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

No. 21
- 6701

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. DELAQUI O’JMAR CARTER, a/k/a Roosevelt , Defendant

- Appellant

.

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

. Mary G. Lewis , District Judge. ( 3:18

- cr - 00677

- MGL

- 5 )

Submitted : December 21 , 2021 Decided: December 27, 2021

Before KING and QUATTLEBAUM , Circuit Judges , and TRAXLER , Senior Circuit Judge

.
Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

. Delaqui O’Jmar Carter, Appellant Pro Se. Benjamin Neale Garner, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinio ns are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 P ER CURIAM: Delaqui O’Jmar Carter appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i), as amended by the First Step Act of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115

- 3 91, § 603(b)(1), 132 Stat. 5194, 5239

. After reviewing the record, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Carter’s motion for compassionate release

. See United States v. Kibble , 992 F.3d 326, 329 (4th Cir.) (stating standard of review), cert. deni ed , 142 S. Ct. 383 (2021) ; see also United States v. High , 997 F.3d 181, 189 (4th Cir. 2021) (affirming district court order denying compassionate release where “[t]he court’s rationale . . . was both rational and l egitimate under [18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)]” and “the court sufficiently explained its denial to allow for meaningful appellate review” (internal quotation marks omitted)). Accordingly, we affirm the district court ’s judgment

. United States v. Carter , No. 3:18

- cr - 00677

- MGL

- 5 (D. S.C. Apr

. 20 , 2021) . 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
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-27-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-28-1998
<CASH>                                         368,198
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     26,872
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               442,643
<PP&E>                                         310,657
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 761,867
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          310,461
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     2,232,005
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,786,599)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   781,867
<SALES>                                      2,585,174
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,585,174
<CGS>                                          776,606
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  776,606
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,657,481
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 211
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                150,876
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            145,876
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   145,876
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .02
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>
 
                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 333-72565) pertaining to the CCBT Bancorp, Inc. Stock Option Plan of our
report dated January 30, 1998, with respect to the 1997 and 1996 consolidated 
financial statements of Cape Cod Bank and Trust Company included in the Annual 
Report (Form 10-K) of CCBT Bancorp, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 1998.



                                            /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Boston, Massachusetts
March 19, 1999
EXHIBIT 31.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Deborah C. Wright, Chairman,  President and Chief Executive Officer of Carver
Bancorp, Inc., certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Carver Bancorp, Inc.;

2.  Based on my  knowledge,  this  annual  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 annual
report;

3.  Based  on my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and  other  financial
information  included  in this annual  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 annual 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 we have:

a) Designed  such  disclosure  controls and  procedures  to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to us by others  within those  entities,  particularly  during the
period in which this annual report is being prepared;

b) Evaluated  the  effectiveness  of the  registrant's  disclosure  controls and
procedures  as of a date  within 90 days prior to the filing date of this annual
report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

c) Presented in this annual report our conclusions  about the  effectiveness  of
the  disclosure  controls  and  procedures  based  on our  evaluation  as of the
Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed,  based on our
most recent evaluation,  to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

a) All significant  deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls
which  could  adversely  affect the  registrant's  ability  to record,  process,
summarize and report  financial data and have  identified  for the  registrant's
auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

b) Any  fraud,  whether  or not  material,  that  involves  management  or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and


6. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have indicated in this annual
report whether or not there were significant  changes in internal controls or in
other factors that could  significantly  affect internal controls  subsequent to
the date of our most recent  evaluation,  including any corrective  actions with
regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: June 29, 2006

                          /s/ Deborah C. Wright
                          -----------------------------------------------------
                          Deborah C. Wright
                          Chairman,   President   and  Chief   Executive Officer
----

Action brought on 10 February 2005 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Portuguese Republic

(Case C-61/05)

(2005/C 82/40)

Language of the case: Portuguese

An action against the Portuguese Republic was brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 10 February 2005 by the Commission of the European Communities, represented by P.Andrade and W.Wils, acting as Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The Commission of the European Communities claims that the Court should:

Pleas in law and main arguments

The Commission submits that by failing to an grant exclusive rental right to the producer of the first fixation of a film, the Portuguese State is in breach of Directive 92/100 since it transposed the provisions of Article 2(1) of the directive incorrectly.

