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### UNPUBLISHED



# UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT



#  J AMES E DWARD M ILLER ,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v. No. 03-7534



#  M IKE P IERCE ; D AVID P ENDRY ; B UTCH H OLLAND ; T IM C HEEK ; R ONNIE P RICE ,

Defendants-Appellees. 

# 
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Graham C. Mullen, Chief District Judge.

(CA-99-50-5-MU) Submitted: January 30, 2004 Decided: March 16, 2004 Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed in part, vacated and remanded in part, by unpublished per curiam opinion.

COUNSEL James Edward Miller, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Mason Thomas, PATRICK, HARPER & DIXON, Hickory, North Carolina, for Appellees.Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

OPINION
PER CURIAM: James Edward Miller appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the Defendants on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. The district court’s grant of summary judgment is reviewed de novo. Higgins v. E. I. Dupont de Nemours & Co. , 863 F.2d 1162, 1167 (4th Cir. 1988). Summary judgment is appropriatewhen there is no genuine issue of material fact, given the parties’ burdens of proof. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c); Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. , 477 U.S. 242, 247-49 (1986). In determining whether the moving party has shown that there is no genuine issue of material fact, a courtmust assess the factual evidence and all inferences to be drawn therefrom in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. Id. at 255; Smith v. Va. Commonwealth Univ. , 84 F.3d 672, 675 (4th Cir. 1996). Miller claims that the Defendants violated his constitutional rights when they removed Miller’s son from his custody. The Defendantsstated that they were acting pursuant to a court order, but never provided a copy of such an order. Miller provided a court order requiringthe child to be returned to his custody, for the two-week period in dispute. Therefore, whether the Defendants were acting pursuant to a court order, or in contravention of one, is a genuine issue of material fact. We conclude that, as to this claim, the district court erred in granting summary judgment. We vacate that portion of the district court’s order and remand the action for further proceedings. As to Miller’s remaining claims, we have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, as to those claims, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Miller v. Pierce , No. CA99-50-5-MU (W.D.N.C. Sept. 16, 2003). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presentedin the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 2 M ILLERv. P IERCEAFFIRMED IN PART, VACATED AND REMANDED IN PART 3 M ILLERv. P IERCE
Exhibit
32.1








CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C.
§ 1350


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002














In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Pacific Asia Petroleum, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
Frank C. Ingriselli, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 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/ Frank C.
Ingriselli


Frank C.
Ingriselli


President
and Chief Executive Officer


August 6,
2009
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 203 (Monday, October 21, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 84233-84234]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-24182]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration #20699 and #20700; FLORIDA Disaster Number FL-
20012]


Presidential Declaration Amendment of a Major Disaster for the 
State of Florida

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Amendment 3.

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

SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a 
major disaster for the State of Florida (FEMA-4828-DR), dated 09/28/
2024.
    Incident: Hurricane Helene.
    Incident Period: 09/23/2024 and continuing.

DATES: Issued on 10/07/2024.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 11/27/2024.
    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 06/30/2025.

ADDRESSES: Visit the MySBA Loan Portal at https://lending.sba.gov to 
apply for a disaster assistance loan.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alan Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Recovery & Resilience, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd 
Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the President's major disaster 
declaration for the State of Florida, dated 09/28/2024, is hereby 
amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the 
disaster:

Primary Counties (Physical Damage and Economic Injury Loans): Alachua, 
Baker, Bradford, Collier, Duval, Putnam, Union.
Contiguous Counties (Economic Injury Loans Only):
    Florida: Broward, Clay, Flagler, Miami-Dade, Monroe, Nassau, St. 
Johns, Volusia.

[[Page 84234]]

    Georgia: Charlton, Ware.

    All other information in the original declaration remains 
unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

Rafaela Monchek,
Deputy Associate Administrator, Office of Disaster Recovery & 
Resilience.
[FR Doc. 2024-24182 Filed 10-18-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8026-09-P
#### C. H. Dewitt v. Mills County, Appellant.

Contagious disease; employment of physician. A board of health of a special charter city may, in an emergency, legally contract with a member of the city council and also the, health officer of the city to attend persons who are a county charge afflicted with a contagious disease.

*■Appeal from Mills District*Court.— HoN. W. K. Green, Judge.

Saturday, December 17, 1904.

ActioN to recover for medical services rendered under a contract with the board of health of Glenwood. A directed verdict was returned, upon which judgment was entered as prayed. The defendant appeals.—

*Affirmed.*

*L. T. Cenung*and *A. E. Cook,*for appellant.

*John 7. Stone,*for appellee.

