alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 01-30576

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JOHN RANDOLPH GANT,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 00-CR-366-ALL-B

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

February 21, 2002

Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent John

Randolph Gant has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a

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

Gant has received a copy of counsel’s motion and brief but has

not filed a response. Our independent review of the brief and

the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly,

counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is

excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS

DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
Exhibit 32.1
                    Certification of Chief Executive Officer

     Pursuant  to 18  U.S.C.  ss.  1350,  as  created  by  Section  906  of  the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, the  undersigned  officer of Tanger GP Trust,  sole
general   partner  of  Tanger   Properties   Limited   Partnership   ("Operating
Partnership") hereby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that:

          (i) the  accompanying  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q of the Operating
     Partnership  for the quarterly  period ended March 31, 2005 (the  "Report")
     fully complies with the  requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as
     applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

          (ii) the information  contained in the Report fairly presents,  in all
     material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
     Operating Partnership.

Pursuant to the rules and  regulations  of the Securities  Exchange  Commission,
this certification is being furnished and is not deemed filed.

                                      /s/ Stanley K. Tanger
Dated:  May 10, 2005                  --------------------------
      --------------------            Stanley K. Tanger
                                      Chief Executive Officer of Tanger GP Trust
                                      Sole General Partner of the Registrant
#### Ingram *v.*Lanier.

Where a person concerned in interest is stated in the bill to be moved away and not since heard of for many years, so that he cannot be served with process, that shall be ; good reason as between third persons for not making him a party ; and the court will proceed to a hearing notwithstanding. When the court feels any doubt about deciding upon a plea, it can overrule it, and suffer the Defendant to insist upon the same in his answer.

This was a petition antler the act of 1762, c. 5, *s.*23, stating that the petitioner is the brother of *Peter Lewis,*deceased, who died possessed of an estate, leaving a wife, who had moved away and had not been since heard of, so as to be served with process : that he was the only-next of kin of the deceased *;*that *Lanier*had procured letters of administration upon the personal estate of the deceased, and had possessed himself thereof, and would not account for the same, and deliver it or his share thereof to the petitioner.

There was a demurrer to this pelifion, for that the wife of the deceased was entitled ¡o a moiety of the personal estate, and was not made a party : there was also a plea that seven years had elapsed since the death ofthe intestate, whereby the church wardens became entitled under the act of 1715. *c. 48, s.*9.

*Per curiam,*

after hearing the argument, as to the first point, when a person concerned in interest, is stated in the hill to be removed to a foreign country, or to be moved away and not since, heard of after many years, so that he cannot he served with process, that .shall he a good reason as between third persons for not making him a party, and the court will proceed to a ¡searing notwithstanding. Here, that is stated in the petition as a reason for not making her a party. 2 *Atk.*510.

As to the other matter, the old law is altered by the act of 1784, c. 23, by which ail the estate of the deceased, not claimed, is to he deposited in the treasury, subject to the claim of creditors, and the law ful representative of such decedent. However as seven years may have expired before the passing of this latter act, in which case it may be doubted whether the first or latter law is to govern this case — let the demurrer and plea be overruled, and the Defendant be at liberty to insist upon the limitation of time-in his answer.
#### Jose M. ANDERSON et al., Appellants, v. Manuel F. L. GUERRERO et al., Appellees.

No. 19516.

United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit.

April 20, 1965.

*695Finton J. Phelan, Jr., Agana, Guam, Alvin G. Buchignani, Hall, Buchignani *&*Cavagnaro, San Francisco, Cal., for appellants.

Harold W. Burnett, Atty. Gen. of Guam, Richard D. Magee, Deputy Atty. Gen. of Guam, Agana, Guam, for ap-pellees.

Before BARNES, JERTBERG and MERRILL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

It has been suggested to this court that certain of the issues presented by this appeal have been rendered moot by virtue of recent action of the United States in bringing suit in the United States District Court for the Territory of Guam for condemnation of certain of the parcels involved; and that the United States proposes to file suit for condemnation of other parcels in the near future. As to parcels not included in such condemnations, appellants desire to amend their complaint to join the Government of Guam as a party defendant. In our judgment this opportunity should be granted. In so ruling we do not prejudge any defenses that the Government of Guam may desire to assert. The extent to which issues have been narrowed by action of the United States should, we feel, be determined by the District Court on remand, rather than by this court.

As to the issues presented by the fourth claim, it would appear that the appropriate remedy is through traditional proceedings to quiet title.

