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

No. 23

- 7214

REV. THOMAS L. DAVIS , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. BROOKS P. GOLDSMITH, Judge of Circuits Courts/Retired; RACHEL DEANGELIS, Asst. Solicitor/State Prosecutor; CHRISTIAN D. ANDERSON, Beaufort County Sheriff Dept.; CARMEN T. MULLEN, 14th Circuit Court Judge , Defendants

- Appellees

.

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

. Bruce H. Hendricks , District Judge. ( 9:23

- cv - 03059

- BHH )

Submitted : March 28, 2024 Decided: April 2, 2024

Before KING and RUSHING , Circuit Judges , and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Thomas Louis Davis , Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-7214 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/02/2024 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM:
Rev. Thomas L. Davis appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing with prejudice his pro se amended complaint

. We have reviewed the record and discern no reversible error. * Accordingly,
we affirm the district court ’s order

. Davis v. Goldsmith , No. 9:23

- cv - 03059

- BHH (D.S.C. filed Nov. 15, 2023 & entered Nov. 16, 2023). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED

* Davis’ informal brief does not challenge the district court’s conclusion that some of his claims were barred by the applicable statute of limitations. Accordingly, he has forfeited appellate review of that aspect of the district court’s order. See Jackson v. Lightsey , 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues preserved in that brief.”)

. USCA4 Appeal: 23-7214 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/02/2024 Pg: 2 of 2
# C_2005132EN.01000701.xml

| 28.5.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 132/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.5.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 132/7

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Grand Chamber)

of 15 March 2005

in Case C-160/03: Kingdom of Spain v Eurojust (1)

1

(Action for annulment under Article 230 EC - Action brought by a Member State challenging calls for applications, issued by Eurojust, for positions as members of the temporary staff - No jurisdiction of the Court - Inadmissible)

(2005/C 132/12)

Language of the case: Spanish

In Case C-160/03: Kingdom of Spain (Agent: L. Fraguas Gadea), supported by Republic of Finland (Agent: T. Pynnäv) v Eurojust (Agent: J. Rivas de Andrés and D. O'Keeffe) — action for annulment under Article 230 EC, brought on 8 April 2004 — the Court (Grand Chamber), composed of V. Skouris, President, P. Jann, C.W.A. Timmermans, A. Rosas (Rapporteur) and A. Borg Barthet, Presidents of Chambers, R. Schintgen, N. Colneric, S. von Bahr, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, E. Juhász, G. Arestis, M. Ilešič and J. Malenovský, Judges; M. Poiares Maduro, Advocate General; H. von Holstein, Deputy Registrar, for the Registrar, gave a judgment on 15 March 2005, in which it:

| 1. | Declares that the application is inadmissible; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that the application is inadmissible;

| 2. | Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs;

| 3. | Orders the Republic of Finland to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Republic of Finland to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 146 of 21.6.2003.

1

---
# C_2005111EN.01000201.xml

| 11.5.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 111/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.5.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 111/2

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

10 May 2005

(2005/C 111/02)

1 euro=

1 euro

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2854 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 135,86 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4419 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,68280 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,2005 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,5467 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 83,21 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,0910 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9559 |
| CYP | Cyprus pound | 0,5791 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 30,035 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 251,33 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,6960 |
| MTL | Maltese lira | 0,4293 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,1673 |
| ROL | Romanian leu | 36 123 |
| SIT | Slovenian tolar | 239,51 |
| SKK | Slovak koruna | 38,870 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,7496 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6615 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5918 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,0241 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7596 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,1141 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 284,24 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 7,9548 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 10,6386 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,3250 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 12 153,46 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,884 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 69,637 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 35,7350 |
| THB | Thai baht | 50,767 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2854

JPY

Japanese yen

135,86

DKK

Danish krone

7,4419

GBP

Pound sterling

0,68280

SEK

Swedish krona

9,2005

CHF

Swiss franc

1,5467

ISK

Iceland króna

83,21

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,0910

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9559

CYP

Cyprus pound

0,5791

CZK

Czech koruna

30,035

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

251,33

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,6960

MTL

Maltese lira

0,4293

PLN

Polish zloty

4,1673

ROL

Romanian leu

36 123

SIT

Slovenian tolar

239,51

SKK

Slovak koruna

38,870

TRY

Turkish lira

1,7496

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6615

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5918

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,0241

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7596

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,1141

KRW

South Korean won

1 284,24

ZAR

South African rand

7,9548

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

10,6386

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,3250

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

12 153,46

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,884

PHP

Philippine peso

69,637

RUB

Russian rouble

35,7350

THB

Thai baht

50,767

---

(1)