Ladd, J.—

In December, 1901, an epidemic of small" pox broke out in the city of Glenwood, and the plaintiff was *170employed to render all necessary medical services to those afflicted with the disease on the following terms: Por the first case he was to receive $150; for the next three, $100 each; and thereafter $50 for each patient. Pour patients were treated. Payment has been made for the first. The other fhree were persons for whose care the county was liable. Some question is raised concerning the liability of two of these, but the evidence showed conclusively that they were without means.' That part of the answer alleging that at the time of entering into the contract the plaintiff was 'a member of the city council of Glenwood, and also health officer of its board of health, was stricken, on motion, as being immaterial and irrelevant. The ruling was correct. Glenwood is a city under special charter, and the board of health consisted of five members designated by the mayor. The plaintiff was not one of these, and there is nothing in the statutes prohibiting him, in an emergency, from being employed by the board of health at an agreed compensation. Section 1026, Code. This was not subject to the approval of the council, and the contract was not invalidated by section 943 of the Code, prohibiting any member of the council from becoming a' interested directly or indirectly in any contract for work or service to be performed for the corporation.” The corporation referred to is the city, and, as the service was not to be rendered for it, but at the expense of the county, the statute does not apply.— *Affirmed.*
# L_2013296EN.01005602.xml

| 7.11.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 296/56 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.11.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 296/56

---

Corrigendum to Council Implementing Decision 2012/334/CFSP of 25 June 2012 implementing Decision 2011/486/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain individuals, groups, undertakings and entities in view of the situation in Afghanistan

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 165 of 26 June 2012
  )

On page 75, recital 2:

for:

| ‘(2) | On 18 March 2012, the Committee established pursuant to paragraph 30 of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1988 (2011) ...’, |
| --- | --- |

‘(2)

On 18 March 2012, the Committee established pursuant to paragraph 30 of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1988 (2011) ...’,

read:

| ‘(2) | On 18 May and 1 June 2012, the Committee established pursuant to paragraph 30 of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1988 (2011) ...’. |
| --- | --- |

‘(2)

On 18 May and 1 June 2012, the Committee established pursuant to paragraph 30 of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1988 (2011) ...’.

---
<PAGE>

                                                                  EXHIBIT 23.2


                        Consent of Independent Auditors

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 333-74513) pertaining to the FlashNet Communications, Inc. 1997 Stock
Incentive Plan and Employee Stock Discount Purchase Plan of our report dated
March 3, 2000, with respect to the 1999 consolidated financial statements of
FlashNet Communications, Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the
year ended December 31, 1999.


                                              /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Fort Worth, Texas
March 27, 2000
Office of Personnel Management

Retirement and Insurance Group

1920 1954 1959 

 

1986 

Benefits Administration Letter

Number: 95-207 Date: January 26, 1995 

SUBJECT Federal Employees' Group Life Insurance Program:

Revised RI 76-10 (Assignment Form)

_________________________________________________________________

Date of Revision The revised form is dated January 1995.

_____________________________________________

Purpose of The form has been revised to reflect that all

Revision employees and former employees covered by

FEGLI now have the right to irrevocably

assign their insurance. Previously, this

right was granted only to certain Federal

judges.

_____________________________________________

When Available The revised RI 76-10 will be available only

on the February 1995 rider. Orders must be

placed through your agency printing officer

with the Government Printing Office, as

explained in the rider.

_____________________________________________

Previous Editions Previous editions are not usable.

_________________________________________________________________
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
2002

I, Christopher Y. Chai, certify that:

1. I have
reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of MAP Pharmaceuticals, Inc.;

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

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrants other
certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and 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 any 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 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.

Date: November 13, 2008



|                             
|-----------------------------
|/s/ Christopher Y. Chai      
|Christopher Y. Chai          
|Chief Financial Officer      
|(Principal Financial Officer)
# L_2012272EN.01001901.xml

| 6.10.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 272/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.10.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 272/19

---

POLITICAL AND SECURITY COMMITTEE DECISION EUSEC/1/2012

of 2 October 2012

on the appointment of the Head of Mission of the European Union mission to provide advice and assistance for security sector reform in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (EUSEC RD Congo)

(2012/543/CFSP)

THE POLITICAL AND SECURITY COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 38 thereof,

Having regard to Council Decision 2010/565/CFSP of 21 September 2010 on the European Union mission to provide advice and assistance for security sector reform in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (EUSEC RD Congo) (1), and in particular Article 8 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to Article 8 of Decision 2010/565/CFSP, the Council authorised the Political and Security Committee, in accordance with the third paragraph of Article 38 of the Treaty, to take the relevant decisions for the purpose of political control and strategic direction of EUSEC RD Congo, including the decision to appoint a Head of Mission, upon a proposal of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (‘HR’). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to Article 8 of Decision 2010/565/CFSP, the Council authorised the Political and Security Committee, in accordance with the third paragraph of Article 38 of the Treaty, to take the relevant decisions for the purpose of political control and strategic direction of EUSEC RD Congo, including the decision to appoint a Head of Mission, upon a proposal of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (‘HR’).

| (2) | On 24 September 2012, the HR proposed the appointment of Colonel Jean-Louis NURENBERG as Head of Mission of EUSEC RD Congo, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

On 24 September 2012, the HR proposed the appointment of Colonel Jean-Louis NURENBERG as Head of Mission of EUSEC RD Congo,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

Colonel Jean-Louis NURENBERG is hereby appointed as Head of Mission of the European Union mission to provide advice and assistance for security sector reform in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (EUSEC RD Congo).

