alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
The State of TexasAppellee/s



# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

January 22, 2015

N o. 04

- 13

- 00548

- CR

Nicolas C. FLORES

, Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 8, B exar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 355026

The Honorable Liza Rodriguez, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

Karen Angelini, Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Appellant Flores’ motion for rehearing was due to be filed on January 7, 2015. On

January 8, 2015, Appellant filed a motion for extension of time requested an extension of twenty

days. Appellant’s motion is GRANTED. Appellant’s motion for rehearing is due to be filed no

later than January 26, 2015.

_________________________________ Patricia O. A lvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 22nd day of January, 2015

.

___________________________________ Keith E . Hottle

Clerk of Court
* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 18, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 03-30582

Conference Calendar 

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

CHARLES JOHNSON,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 02-CR-289-1-A

- - - - - - - - - -

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Charles

Johnson has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief

as required by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). 

Johnson was advised of the motion and served with a copy of

counsel’s brief, but has not filed a response to the motion. 

Our independent review of the brief and the record discloses no

nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Counsel’s motion for leave to

withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further
No. 03-30582

-2-

responsibilities in this case, and the appeal is DISMISSED. See

5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Contractors

# Stress Corrosion Cracking in Nickel-Base Alloys 690 and 152 Weld in Simulated PWR Environment - 2009 (NUREG/CR-7137)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-7137 (PDF - 48.36 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:****Date Published:**
**Prepared by:** B. Alexandreanu, Y. Yang, Y. Chen, and W. J. Shack

 Argonne National Laboratory Argonne, IL 60439

Darrell Dunn/Appajosula Rao, NRC Project Managers

Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

## Abstract

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
No. 82-5969.

#### Mumin et al. *v.*Maggio, Warden.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
N OTE : This order is nonprecedential. 

# United States Court of Appeals **for the Federal Circuit**

__________________________

JOHNNY B. WILLIAMS , Petitioner,

v. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE , Respondent.

__________________________
2012

- 3 166

_________________________ _ Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection Board in case no. AT0752110898

- I

- 1

.

__________________________ ON MOTION

__________________________

O R D E R

On August 2 9, 2012, Johnny B. Williams ’ petition was dismissed for failure to pay the docket ing fee required by Federal Circuit Rule 52(a)(1) and to file the required Fed. Cir. R. 15(c) s tatement concerning d iscrimination

. Williams moves to reinstate his petition for review. He also moves to proceed in forma pauperis and submit s his completed F ed. Cir. R

. 15(c) statement concerning discrimination. Case: 12-3166 Document: 13 Page: 1 Filed: 02/28/2013JOHNNY WILLIAMS V

. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICU LTURE 2
Upon consideration thereof

,

I T I S O RDERED T HAT :
(1) The motion to proceed in forma pauperis is gran ted.

(2) The motion to reinstate the petition for review is
gran t ed. The court’s A u gust 2 9 , 2012 o r der is v a ca t ed, the court’s mandate is recalled, and the pet i tion is rei nstated

. (3) Williams’ brief is due 30 days from the date of this order.

F OR T HE C OURT

/s/ Jan Horbaly Jan Horbaly Clerk

s 26 Case: 12-3166 Document: 13 Page: 2 Filed: 02/28/2013
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-1579

AMARA CAMARA,

Petitioner,

v.

MICHAEL B. MUKASEY, Attorney General,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration

Appeals.

Submitted: August 27, 2008 Decided: October 22, 2008

Before MOTZ and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Petition denied in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per

curiam opinion.

Ana T. Jacobs, ANA T. JACOBS & ASSOCIATES, P.C., Washington, D.C.,

for Petitioner. Jeffrey S. Bucholtz, Acting Assistant Attorney

General, Douglas E. Ginsburg, Senior Litigation Counsel, Jeffrey L.

Menkin, OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION LITIGATION, Washington, D.C., for

Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
*Camara claims that the Board erred in declining to consider

evidence he submitted with his appeal brief. We find no error in

the Board’s ruling. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(d)(3)(iv) (2008).

- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Amara Camara, a native and citizen of Guinea, petitions

for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board)

dismissing his appeal from the Immigration Judge’s denial of his

applications for relief from removal. 