Moreover, the use of the term ‘producer’ in the Portuguese legislation creates confusion as to who must pay the artists the remuneration to which they are entitled, constituting an incorrect transposition of the directive, in particular of Article 2(5) and (7) in conjunction with Article 4 thereof.

----

(1)OJ 1992 L 346, p. 61.

----
Dave Kier Named NRO Deputy 

Director 

Mr. David A. Kier has been appointed Deputy Director of the National Reconnaissance Office 

(NRO) by Acting Director of Central Intelligence Mr. George J. Tenet, with the concurrence of 

Deputy Secretary of Defense John P. White. The appointment was effective, Friday, 30 May 

1997. Mr. Kier will also serve as the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force 

(Space). He has been the NRO Technical Director since April 1996.

Mr. Kier began his civil service career with NASA in 1965 as a flight test engineer. He 

participated in the Executive Leadership Development in 1973, serving in the U.S. House of 

Representatives, NASA Headquarters, and the Department of Commerce. He worked at NASA 

Headquarters through 1981, when he joined the National Reconnaissance Office. He managed 

several major satellite programs through 1994, when he accepted a rotational assignment to the 

U.S. Navy.

The NRO was formed in September 1961. Mr. Keith R. Hall is the 12th and current NRO 

Director and Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Space). Mr. Kier becomes the ninth Deputy 

Director of the NRO since the position was created in 1963.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                EXHIBIT 10.19

                   TERMS OF DAVID J. HIRSCHHORN STOCK OPTION

        On March 17, 1997, the Company granted to David J. Hirschhorn a stock
option to purchase 2,500,000 shares of Common Stock of the Company at an
exercise price $2.00 per share.  The stock option vests as follows: 1,000,000
shares vest on March 17, 1997; 200,000 shares vest on March 17, 1998; 300,000
shares vest on March 17, 1999; 450,000 shares vest on March 17, 2000; and
550,000 vest on March 17, 2001.  The stock option may be exercised as to the
vested portions at any time after the date of vesting until the date that is
five years from the individual vesting dates.
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 149 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 149

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the excise tax on 
                            medical devices.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 13, 2015

 Mr. Hatch (for himself, Ms. Klobuchar, Mr. Toomey, Mr. Donnelly, Mr. 
Burr, Mr. Franken, Mr. Portman, Mr. Casey, Mr. Coats, Mrs. Shaheen, Mr. 
  Alexander, Ms. Ayotte, Mr. Cassidy, Mr. Isakson, Ms. Murkowski, Mr. 
 Scott, and Mr. Wicker) introduced the following bill; which was read 
             twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the excise tax on 
                            medical devices.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Medical Device Access and Innovation 
Protection Act''.

SEC. 2. REPEAL OF MEDICAL DEVICE EXCISE TAX.

    (a) In General.--Chapter 32 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is 
amended by striking subchapter E.
    (b) Conforming Amendments.--
            (1) Subsection (a) of section 4221 of such Code is amended 
        by striking the last sentence.
            (2) Paragraph (2) of section 6416(b) of such Code is 
        amended by striking the last sentence.
    (c) Clerical Amendment.--The table of subchapter for chapter 32 of 
such Code is amended by striking the item related to subchapter E.
    (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to sales after December 31, 2012.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.5

                        REPORT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We have audited the consolidated financial statements of Fountain View, Inc. as 
of December 31, 1997 and 1996, and the related consolidated statements of 
income, shareholders' equity (deficit) and cash flows for each of the three 
years in the period ended December 31, 1997, (included elsewhere in this 
Registration Statement). Our audits also included the financial statement 
schedule listed in item 21(b) of this Registration Statement. This schedule is 
the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express
an opinion on this schedule based on our audits.  

In our opinion, the financial statement schedule referred to above, when 
considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole, 
presents fairly in all material respects the information set forth therein.