As to the fourth claim, judgment is affirmed. As to the remaining issues, the judgment of the District Court is vacated, and the matter is remanded with instructions that appellants be granted leave to amend their complaint to join the Government of Guam as party defendant, and for such further proceedings in accordance with this opinion as are deemed appropriate.
[Cite as State v. Rinda , 2018-Ohio-2148.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT TRUMBULL COUNTY, OHIO

STATE OF OHIO, : MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff-Appellee, : CASE NO. 2018-T-0034 -vs- : CHRISTOPHER J. RINDA, : Defendant-Appellant. :

Criminal Appeal from the Trumbull County Central District Court, Case No. 2018 CRB 0025. Judgment: Appeal dismissed.

Dennis Watkins, Trumbull County Prosecutor, Administration Building, Fourth Floor, 160 High Street, N.W., Warren, OH 44481-1092 (For Plaintiff-Appellee). Christopher J. Rinda, pro se, Inmate Id# 052387, Trumbull County Adult Justice Center, 150 High Street N.W., Warren, OH 44481 (Defendant-Appellant).

DIANE V. GRENDELL, J. {¶1} Appellant filed a pro se “Motion for Appeal” on April 18, 2018. No judgment entry was attached. However, it appears that he is appealing a February 14, 2018 entry of the Trumbull County Central District Court. A timely notice of appeal from that entry was due no later than March 16, 2018, which was not a holiday or a weekend. Thus, his appeal was untimely filed by approximately one month. {¶2} App.R. 4(A)(1) states in relevant part:2 {¶3} “* * * [a] party who wishes to appeal from an order that is final upon its entry shall file the notice of appeal required by App.R. 3 within 30 days of that entry.” {¶4} Appellant has a remedy to file an untimely appeal from a criminal judgment under App.R. 5(A), which states in relevant part: {¶5} “(1) After the expiration of the thirty day period provided by App.R. 4(A) for the filing of a notice of appeal as of righ t, an appeal may be taken by a defendant with leave of the court to which the appeal is taken in the following classes of cases: {¶6} “(a) Criminal proceedings; {¶7} “(b) Delinquency proceedings; and {¶8} “(c) Serious youthful offender proceedings. {¶9} “(2) A motion for leave to appeal shall be filed with the court of appeals and shall set forth the reasons for the failure of the appellant to perfect an appeal as of right. * * *.” {¶10} Further, appellant has not complied with Loc.R. 3(D)(2) of this court by attaching a copy of the judgment being appealed to his notice of appeal. {¶11} In the present case, appellant has neither complied with the thirty-day rule set forth in App.R. 4(A)(1) nor sought leave to appeal under App.R. 5(A). Thus, this court is without jurisdiction to consider this appeal. Appellant has a remedy to file an untimely appeal from a criminal judgment under App.R. 5(A). {¶12} Based on the foregoing, this appeal is hereby sua sponte dismissed as being untimely.

THOMAS R. WRIGHT, P.J., TIMOTHY P. CANNON, J., concur.
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 99.10

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                         PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     In connection with the Annual Report of ATSI Communications, Inc. on Form
     10-K for the period ending July 31, 2002, as filed with the Securities and
     Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, J. Christopher Cuevas, Chief
     Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C, ss. 1350,
     as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that,
     to the best of my knowledge and belief:

     1)   the Report complies with the requirements of section 13 (a) or 15 (d)
     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

     2)   the information in the Report fairly presents, in all material
     respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.


By /s/ J. Christopher Cuevas
J. Christopher Cuevas
Chief Financial Officer
February 3, 2003
# C_2004138EN.01000101.xml

| 18.5.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 138/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.5.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 138/1

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

17 May 2004

(2004/C 138/01)

1 euro ==

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2023 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 136,68 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4406 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,6796 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,192 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,536 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 88,12 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,2775 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9464 |
| CYP | Cyprus pound | 0,5862 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 31,881 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 253,85 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,6586 |
| MTL | Maltese lira | 0,4269 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,7795 |
| ROL | Romanian leu | 40 509 |
| SIT | Slovenian tolar | 238,74 |
| SKK | Slovak koruna | 40,11 |
| TRL | Turkish lira | 1 844 700 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,737 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,6632 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,3778 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,9834 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,0728 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 421,72 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 8,1182 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2023

JPY

Japanese yen

136,68

DKK

Danish krone

7,4406

GBP

Pound sterling

0,6796

SEK

Swedish krona

9,192

CHF

Swiss franc

1,536

ISK

Iceland króna

88,12

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,2775

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9464

CYP

Cyprus pound

0,5862

CZK

Czech koruna

31,881

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

253,85

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,6586

MTL

Maltese lira

0,4269

PLN

Polish zloty

4,7795

ROL

Romanian leu

40 509

SIT

Slovenian tolar

238,74

SKK

Slovak koruna

40,11

TRL

Turkish lira

1 844 700

AUD

Australian dollar

1,737

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,6632

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,3778

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,9834

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,0728

KRW

South Korean won

1 421,72

ZAR

South African rand

8,1182

---

(1)

1

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

Source:

---
*April 5, 1932.*

#### Bock, Respondent, vs. Dean, Appellant.

For the appellant: *Sanborn, Blake & Aberg*and *Ernest H. Pett,*all of Madison, and *Charles Voigt*of Sheboygan.