Camara first challenges the determination that he failed

to establish eligibility for asylum. To obtain reversal of a

determination denying eligibility for relief, an alien “must show

that the evidence he presented was so compelling that no reasonable

factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution.”

INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 483-84 (1992). We have

reviewed the evidence of record and conclude that Camara fails to

show that the evidence compels a contrary result. Having failed to

qualify for asylum, Camara cannot meet the more stringent standard

for withholding of removal.* Chen v. INS, 195 F.3d 198, 205 (4th

Cir. 1999); INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. 421, 430 (1987). 

Next, we uphold the finding below that Camara failed to

demonstrate that it is more likely than not that he would be

tortured if removed to Guinea. 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(2) (2008).

Finally, we lack jurisdiction to review Camara’s challenge to the

Board’s finding that he did not meet his burden of showing by clear

and convincing evidence that he filed his asylum application within
- 3 -

one year of his entry into the United States. See 8 U.S.C.

§ 1158(a)(3) (2006); Niang v. Gonzales, 492 F.3d 505, 510 n.5 (4th

Cir. 2007). 

Accordingly, we deny in part and dismiss in part the

petition for 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.

PETITION DENIED IN PART

AND DISMISSED IN PART
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                      66,208,440
<SECURITIES>                                17,660,007
<RECEIVABLES>                               18,470,489
<ALLOWANCES>                               (4,710,896)
<INVENTORY>                                    304,525
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            98,873,958
<PP&E>                                      15,494,602
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,103,829
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             119,602,296
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,970,270
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        39,164
<OTHER-SE>                                 111,375,572
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               119,602,296
<SALES>                                     11,712,508
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            11,712,508
<CGS>                                        4,246,685
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               10,011,726
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             208,029
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,908,811
<INCOME-TAX>                                   830,660
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,078,151
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,078,152
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.17
        

</TABLE>
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Contractors

# State-of-the-Art Reactor Consequence Analyses (SOARCA) Project: Sequoyah Integrated Deterministic and Uncertainty Analyses (NUREG/CR-7245)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-7245 (PDF – 30.67 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** November 2017**Date Published:** October 2019

**Prepared by:** Severe Accident Analysis Department Sandia National Laboratories P.O. Box 5800 MS-0848 Albuquerque, NM 87185-0748

S. Tina Ghosh, NRC Project Manager

Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

## Abstract

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission initiated the state-of-the-art reactor consequence analyses (SOARCA) project to develop realistic estimates of the offsite radiological health consequences for potential severe reactor accidents. The SOARCA analysis of an ice condenser containment plant was performed because its relatively low design pressure and reliance on igniters makes it potentially susceptible to early containment failure from hydrogen combustion during a severe accident. The focus was on station blackout accident scenarios where all alternating current power is lost. Accident progression calculations used the MELCOR computer code. For scenarios leading to an offsite release of radioactive material, SOARCA analyzed atmospheric dispersion, emergency response, and potential health consequences using the MELCOR Accident Consequence Code System (MACCS). The analysis included hundreds of MELCOR and MACCS simulations to account for uncertainty in important accident progression and offsite consequence input parameters. This analysis reinforces the results of past analyses of ice condenser containments showing that successful use of igniters is effective in averting early containment failure. Even for scenarios resulting in early containment failure, the calculated individual latent fatal cancer risks are very small.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-6156

NATHANIEL LEE HARVEY,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

GENE M. JOHNSON, Director, Virginia

Department of Corrections; GARY WATERS,

Sheriff; SENTENCING JUDGE, Portsmouth,

Virginia Civil Center 1982; VON L. PIERSALL,

JR., Convicting Judge; SCOTT EHRENWORTH,

Assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney; STEPHEN R.

MCCULLOUGH, Virginia Assistant Attorney

General,

Defendants - Appellees.

No. 04-6265

NATHANIEL LEE HARVEY,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

GARY WATERS, Portsmouth, Virginia Sheriff;

VON L. PIERSALL, JR., Judge; SCOTT

EHRENWORTH, Prosecutor; R. M. HOLLEY,

Detective; C. E. HOLLOWOOD, Detective,

Defendants - Appellees.
- 2 -

No. 04-6314

NATHANIEL LEE HARVEY,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

GENE M. JOHNSON, Director of Virginia

Department of Corrections; GARY WATER,

Sheriff, Portsmouth, Virginia,

Defendants - Appellees.