                                                    /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Los Angeles, California
March 11, 1998
.•

--

1.

•

13 So SO •

MISMOSAMDIIM PCI CI STAPP, Mr

1

As a resat of reeent review of the SAMOS project at the

highest national level, changes have bees made is the character and scope of the technical program. It has been directed

by the Manama Security Conseil mad the Secretary of Meese

that special management prceedures be established is $0005'-

dance with the national importanoe of this program.

Accordingly, I have establimhed:

*1

•

••

sibilitkes. :......7

The functional relatioeship between the above offices is

outlined in the attachments hereto, along with a description

of the organisation and functions of the Milos of Missile

and Satellite Systems sad the charters of as Advisory Council

and a Technical Advisory Group is Satellite M000mnaissanoe.

•

•

.

.•

...A

..•

.07.0

,

7,

affective immediately, the satellite recommaissance proram support or coordination of related matters, need-to.4mow

order to maintain general project knowledge within those comm. • -

mond and staff offices where such knowledge is ascessary for pro....A.

be as review or approval channels between the Director of the • :=..-1

briefings will be given by the program management staff. These •

gram will be managed withia . the above structure. There will

SAMOS Project and the Secretary of the Airless*. Mowever, in 

.

••.',.'r

--:.I

briefing, will be gives on a periodic basis, without request, . %

"

.......

and not as a part of Project management actions. All requests .:.*.

.i. for briefings will be divested to the Secretary of the Air , A

Force, and will be approved only on a strict need-to-know . . • • ..44

basis.

..!,

The national urgency requires the utmost support with -1i;

v

immediate response and overriding priority from all elements • .

4.• of the Air /Oros as and whenever requested by the program .

SECRET

• Director it the RAIDS Project at 111111111 as a field •.„

extension of my office, res ponsible to sad reporting directly ....

to si* . and ..

...

.- .:.;

An Office of Missile sad Satellite Systems (SAID)

within my staff, to assist mein the discharge of my respos- ...s.: . .. ..
$ECEET

•

manegemest. The Dire for of the SAMOS Project is authorised • •.;

direct contact with major ocemands to request gush support.

The Director, Office et almeile and latellite Spasm is

authorised direct °catmint with the Air Staff, sad other staffs

and agencies, to request support as required.

Visits to the UM Project Office viii be for official

business only. Sweets for visits by other than normally

accredited contractors and measles of government whose bust- •

nest rewires regular and frogmen visits will be directed to

the Secretary of the Airfares for approval.

Sequest that you infers the Air Staff and all major ocm.

sands of the above directive immediately.

. • r

S limas:

Ors

Off

Sat

S. Sat

& Functions of

of Sol a ma Sys 00

Meson Adv Conlon (1)

icon Tech Aft Op (119

/s/ DOOM C. IMAM

Secretary of the Airforce

.•

-•

COP Ir

1
# NROL-123

Launches
current page

THE NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE SUCCESSFULLY LAUNCHES NROL-123 FROM WALLOPS ISLAND, VIRGINIA.

## About the Mission Emblem

The dragonfly symbolizes energy, youthful exuberance, and accomplishment—representing the use of new technology. The position of it flying through the hexagon symbolizes a new frontier, new opportunity, and new perspective. The forward movement represents the critical path of the mission.The bees are based on the idea of “small but impactful” and represent the tremendous impact the program experiments will have on the NRO mission.The sunfish, or mola, nods toward the program.Download the NROL-123 Press Kit

 

## Launch Vehicle

### Electron

 Electron is a two-stage rocket designed and manufactured by Rocket Lab for dedicated access to space of small satellites.

### Rutherford Engine(s)

Proven performance. The world’s first 3D-printed, electric-pump-fed rocket engine.

