING, in U.S. Magistrate Court, Courtroom No. 2, Third Floor, 800 Franklin

Avenue, Waco,aco Texas, on November 01, 2022 at 01:30 PM.

28th day of October, 2022.

Derek T. Gilliland

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 6:20-cv-00489-ADA-DTG Document 249 Filed 10/28/22 Page 1 of 1
##### 



Exhibit 99.4 (KPMG LOGO) Three
[ILLEGIBLE] Center 
San Francisco, CA 94111 Independent Accountants Report The Board of Directors
First Republic Bank: We have examined managements assertion that First Republic Bank (the Bank)
complied with the minimum servicing standards set forth in the Mortgage
Bankers Association of Americas Uniform Single Attestation
Program for
Mortgage Bankersas of and for the year ended December 31, 2003 included in
the accompanying Management Assertion. Management is responsible for the
Banks compliance with those minimum servicing standards. Our responsibility
is to express an opinion on managements assertion about the Banks compliance
based on our examination. Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards
established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and,
accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Banks
compliance with the minimum servicing standards specified above and performing
such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We
believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our
examination does not provide a legal determination on the Banks compliance
with the minimum servicing standards. In our opinion, managements assertion that First Republic Bank complied with
the aforementioned minimum servicing standards during the year ended December
31, 2003 is fairly stated, in all material respects. -s- KPMG LLP February 20, 2004 (BOX)




---



##### 



(FIRST REPUBLIC BANK LOGO) Management Assertion As of and for the year ended
December 31, 2003, First Republic Bank (the
Bank) complied in all material respects with the minimum servicing
standards set forth in the Mortgage Bankers Association of Americas
Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers.As of
and for this same period, the Bank had in effect fidelity bond insurance policies
of $25,000,000 and errors and omissions insurance policy in the amount of
$5,000,000. /s/ James H. Herbert II
    
    February 20, 2004James H. Herbert IIPresident
and Chief Executive Officer/s/ Katherine August-deWilde
    
    February 20, 2004Katherine August-deWildeExecutive
Vice President and Chief Operating Officer/s/ Willis H. Newton, Jr.
    
    February 20, 2004Willis H. Newton, Jr.Executive
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer/s/ Nancy Segreto
    
    February 20, 2004Nancy SegretoVice
President Loan Operations
 (CITY ADDRESSES)
Exhibit 32.2


CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


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 The Stephan Co. (the
"Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2005 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), I, David Spiegel, Chief Financial Officer
of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to my knowledge:

(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
results of operations of the Company.



/s/ David A. Spiegel
__________________________________
David A. Spiegel
Chief Financial Officer
September 30, 2005
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5548 

To suspend temporarily the duty on 2,3-Dichloro-5,6-dicyano-1,4- 

benzoquinone. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 8, 2012 

Mr. BENISHEK introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on 2,3-Dichloro-5,6-dicyano1,4-benzoquinone. 

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

3 SECTION 1. 2,3-DICHLORO-5,6-DICYANO-1,4-BENZOQUINONE. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 2,3-Dichloro-5,6-dicyano1,4-benzoquinone (CAS 

No. 84–58–2) (provided 

for in subheading 

2926.90.48) ....................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5548 IH

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
FORM 10-Q FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2000 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                      12,288,189
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,959,721
<ALLOWANCES>                                   131,896
<INVENTORY>                                 12,100,958
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            29,562,590
<PP&E>                                       5,140,888
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,219,380
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              60,630,984
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,838,769
<BONDS>                                     10,053,162
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        45,674
<OTHER-SE>                                  45,188,866
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                60,630,984
<SALES>                                      8,202,562
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             8,394,665
<CGS>                                        4,537,157
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,537,157
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,951,114
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                21,829
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             226,452
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                906,394
<INCOME-TAX>                                   340,947
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            565,447
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   565,447
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.13
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.13


</TABLE>