1

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

Source:

---
Approved for Release: 2019/05/02 C051 07538 

DEPARTMENT Of. I HE AIR FORCE v 

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY 

MEMORANDUM 

2 October 1968 

MEMORANDUM FOR COL WORTHMAN (SS-5) 

SUBJECT: Interim Re p ort - DIA/NRO Cost 

Request 

The transmittal of thi s letter from DIA 

to the NRO abrogates an agreement that Colonel 

Howard had with b oth General Berg and Colonel 

Cappelletti. Colone l Howard discussed with 

General Berg the fact that a letter woU:ld be 

forthcoming and they mutually concluded that 

the letter should not corne to the NRO, but to 

Mr. John Bross . Evidently Colonel Cappelletti 

reversed this po sition when he found that 

Mr. Bross woul d not furnish the requested 

data. 

I contacted Mr. Nate Fitts, the Target 

Oriented Displ ay (TOD) foca l point, in the 

absence of Mr. John Bross and asked him if 

any of the cost data provided NIPE by the NRO 

at the BYEMAN level had been rel eased to the 

DIA. Mr. Fitts stated that at the requ est of 

RADM Showers, A s sistant Chief of Staff, P lans 

Approved for Release: 2019/05/02 C051 07538 
I 

Approved for Release: 2019/05/02 C051 07538 

I 

and PrograITls, DIA, NIPE released SOITle 

inforITlation at the TK level. What inforITlation 

and for what purpose Mr. Fitts will deterITline 

and call ITle back. 

I talked tol Ion the validity 

of the nUITlbers in the event they were released. 

He advised ITle they were over a year old and 

prepared for a very special reason, and were 

not to be released without Dr. Flax's specific 

approval. 

'-----______ Ihas a copy of the letter and 

will discuss his nonconcurrence with Dr. Flax 

on the release of the data to DIA. Depending 

on the outcOITle ofl I conversation with 

Dr. Flax, I will prepare a draft of a letter to 

Colonel Cappelletti. 

EDWIN F. SWEENEY 

Colonel, USAF 

i 

g 

I 

f 

I .. 

, 

! 

I 

L 

I 

-

Approved for Release: 2019/05/02 C051 07538
EXHIBIT 31.a

I, John P. Manning, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of BCTC IV Assignor Corp. (the "Assignor");
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 Assignor as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The Assignor'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 Assignor and have:



1. 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 Assignor, 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;
2. evaluated the effectiveness of the Assignor'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
3. 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



1. The Assignor's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Assignor's auditors and the audit committee of the Assignor's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



1. 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 Assignor's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
2. any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the Assignor's internal control over financial reporting.



|Date:  May 15, 2007 | /s/ John P. Manning 
|------------------- | --------------------
|                    | John P. Manning     
|                    | Director, President 
|                    | (Principal Executive
|                    | Officer), BCTC IV   
|                    | Assignor Corp.
11 TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND

, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

In the interest of C.C.C

. and * From the 90 th District Court

D.D.C., children, of Stephens County,

Trial Court No. CV32118A

.

No. 11

- 2 3

- 00 041

- C V * August 1 7 , 20 2 3

* Memorandum Opinion by Williams , J.

(P anel consists of: Bailey , C.J.,

Trotter , J. , and W illiams, J.)

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that th ere is

error in the order below. Therefore, in accordance with this court’s opinion, we

reverse the order of the trial court, and we remand this cause to the trial court for

further proceedings. Any proceeding on remand must be commenced within 180

days o f this court’s mandate. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 28.4 (c).
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

April 24, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh
Elizabeth A. Weaver 132923 Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 132923 COA: 263509 Wayne CC: 04-003329-02 CHRISTOPHER LEE BLANCHAR REED, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the November 21, 2006 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

d0416 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

April 24, 2007

Clerk
David Webster 

The State of New Hampshire 

Department of Environmental Services 

Thomas S. Burack, Commissioner 

Celebrating 25 Years of Protecting 

New Hampshire's Environment 

July 11, 2012 

Chief, Industrial Permits Branch 

Office of Ecosystem Protection 

US Environmental Protection Agency 

5 Post Office Square 

Boston, MA 02109-3912 

RE: File No. 2012-01; Reissuance ofNPDES Vessel General Permit and Issuance of 

NPDES Small Vessel General Permit 

Dear Mr. Webster: 