No. 04-6315

NATHANIEL LEE HARVEY,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

SCOTT EHRENWORTH, Prosecutor; C. E. HOLBWOOD,

Officer-Jail; C. E. HOLLOWOOD, Detective,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior

District Judge. (CA-03-885-2; CA-04-29-2; CA-04-27-2; CA-04-28-2)

Submitted: March 25, 2004 Decided: April 2, 2004

Before TRAXLER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
- 3 -

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Nathaniel Lee Harvey, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 4 -

PER CURIAM:

Nathaniel Lee Harvey appeals the district court’s orders

denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaints. We have

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we

affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Harvey v.

Johnson, No. CA-03-885-2 (E.D. Va. Jan. 5, 2004); Harvey v. Waters,

No. CA-04-29-2 (E.D. Va. Feb. 3, 2004); Harvey v. Johnson, No. CA04-27-2 (E.D. Va. filed Feb. 3, 2004 & entered Feb. 4, 2004);

Harvey v. Ehrenworth, No. CA-04-28-2 (E.D. Va. filed Feb. 3, 2004

& entered Feb. 4, 2004). We deny Harvey’s motions for preparation

of transcripts, for oral argument, and for review of the records in

the clerk’s office. 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
ORIGIN 

DAVID GLENN BETTENCOURT 

Attorney at Law- Hawai'i Bar No. 970 

Suite 304 Dillingham Transportation Bldg. 

735 Bishop Street, Honolulu, Hawai'i 96813 

Telephone: (808) 521-3491 

Facsimile: (808) 521-7749 

Email: airlaw@pixi.com 

Attorney for OFFSHORE 

FLIGHT SCHOOL, INC. 

RECEIVED 

OCT 0 6 2014 

HEARING DOCKET 

JO l Li - 0 Co g I 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARING 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

In the Matter of: ) FAA Case No. 2014WP910016 

) 

OFFSHORE FLIGHT SCHOOL, ) REQUEST FOR HEARING; 

INC ) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

) 

) 

REQUEST FOR HEARING 

COMES NOW OFFSHORE FLIGHT SCHOOL, INC, by and through 

its designated agent and legal counsel, DAVID GLENN BETTENCOURT, 

and respectfully requests a hearing in this proceeding pursuant to 14 C.F.R. 

§ 13.16(g)(2)(ii), of the FINAL NOTICE OF PROPOSED CIVIL PENALTY, 

served 18 September 2014 

DATED: Honolulu, Hawaii, 29 September 2014. 

i)~&vJL . ID GLENN BETTENCOURT 

Attorney for OFFSHORE FLIGHT 

SCHOOL, INC. 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARING 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

In the Matter of: ) FAA Case No. 2014WP910016 

) 

OFFSHORE FLIGHT SCHOOL, ) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

INC ) 

) 

) 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

The undersigned hereby certifies that on the date set forth below, 

copies of the foregoing were duly served as set forth below: 

Certified 

Mail 

TO: Federal Aviation Administration ( ) 

Attention: Hearing Docket Cler~ AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2W1000 

800 Independence A venue SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

(Original+ 3 copies) 

Federal Aviation Administration ( ) 

Office of Regional Counsel- ANM-7 

Northwest Mountain Region 

1601 Lind A venue, SW 

Renton, Washington 

First Class 

Mail 

(XX) 

(XX) 

DA'JED, Honolulu, Hawilli, 2~bec 2014 ,(Jf(&( 

ID GLENN BETTENCOURT 

Attorney for OFFSHORE FLIGHT 

SCHOOL, INC. 