For the respondent: *David Rabinovitz*and *H. S. Hwmke,*both of Sheboygan.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1715 

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special resource 

study of the Medgar Evers House, located in Jackson, Mississippi, and 

for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 23, 2017 

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi introduced the following bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a 

special resource study of the Medgar Evers House, located in Jackson, Mississippi, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Medgar Evers House 

5 Study Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. SPECIAL RESOURCE STUDY. 

7 (a) STUDY.—The Secretary of the Interior shall con8 duct a special resource study of the home of the late civil 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1715 IH

1 rights activist Medgar Evers, located at 2332 Margaret 

2 Walker Alexander Drive in Jackson, Mississippi. 

3 (b) CONTENTS.—In conducting the study under sub4 section (a), the Secretary shall— 

5 (1) evaluate the national significance of the 

6 site; 

7 (2) determine the suitability and feasibility of 

8 designating the site as a unit of the National Park 

9 System; 

10 (3) consider other alternatives for preservation, 

11 protection, and interpretation of the site by Federal, 

12 State, or local governmental entities, or private and 

13 nonprofit organizations; 

14 (4) consult with interested Federal, State, or 

15 local governmental entities, private and nonprofit or16 ganizations or any other interested individuals; 

17 (5) determine the effect of the designation of 

18 the site as a unit of the National Park System on 

19 existing commercial and recreational uses, and the 

20 effect on State and local governments to manage 

21 those activities; 

22 (6) identify any authorities, including con23 demnation, that will compel or permit the Secretary 

24 to influence or participate in local land use decisions 

25 (such as zoning) or place restrictions on non-Federal 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1715 IH

1 land if the site is designated a unit of the National 

2 Park System; and 

3 (7) identify cost estimates for any Federal ac4 quisition, development, interpretation, operation, and 

5 maintenance associated with the alternatives. 

6 (c) APPLICABLE LAW.—The study required under 

7 subsection (a) shall be conducted in accordance with sec8 tion 100507 of title 54, United States Code. 

9 (d) STUDY RESULTS.—Not later than 3 years after 

10 the date on which funds are first made available for the 

11 study under subsection (a), the Secretary shall submit to 

12 the Committee on Natural Resources of the House of Rep13 resentatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural 

14 Resources of the Senate the results of the study and any 

15 conclusions and recommendations of the Secretary. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
# C_2004284EN.01001501.xml

| 20.11.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 284/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.11.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 284/15

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 21 September 2004

in Case T-104/02: Société française de transports Gondrand Frères SA v Commission of the European Communities (1)

1

(Remission of import duties - Article 1(3) of Regulation (EC) No 3319/94 - Meaning of ‘special situation’ under Article 905 of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 - Anti-dumping duty on imports of urea ammonium nitrate solution originating in Poland - Direct invoicing of the importer)

(2004/C 284/30)

Language of the case: French

In Case T-104/02: Société française de transports Gondrand Frères SA, established in Paris (France), represented by M. Famchon, lawyer, with an address for service in Luxembourg, against Commission of the European Communities (Agents: C. Durand, B. Stromsky and X. Lewis, with an address for service in Luxembourg) — application for annulment of Commission decision C(2002) 24 final, of 14 January 2002, finding there to be no grounds for remission of import duties in a particular case — the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber, Extended Composition), composed of P. Lindh, President, R. García-Valdecasas, J.D. Cooke, P. Mengozzi and M.E. Martins Ribeiro, Judges; I. Natsinas, Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 21 September 2004, in which it:

| 1. | Dismisses the application; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the application;

| 2. | Orders the applicant to bear its own costs and to pay those of the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the applicant to bear its own costs and to pay those of the Commission.

---

(1)  OJ C 156 of 29.6.2002.

1

---
**DEPA RTMENT OF THE A**  **I R FORCE**  HEADQUARTERS AIR FOR CE FLIGHT STANDARDS AGENCY

16 Jul 1 5 MEMORANDUM FOR HQ FAA/A RM - 1 0 0 FROM: HQ AFFSA/X O F 6500 South MacArthur Blvd Bldg 4 Oklahoma City , OK 73 169 - 6918 SUBJECT: 14 CFR Exemption 7687 G Addendum (Docket No. FAA - 200 1 - 9501) 14 CFR Exemption 7687 was granted to the United St ates Air Force on 3 Jan 2002 and exempt s the USAF from the provisions of Section 91.209 (a)(1) and (b). The exemption was last renewed on 2 May 1 3 (7687 G ) and will expire 30 Nov 1 5 . Since this is a long - standing exemption, the Air Force r espectfully re quests a 3 - yr extension with no changes to the current policy . Please contact me with any questions at e - mail: hqaffsa.xof@us.af.mil or ( 405 ) 582 - 6087 . Thank y ou for yo ur assistance. 7/16/2015 