The New Hampshire Coastal Program (NHCP) has received the Environmental Protection Agency's 

federal consistency determination regarding reissuance of the National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System (NPDES) Vessel General Permit (VGP) and issuance of the NPDES Small 

Vessel General Permit (sVGP), pursuant to Section 307(c)(l) ofthe Coastal Zone Management 

Act, 16 U.S.C. § 1456(c)(l). The VGP authorizes discharges incidental to the normal operation of 

non-military and non-recreational vessels, including commercial fishing vessels, greater than or 

equal to 79 feet in length, while the sVGP authorizes discharges incidental to the normal operation 

of non-military and non-recreational vessels, including commercial fishing vessels, less than 79 feet 

in length. After reviewing the proposed VGP and sVGP, we find them to be consistent, to the 

maximum extent practicable, with the enforceable policies of the NHPC's federally approved coastal 

management program. 

Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (603) 559-0025. 

cc: Jeff Andrews, NHDES-WEB 

Christian 

'~~- Williams 

Federal Consistency Coordinator 

New Hampshire Coastal Program 

www.des.nh.gov 

29 Hazen Drive • PO Box 95 • Concord, NH 03302·0095 

(603) 271-3503 • TDD Access: Relay NH 1-800-735-2964
#### West Side Sanitary District v. The Land Conservation and Development Commission

(14337).

Affirmed. *West Side Sanitary Dist. v. Health Div.,*42 Or App 755, 601 P2d 858 (1979). (603 P2d 1390, aff'd 289 Or 393, 614 P2d 1141 (1980))
#### Saunders (William), Plaintiff and Respondent, vs. Saunders (George) and others, Defendants and Respondents: Saunders (Fred), Appellant.

For the appellant: *Wm. Cook,*attorney, and *H. A. Mina-han*of counsel, both of Green Bay.

For the respondent: *Clement W. Dwyer,*attorney, and *Max Strehlow*of counsel, both of Green Bay.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 28 (Wednesday, February 11, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 7562]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-02716]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[GN Docket No. 12-268, ET Docket Nos. 13-26 and 14-14; Report No. 3015]


Petitions for Reconsideration of Action in Rulemaking Proceeding

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Petition for reconsideration.

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

SUMMARY: Petitions for Reconsideration (Petitions) have been filed in 
the Commission's Rulemaking proceeding by Donald G. Everist, on behalf 
of Cohen, Dippell and Everist, P.C.; Rick Kaplan, on behalf of National 
Association of Broadcasters; Lawrence R. Krevor, on behalf of Sprint 
Corporation.

DATES: Oppositions to the Petitions must be filed on or before February 
26, 2015. Replies to an opposition must be filed on or before March 9, 
2015.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street SW., 
Washington, DC 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Aspasia Paroutsas, Office of 
Engineering and Technology Bureau, 202-418-7285, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f8b98b88998b9199d6a8998a978d8c8b998bb89e9b9bd69f978e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="1352606372607a723d4372617c6667607260537570703d747c65">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of Commission's document, 
Report No. 3015, released January 30, 2015. The full text of this 
document is available for viewing and copying in Room CY-B402, 445 12th 
Street SW., Washington, DC or may be purchased from the Commission's 
copy contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc. (BCPI) (1-800-378-3160). 
The Commission will not send a copy of this Notice pursuant to the 
Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) because this notice 
does not have an impact on any rules of particular applicability.
    Subject: Expanding the Economic and Innovation Opportunities of 
Spectrum Through Incentive Auctions, published at 79 FR 76903, December 
23, 2014, in GN Docket No. 12-268; ET Docket Nos. 13-26 and 14-14, and 
this notice is published pursuant to 47 CFR 1.429(e) of the 
Commission's rules. See also 47 CFR 1.4(b)(1) of the Commission's 
rules.
    Number of Petitions Filed: 3

    Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-02716 Filed 2-10-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Technical Service Provider

Request for AgLearn Account

Instructions: Please complete the required fields and submit this form via email:

TSP.Aglearn.Requests@usda.gov. 

