alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE>
Exhibit 11
 
Comtex Scientific Corporation
Earnings Per Share Computation
 
<CAPTION>
 
                                   Three Months Ended               Nine Months Ended
                                        March 31,                        March 31,
                                  1998            1997             1998             1997
                              -----------    ------------     ------------     ------------
<S>                          <C>            <C>              <C>               <C>
Net Income                    $     7,361     $     5,610      $    25,719      $    46,474
 
Basic Earnings per Share:
Weighted average shares
Outstanding                     7,859,417       7,858,417        7,858,749        7,858,417
 
Net Income per Common Share   $      0.00     $      0.00      $      0.00      $      0.01
 
 
Diluted Earnings per Share:
Weighted average shares
Outstanding                     7,859,417       7,858,417        7,858,749        7,858,417
CSE - Stock Options             2,263,146           -            2,137,122            -  
                              -----------    ------------     ------------     ------------


                              $10,122,563     $ 7,858,417      $ 9,995,871        7,858,417
 
Net Income per Common Share   $      0.00     $      0.00      $      0.00       $     0.01

</TABLE>

<PAGE>
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1070 

CAF 15-00167 

PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., SMITH, DEJOSEPH, NEMOYER, AND TROUTMAN, JJ. 

 

IN THE MATTER OF AMYN C. 

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

ERIE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

PETITIONER-RESPONDENT; 

 

CHELSEA K., RESPONDENT-APPELLANT, 

AND ISAAC C., RESPONDENT. 

WILLIAM D. BRODERICK, JR., ELMA, FOR RESPONDENT-APPELLANT. 

JOSEPH T. JARZEMBEK, BUFFALO, FOR PETITIONER-RESPONDENT.

DAVID C. SCHOPP, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILD, THE LEGAL AID BUREAU OF

BUFFALO, INC., BUFFALO (CHARLES D. HALVORSEN OF COUNSEL). 

 

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Erie County (Lisa Bloch

Rodwin, J.), entered January 5, 2015 in a proceeding pursuant to

Family Court Act article 10. The order adjudged that the subject

child was neglected by respondents. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is

unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: In this proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act

article 10, respondent mother appeals from an order that adjudicated

the subject child to be neglected. We affirm. Family Court properly

made the determination that the child is derivatively neglected based

upon the evidence that the mother’s four other children were

determined to be neglected children, “ ‘including the evidence that

[the mother] had failed to address the mental health issues that led

to those neglect determinations and the placement of the custody of

those children with petitioner’ ” (Matter of Sophia M.G.-K. [Tracy

G.-K.], 84 AD3d 1746, 1746-1747; see Matter of Lillianna G. [Orena

G.], 104 AD3d 1224, 1225). Moreover, the neglect finding with respect

to the other four children was entered only two days before the

subject child was born, and thus “ ‘the prior finding . . . was so

proximate in time to [the instant] proceeding[] that it can reasonably

be concluded that the condition still exist[ed]’ ” (Sophia M.G.-K., 84

AD3d at 1747; see also Matter of Alexisana PP. [Beverly PP.], 136 AD3d

1170, 1171).

Contrary to the mother’s implied contention, we conclude that the

court properly took judicial notice of its own prior proceedings (see

Gugino v Tsvasman, 118 AD3d 1341, 1342; Matter of Miranda F. [Kevin 
-2- 1070 

CAF 15-00167 

D.], 91 AD3d 1303, 1305).

Entered: November 18, 2016 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

NANCY D. MARTZ, EXECUTRIX OF THE 

ESTATE OF HARRY L. OTTO, 

DECEASED,

Respondent

v.

GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL SENIOR 

CARE, LLC; GGNSC ALTOONA 

HILLVIEW LP, D/B/A GOLDEN LIVING 

CENTER-HILLVIEW GP LLC; GGNSC 

ALTOONA HILLVIEW GP LLC; GGNSC 

HOLDINGS LLC; GGNSC EQUITY 

HOLDINGS, LLC; GGNSC 

ADMISTRATIVE SERVICES, LLC; 

GGNSC CLINICAL SERVICES, LLC; 

GOLDEN GATE ANCILLARY, LLC; 

DENISE CURRY, AN INDIVIDUAL, AND 

ROBERT ETCHELLS, NHA,

Petitioners

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 120 WAL 2016

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Unpublished Memorandum and 

Order of the Superior Court at No. 855 

WDA 2015 entered on February 25, 

2016, affirming the Order of the Blair 

County Court of Common Pleas at No. 