2
No. 82-5947.

#### Pelaez-Navarro *v.*United States.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Contractors

# The Estimation of Very-Low Probability Hurricane Storm Surges for Design and Licensing of Nuclear Power Plants in Coastal Areas(NUREG/CR-7134)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-7134 (PDF - 9.92 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** May 2012**Date Published:** October 2012

**Prepared by:** Donald T. Resio, Ty V. Wamsley, Mary A. Cialone, and T. Christopher Massey

U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory 3909 Halls Ferry Road Vicksburg, MS 39180

John Randall, NRC Project Manager

NRC Job Code N6676

 Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

## Abstract

Design criteria for nuclear power plants require, in part, that structures, systems, and components important to safety be designed to withstand the effects of natural phenomena, including floods, without loss of capability to perform their safety functions. The objective of this project is to provide the NRC with a technical basis for estimating probable maximum water levels due to storm surge from extreme events along the southern coast of the U.S. A review of the existing guidance was conducted and limitations in the technical basis for estimating storm surge identified. Required updates based on the most recent data available and state-of-the-practice analysis methods, tools, and models are recommended for NRC consideration. A deterministic-probabilistic approach for estimating very-low probability hurricane storm surges for design and licensing of nuclear power plants in coastal areas is developed. The proposed approach determines which factors affecting hurricane surges can be shown to have asymptotic upper limits and which factors should be treated within a context that allows for natural uncertainty in estimating an upper limit for surges at a specified site. The proposed approach is demonstrated through application at three nuclear plant sites. A screening method is also developed to determine if a prospective site is at risk of flooding from coastal storm surge. The proposed screening method includes criteria for proceeding or not proceeding to more detailed definitions of design-basis storm surges and explicitly considers local conditions and bathymetry that may affect water level estimates.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Thursday, March 25, 2021
Page 1 of 3

Disposition Comments

Docket No: FAA-2011-1061 These comments are in

Directorate ID: 2011-NM-053-AD response to an SNPRM

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

Next Step: FRAN SNPRM

 No Comments/Only Supportive Comments Received – If this box is checked, no signatures are 

required.

No Has the referenced service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? If yes, 

list latest revision and attach a copy. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously 

published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance.

Instructions: Summarize all comments by issue (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of 

each issue. All comments relating to the same issue should be discussed together. Do not list all of the issues 

from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and 

describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA-IR-M-8040.1C Chapter 9.

ISSUE 1: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD: 

If NO, we don’t agree because 

ISSUE 2: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD:
Page 2 of 3

If NO, we don’t agree because 

For additional issues, double-click here
Page 3 of 3

Signature Section

Signature indicates concurrence with this action.

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

ASE Printed Name: Date

Branch Manager Date
#### Welch, Appellant, vs. Henry and another, Respondents.

*January 14*

January *15, 1938.*

The cause was submitted for the appellant on the brief of *Bundy, Beach & Holland*of Eau Claire, and for the respondents on that of the *Attorney General*and *A. G. Hawley,*assistant attorney general.

Per Curiam.

This case was before this court and reported in *Welch v. Henry*(1937), 223 Wis. 319, 271 N. W. 68, to which reference is made for a statement of facts. On the former appeal and upon this appeal the plaintiff contends that the statute in question, sec. 6, ch. 15, Laws of 1935, offends section 1 of the Fourteenth amendment to the constitution of the United States. Upon the former appeal this court considered and rejected the plaintiff’s contention that the act in question violated his rights under section 1 of the *596Fourteenth amendment to the constitution of the United States. We have reconsidered plaintiff’s contention and find nothing in the act violative of the plaintiff’s rights under said section 1 of'the Fourteenth amendment. Reference is made to the opinion in that case, and for the reasons there stated the judgment appealed from is affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.
---

Exhibit 99.7

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 annual report of International Tower
Hill Mines Ltd. (the Company) on Form 40-F for the period ended May 31, 2011
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Michael Kinley, Chief Financial 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:

(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 this Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company.

| | Date:    August 26, 2011 | /s/
      Michael Kinley                
| | ------------------------ | ----------------------------------------
| |                          |                                         
| |                          | Name:   Michael Kinley                  
| |                          | Title:     Chief Financial
      Officer

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

---
EXHIBIT 23.2

                        CONSENT OF WHEELER WASOFF, P.C.



<PAGE>




            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM



We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Registration  Statement No.
333-120275,  333-126310, and 333-130391 on Form S-3 of Galaxy Energy Corporation
("Galaxy")  of our report dated  February 24, 2004  relating to our audit of the
consolidated financial statements,  included in and incorporated by reference in
the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Galaxy for the year ended November 30, 2003.




/s/ WHEELER WASOFF, P.C.


WHEELER WASOFF, P.C.

Denver, Colorado
March 14, 2006