Request Type: New ☐ Re-activation ☐ Not Sure ☐

Request Date: 

TSP Name: 

TSP ID Number: 

Resident State: 

Phone Number: 

eAuthentication ID: Unknown ☐

Email (associated with your eAuth): Unknown ☐

Are you a former employee/affiliate? Employee ☐ Affiliate ☐ NA ☐

Thank you for your interest in the TSP program. We will process your request for AgLearn access as soon as 

possible and will notify you once your account has been created. Please contact your Regional TSP Coordinator if 

you have any questions. 

Stacey Bradshaw Peter Hoagland Miguel Oliveras

Regional TSP Coordinator – SE & W Regional TSP Coordinator – NE Regional TSP Coordinator - C 

Stacey.bradshaw@usda.gov Peter.Hoagland@usda.gov Miguel.oliveras@usda.gov

202-617-1812 717-216-3715 870-209-0089

Natural Resources Conservation Service

14th and Independence Avenue, S.W., Room 5239-S, Washington, D.C. 20250

Voice (202) 720-1845 Fax (202) 720-4265

An Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer
.c::

}J.J.CY; J.u rVUILi:l HANDLE VIA 

Approved To~~el~~02/01 Cd5101-9g2~y: Policy ---- BYEMAN 111I/l1"1"11I""II1"I/IIIIIII/IIIIIIIIII/lI"IIIII1If1~~lr" <·i TEM 

~NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

14000906130 i 

THE NRO STAFF 

HANDLE VIA 

BYEMAN 

CONTROL SYSTEM 

'ij.f.!bZ-i~ ruM". lK,.,.. 

9 August 1966 

MEMORANDUM roR DR. FLAX 

SUBJECT: Recommendation No. 7 of the NSAM 156 Ad Hoc 

Committee Report 

Problem: 

What should you and Mr. Helms do about Recommendation No. 7 

of the NSAM 156 Ad Hoc Committee Report? 

Background: 

The NSAM 156 Ad Hoc Committee's final report (see Tab A) 

reads as follows, under Recommendation 7: 

for: 

liThe Director of Central Intelligence, in consultation with 

the Director of the National Reconnaissance Office, should 

review and establish appropriate security restrictions on 

cameras and other sensing apparatu~ and equipment which 

can be made available for NASA's program of non-military 

applica tions of satellite earth -sensing. It is recognized 

that substantial compartmentalization will probably have to 

remain, but the non-military programs should be enabled 

to profit from relevant achievements of the military program to the extent feasible. If 

On Augus t 4, Mr. Helms sent a letter to you (see Tab B) asking 

1. "Your views and recommendations on sensors within the 

NRP inventory which can be declassified for use by NASA without 

jeopardy to the NRP. If 

, h; 

TOP SECRET EXCLUDED FROM AUTOMATIC REGRADING 

DOD DlREcnVE 5200.10 DOES NOT APPLY 

Approved for Release: 2018/02/01 C05101952 

CONTROL NO ______ _ 

COPY ___ OF ___ COPIES 

PAO[, ___ 0' ___ PAGES 
HANDLE VIA 

BYEMAN 

CONTROL SYSTEM 

Tnn ("~ , Approved for Release: 2018/02/01 C05101952 

2. "Your comments and suggestions on any oth,er security 

aspects of making presently classified earth sensing equipment 

available to NASA for its program of non-military applications of 

earth sensing. II 

Alternate Courses of Action: 

During June, in response to a request from Ambassador 

U. Alexis Johnson, you directed the preparation of a study, I'Technical Security Considerations of the Disclosure of National Reconnaissance Program Sensor Technology." This study (see Tab C) 

had a very limited distribution and could be forwarded to Mr. Helms 

as essentially answering his questions. 

An alternative action would be to take this occasion to make a 

somewhat more detailed study of the situation. With Mr. Mazza 

chairing the study, we could request Mr. Helms, General Carter, 

and General Martin to furnish one representative each to revise, 

up-date, or enlarge, as necessary, our earlier, quick-response 

effort. 

Recommendation: 

I recommend you approve the second ·course of action and sign 

the attached response to Mr. Helms. 

2 

HANDLE VIA 

BYEMAN 

CONTROL 5 VSTEM 

CONTROL NO, ______ _ -

TOP SECRET - EXCLUDED FROM AUTOMATIC REGRADING 

DOD DIRECTiVE 5200,10 DoES Nor APPLY 

Approved for Release: 2018/02/01 C05101952 

COPY' ___ OF ___ COPIES 

PAGE ___ OF ___ PAGES 

-

.-