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

It shall apply from 1 October 2012.

Done at Brussels, 2 October 2012.

For the Political and Security Committee

The Chairperson

O. SKOOG

---

(1)  
  OJ L 248, 22.9.2010, p. 59.

1

---
106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2951

AN ACT

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a

study to investigate opportunities to better manage the

water resources in the Salmon Creek watershed of the

upper Columbia River.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

S 2951 ES

1 SECTION 1. SALMON CREEK WATERSHED, WASHINGTON,

2 WATER MANAGEMENT STUDY.

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Interior may

4 conduct a study to investigate the opportunities to better

5 manage the water resources in the Salmon Creek Water6 shed, a tributary to the Upper Columbia River system,

7 Okanagoan County, Washington, so as to restore and en8 hance fishery resources (especially the endangered Upper

9 Columbia Spring Chinook and Steelhead), while maintain10 ing or improving the availability of water supplies for irri11 gation practices vital to the economic well-being of the

12 county.

13 (b) PURPOSE.—The purpose of the study under sub14 section (a) shall be to derive the benefits of and further

15 the objectives of the comprehensive, independent study

16 commissioned by the Confederated Tribes of the Colville

17 Reservation and the Okanagoan Irrigation District, which

18 provides a credible basis for pursuing a course of action

19 to simultaneously achieve fish restoration and improved ir20 rigation conservation and efficiency.
3

S 2951 ES

1 (c) COST SHARE.—The Federal Government’s cost

2 share for the feasibility study shall not exceed 50 percent.

Passed the Senate October 13 (legislative day, September 22), 2000.

Attest:

Secretary.

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2951

AN ACT

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study to investigate opportunities to better

manage the water resources in the Salmon Creekwatershed of the upper Columbia River.
Exhibit 32.2


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 China Prosperous Clean Energy Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Hongjie Zhou, Acting 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 the best of 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.





Date: May 12, 2010

/s/ Hongjie ZhouHongjie Zhou

Acting Chief Financial Officer
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-10370

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

AUDRY LANE, also known as Spud,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:16-CR-245-3

Before BENAVIDES, SOUTHWICK, and COSTA, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Audry Lane has appealed the sentence imposed related to his conviction 

of conspiracy to commit sex trafficking. He asserts that the district court erred 

in adjusting his Sentencing Guidelines offense level by two levels under 

U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(c) because he was an organizer or leader of criminal activity. 

Lane argues that he “was involved in the organization and even helped 

 

* 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

February 7, 2018

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 17-10370 Document: 00514340477 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/07/2018
No. 17-10370

2

formulate the idea of the sex trade, but very soon backed off while his brother 

and others ran the operation.” 

Lane has not shown that the district court’s finding, based on the 

unrebutted findings in the presentence report, is clearly erroneous. See United 

States v. Ochoa-Gomez, 777 F.3d 278, 281 (5th Cir. 2015); see also United States 

v. Guzman-Reyes, 853 F.3d 260, 265-66 (5th Cir. 2017). The judgment is 

AFFIRMED. 

 Case: 17-10370 Document: 00514340477 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/07/2018
EXHIBIT 32


CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, the
undersigned officer of Fordgate Acquisition Corporation
 (the "Company"), hereby certify to my knowledge that:

The Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2012 of the Company fully complies, in all material respects,
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the
Report fairly represents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by
the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.


                             /s/ James Cassidy
                                 Chief Executive Officer
                                 Chief Financial Officer
Date: April 11, 2013
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 16-1489

___________________________

MartinLutherLindstedt,TheChurch ofJesusChristChristian/AryanNations ofMissouri

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

Newton County, Missouri; Newton County Sheriff's Department; Ken Copeland,

Newton County Sheriff; Oren Barnes; Michael Lindstedt; Terry Neff, Attorney;

The Honorable Kevin L. Selby; The Honorable Timothy Perigo; Crystal Courtney

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Western District of Missouri - Joplin

____________

 Submitted: October 7, 2016

Filed: October 11, 2016

[Unpublished]

____________

Before WOLLMAN, ARNOLD, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.
Martin Luther Lindstedt, The Church of Jesus Christ Christian/Aryan Nations

of Missouri appeals the district court’s orders granting motions to dismiss an 1

amended complaint for failure to state a claim. We find no basis for overturning the

orders at issue, and appellant has identified none. The judgment of the district court

is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. 

______________________________

The Honorable Stephen R. Bough, United States District Judge for the

1

Western District of Missouri.

-2-