### First Stage

          - 9 Sea-level Rutherford Engines
          - Lift-off Thrust: 190 kN (43,000 lbf)
          - Peak Thrust: 224 kN (56,000 lbf)
          - ISP: 311 seconds

### Interstage

Pneumatic Pusher

### Second Stage

          - Single Vacuum Rutherford Engine
          - Total Thrust: 25.8 kN (5,800 lbf)
          - ISP: 343 seconds

### Kick Stage

Electron’s unique Kick Stage is designed to deliver small satellites to precise and unique orbits, whether flying as dedicated or rideshare.
          - Deployment of payloads at multiple planes/inclinations
          - Higher altitude deployment
          - Hosted payload support
          - Multiple trajectory changes
          - Sustained low altitude orbits
          - Deorbiting payloads to eliminate space debris

## Site Info

NROL-123 successfully launched from the MARS Pad 0C, also known as Rocket Lab Launch Complex 2. The launch complex is co-located on the NASA Wallops Flight Facility on the Eastern Shore of Virginia. In 1997, the Virginia Commercial Space Flight Authority entered into a Reimbursable Space Act Agreement with NASA, which provided for permitted use of land on NASA Wallops Island for the MARS launch pads. Virginia Space Authority also applied for and was granted an FAA license to launch to orbit. This led to the establishment of the Virginia Space Authority Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport, located on the southern portion of NASA Wallops Island. The Virginia Spaceport Authority, a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia, owns and operates MARS. NASA Wallops partners with Virginia Spaceport Authority to provide various support services to MARS launches.

Download the NROL-123 Press KitDownload the NROL-123 Press Release

## Ready to launch your career?

For more than 60 years, the NRO has leveraged innovation and strategic partnerships to develop, acquire, launch, and operate America's spy satellites.
More on the Mission
# C_2005114EN.01000201.xml

| 14.5.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 114/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.5.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 114/2

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.3806 — Telefonica/Cesky Telecom)

(2005/C 114/02)

(Text with EEA relevance)

| 1. | On 2 May 2005, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the Spanish undertaking Telefónica S.A. acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation control of the whole of the Czech undertaking Cesky Telecom a.s. by way of purchase of shares. |
| --- | --- |

1.

On 2 May 2005, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the Spanish undertaking Telefónica S.A. acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation control of the whole of the Czech undertaking Cesky Telecom a.s. by way of purchase of shares.

1

| 2. | The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






  — | for undertaking Telefónica S.A.: global operator in the Telecommunications sector, |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

—

for undertaking Telefónica S.A.: global operator in the Telecommunications sector,

| — | for undertaking Cesky Telecom a.s: Telecommunications services in the Czech Republic. |
| --- | --- |

—

for undertaking Cesky Telecom a.s: Telecommunications services in the Czech Republic.

| 3. | On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. However, the final decision on this point is reserved. |
| --- | --- |

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

| 4. | The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
  Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (No (32-2) 296 43 01 or 296 72 44) or by post, under reference number COMP/M.3806 — Telefonica/Cesky Telecom, to the following address:





  European Commission |
| --- | --- |
| Directorate-General for Competition, |
| Merger Registry |
| J-70 |
| B-1049 Brussels |

4.

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

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (No (32-2) 296 43 01 or 296 72 44) or by post, under reference number COMP/M.3806 — Telefonica/Cesky Telecom, to the following address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition,

Merger Registry

J-70

B-1049 Brussels

---

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

1

---
EXHIBIT 11.1
              COMPUTATION OF NET LOSS PER SHARE (DEC 01)


CALCULATION OF WEIGHTED AVERAGE FOR THE PERIOD
ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2001


BEGINNING BALANCE                                     44,099,333

DATE              NO OF SHARES    CONTRIBUTION TO
                  ISSUED          WEIGHTED AVERAGE    ENDING BALANCE
------            ------------    ----------------    --------------


Feb. 26, 2001     3,300,000        2,784,658          46,883,991
Mar. 15, 2001     4,800,000        3,826,849          50,710,840
Jun. 26, 2001     2,773,523        1,428,554          52,139,394
Aug. 30, 2001       295,455           99,564          52,238,958
Sep. 06, 2001        25,000            7,945          52,246,903

Net Loss for the period: 1,856,530
Weighted average shares: 52,246,903
Net Loss per share: $(0.04)