# X AN DR EW B . KREB S, Maj, U SA F Assistan t Chief, Flight D ir ect iv es Si gned by: KREB S. AN DR EW .B .1232714219
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 25 (Friday, February 6, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6792-6793]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-02409]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUSQUEHANNA RIVER BASIN COMMISSION


Commission Meeting

AGENCY: Susquehanna River Basin Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Susquehanna River Basin Commission will hold its regular 
business meeting on March 5, 2015, in Hershey, Pennsylvania. Details 
concerning the matters to be addressed at the business meeting are 
contained in the Supplementary Information section of this notice.

DATES: March 5, 2015, at 9:00 a.m.

ADDRESSES: Hershey Lodge, 325 University Drive, Hershey, PA 17033.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jason E. Oyler, Regulatory Counsel, 
telephone: (717) 238-0423, ext. 1312; fax: (717) 238-2436.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The business meeting will include actions or 
presentations on the following items: (1) Informational presentation of 
interest to the Lower Susquehanna Subbasin area; (2) revision of FY-
2016 budget; (3) ratification/approval of contracts/grants; (4) 
resolution to encourage the use of dry cooling technology for power 
generation and other facilities for the

[[Page 6793]]

conservation of the waters of the Susquehanna River Basin; (5) notice 
for Four Seasons Golf Course project sponsor to appear and show cause 
before the Commission; (6) regulatory compliance matter for Cabot Oil & 
Gas Corporation; and (7) Regulatory Program projects. Projects listed 
for Commission action are those that were the subject of a public 
hearing conducted by the Commission on January 29, 2015, and identified 
in the notice for such hearing, which was published in 80 FR 98, 
January 2, 2015.

Opportunity To Appear and Comment:

    Interested parties are invited to attend the business meeting and 
encouraged to review the Commission's Public Meeting Rules of Conduct, 
which are posted on the Commission's Web site, www.srbc.net. As 
identified in the public hearing notices referenced above, written 
comments on the Regulatory Program projects that were the subject of a 
public hearing, and are listed for action at the business meeting, are 
subject to a comment deadline of February 9, 2015. Written comments 
pertaining to any other matters listed for action at the business 
meeting may be mailed to the Susquehanna River Basin Commission, 4423 
North Front Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17110-1788, or submitted 
electronically through http://www.srbc.net/pubinfo/publicparticipation.htm. Any such comments mailed or electronically 
submitted must be received by the Commission on or before February 27, 
2015, to be considered.

    Authority:  Pub. L. 91-575, 84 Stat. 1509 et seq., 18 CFR parts 
806, 807, and 808.

    Dated: January 30, 2015.
Stephanie L. Richardson,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2015-02409 Filed 2-5-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7040-01-P
# C_2004248EN.01000501.xml

| 7.10.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 248/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.10.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 248/5

---

Initiation of proceedings

(Case COMP/M.3423 — RWA/AMI/INTER-FERT (JV))

(2004/C 248/05)

On 29 September 2004 the Commission decided to initiate proceedings in the abovementioned case after finding that the notified concentration raises serious doubts as to its compatibility with the common market. The initiation of proceedings opens a second phase investigation with regard to the notified concentration. The decision is based on Article 6(1)(c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).

1

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their observations on the proposed concentration to the Commission.

In order to be fully taken into account in the procedure, observations should reach the Commission not later than 15 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (fax No (32-2) 296 43 01 – 296 72 44) or by post, under reference COMP/M.3423 — RWA/AMI/INTER-FERT (JV), to the following address:

| Commission of the European Communities |
| --- |
| Competition DG |
| Merger Registry |
| Rue Joseph II/Jozef II-straat 70 |
| B-1000 Brussels |

Commission of the European Communities

Competition DG

Merger Registry

Rue Joseph II/Jozef II-straat 70

B-1000 Brussels

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
# C_2004255EN.01000801.xml

| 15.10.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 255/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.10.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 255/8

---

Call for proposals for modal shift, catalyst and common learning actions under the Marco Polo Programme (Regulation (EC) 1382/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 July 2003 (OJ L 196 of 2 August 2003))

(2004/C 255/04)

The European Commission is hereby launching a call for proposals for the selection procedure 2004 under the Marco Polo programme. The call is closing on 15 December 2004.

Information on the modalities of the call and guidance to proposers on how to submit projects, is available at the following website:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/transport/marcopolo/whatsnew/index_en.htm

The helpdesk of the Marco Polo Programme can be reached via e-mail:

tren-marco-polo@cec.eu.int and fax (32-2) 296 37 65.

---