2014-01657 entered on May 12, 2015

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 17th day of November, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is GRANTED. The Superior Court’s order is VACATED. This matter is REMANDED 

for proceedings consistent with the decision in Taylor v. Extendicare Health Facilities, 

Inc., ___ A.3d ___, 2016 WL 5630669 (Pa. September 28, 2016).
EXHIBIT 32.1


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


         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Dotronix, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Kurt T. Sadler, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as
adopted pursuant to ss.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 the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

         Dated:  November 19, 2003

                                             /s/ Kurt T. Sadler
                                             -------------------------------
                                             Kurt T. Sadler
                                             Chief Executive Officer
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 96-2711

___________ Debra Kyzer, * * Appellant, * * v. * * Russell Levanthall, President * and/or owner in most or all of * the following Corporations and * individually: Laguna Entertain- * Appeal from the United State s ment, Inc.; Interstate Enter- * District Court for the tainment; RFJ Communications, * Western District of Arkansas
. Inc.; Rainbow Entertainment, * [UNPUBLISHED] Inc.; Ultra Ribbons, Inc.; * Porsche Entertainment, Inc.; * Forced REP Entertainment, Inc.; * Superior Holdtime, Inc.; * 905 Santa Fe Corporation; * American Response Marketing, * Inc.; Smart Building, Inc.; * American Billing & Collection, * Inc.; All-State Distributing, * Inc.; Automated Data Billing, * Inc.; 8053 Deering Avenue, Inc.;* American Inbound Marketing * Communications, Inc.; Allstate * Communications, Inc.; U.S. * Interstate Distributing, Inc.; * Haskell Avenue Corp.; Frank * Mongtelione, Individually; * John Doe, 1 through 10, * * Appellees. *

___________ Submitted: February 12, 1997 Filed: April 14, 1997

___________The HONORABLE ANDREW W. BOGUE, United States District Judge 1 for the District of South Dakota, sitting by designation. The Honorable Jimm Larry Hendren, United States District 2 Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. -2- Before BOWMAN and WOLLMAN, Circuit Judges, and BOGUE, District 1 Judge.

___________
PER CURIAM.

De braKyzer appeals from the district court’s grant o f 2 summaryjudgment in favor of the defendants in Kyzer’s action t o recove rfor negligence and for the intentional infliction o f em otional distress that she allegedly suffered upon opening a n envelope containing sexually e xplicit materials that had been sent to her minor son by the defendants. Having concluded that n o error of law appears in the district court’s ruling, we affirm th e judgment on the basis of the district court’s memorandum opinion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
A true copy.

Attest:
CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
REF ID:A71828 

SEyf'(Ef. 

;Atg:AI!S fl'. ~~NAtY~ S~'.tALTI~ 

1. Progra."ll planning (large prob:i.t:ma requiring l.mg-ranp, long-tem operations) 

2, Solution ot complex mmual a7stmna 

3. Soll11ion flt crypto-achine e;vstam (literal and teleprlnter) 

4. Cr,yptanal;yt4c machinery (deaisn and utilisation) 

>. Crypto-mathema tioians 

6" Solution ot cipbon.y...citu qatems 

7. Crypto-llnguists 

Cllllr. ( 23 ~ I GS-1$ 24 

l'u.llbqck Gs-J.S 0) 

Ra.van as.JS 206) 

/"Shin11, L. GS.JI- 24&) \[J1nkov as .. JS 02) 

Vs,aS.ne QS ... l) GCHQ) 

0,1. 

" e:ibacb llS•lJ 206t x.a.4s, A,. os-13 206 L~•i F. G3•l3 2o6 

8Wke;v GS..]J 206 

Lutwiniak as.12 2441) 

Shinn,. M. GS-12 2o6) 

Groui? ~· - "1t\iredga GS-lJ I 206) Bechtel, B.Gs-12 2h4) 

D:radley Gs-12 206J 

Siegel GS-12 2o6 

Wat80ll GS·l2 24h 

aro; 2r 

' onover OS•l.3 ( 206.B) 

Conklin OS-12 (2J3B) 

Moody GS""'12 ( 2.3.3) 

Whitmore GS-ll (238T) 

Orou¥J:lu 

•· racoll os-131206) nerthick os .. 12 244) 

Girhard GS-12 206) 

Hollcrott OS-12 02A7) 

Morehouse OS-12 f 206) Munn GS-12 2)2C) 

Mountjo;.r OS-ll 238) 

Categor,y 3 - S~~ut.i;on o~ cizeto-:machine q~:s 

01'01.y> 1 t GJ.'aUcfirl I 

~ 'reienson GS-lJ 206 ---:~a GS•l.2 (Jll} 

Reimora os-ll ao6 He•• GS-12 (24JA) -- -- · - :?\_Shaw as .. 13 hll Brner as-11 4U) 

μo\...t f....Of1"' ~~·' (Budmbach) GS-lJ 20.~ DeJllld.ng GS.ll ~:~. ~~vis, A.) GS•lJ 206 stephens QS-U 'M.A. 

- r P111• os-12 412 ,,.- vagnm ees:U 

8cbidfl:t GS•ll 206) / Wagoner GS-11 ~) vJ&P·,,.r GS .. 11 ~q3)~ Willunn os-u &M..L) ~ 

ursuant to E .0. 1352 
··-· ~-----~ • REF ID:A71828 

cc:cR ·~~ ·r ti -. -r 

Catecor,y 4 - ~:zI>t~~~ mach~'!Z' 

D•s1£ UtU1:tation1 

, 'r us os-151.lS) ' buailq as-14 

B01illl9.n 08-1) )$2B) lligblay OS•l4 

Ha.r.st(ll OS-13 '1JA) Gingerich OS•l.3 

Moulton os-lJ 3S2) OoJdcn as-13 

Shep&l"d GS..]J 206) Lawless GS•l3 

SJVder os-ll 

Categor,r 5 .. Crypto-mat..'iar.a.t1c1ana 

~ - nahip Lt. !34) Cllllp~31\e GS-lS ~ foJdolla GS-1$ l2 

Dribin OS-1.3 ( ) 

(Chall) GS·JJ (Ul.l) 

Ca.tegory 7 ... ~9Jrt:o,...U!!tt-?Uiats 

)SJ.) 

22) 

lSla)(llCHQ) 

3$2) 

22) 

lSlD) 

fruss~ Oriental.1 

• 4(j er GS-1,) ~244) ' 'Q'DJf" GS•l2 ( 2.3A2) 

Oerba."1 OS-13 244) 

Chesnut OS-12 2)5C) Prenchs 

· , tt!6Son os-12 (2.32) 

--------· '=--------==-----llllllllllliii ..... iiiiliillil ____ iliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii-
**Exhibit 10.18**

 

Summary of Certain Compensation Arrangements Regarding Hungarian 

and Telephone and Cable Corp.’s Chief Executive Officer 

 

In connection with the PanTel transaction, the Registrant has agreed to award Ole Bertram, the Registrant’s President and Chief Executive Officer, a special cashbonus of $600,000 for his efforts in securing the PanTel acquisition and the related financing. 

 

After a review of Mr. Bertram’s employment agreement and his service to the Company both as a director and executive officer since 1997, the Registrant has agreed to award Mr. Bertram with a one-time lump sumpayment upon retirement. The retirement payment will be equal to six times his then monthly base salary. Mr. Bertram’s retirement date has not been determined at this point in time.
Record or Discussion 

Docket No. FAA-2013 -o 360 Directorate Identifier: 07-AD-63RI-AD ZcJ If -A)M -/6 3-A D 

With whom outside the FAA has this AO action been discussed (i.e., Design Approvnl Holder, 

manufacturer, ATA, NBAA, RAA, AOPA, ALPA, GAMA, etc)'? 

ORGANIZATION PERSON CONTACTED DATE TOPICS DISCUSSED 

Boei ~ J<Jmes Ma~ar 4/1/2010 Concur 

ATA Joe White 4/112010 No response 

Boeing Richnrd Weiner & 3/ 1/2014 Opermor comments on 

Christophe Vrillacq original release of SB. 

Schedule for release of 

revised Sl3 addressing 

concerns. 

Other/ Additional Information:
REF ID:A63642 

L _' 

lh". lA',Juia ~. Wright 

Director ' 

'!he J'olger Shakespeare Libn.ry 

Waahixlgton 3,, ?>. c .. 

Zlear Dr. Wri&ht: 

. .,/ 

'!'bank ;,you t:or your J.etter ot: l.9 Je.nuary 1955· 

It ha.a occurred to us that in view or the tact that our ~1pt deal• vith a rather unuaua.l. and otten quite com.pl.ex 

tedmical. subject ve abould have included a tev vor4s about 

cur teehn1ca.J. competence vhen the mnuacr1pt; •• submitted to 

you ror the benef'it ot the Comldttee vhich is to read it ~or 

& 4eterm1nation ot its 'Vlll.ue u a contr1'bu~~on to Bbak.e.spearean 

•chol.areh1p. I am. theretore eending you berew1th e.ome b1oar&ph1co.l. data which my be or interest .e.nd ot posaible value 

to the Judges in the Folger competition. I should add that 

use or •uch l!tata so 'tar as concerns • bas not yet been cleared 

with 'IQ' depr.rtment--but tt necessary or desirable this matter ..,.- be taken up a.t a later date. 

I note, too, tbat I f'&iled to indicate in 'fJIY letter of 

19 J'anua.ry 1955, accom:r;anying our mnuscr:lpt, that it had been 

el.ea.red by the appropriate authoritie• in the Department ot 

Defense and because ot certa1l1 aid '\.te receiYed troi:s him, al.lo 

'b7 Mr. 3. '!Mgar :Hoover, Director of the Ped.erai llureau or 

Invest:lga.tiou. 

Inel.1 

-.. ,. 

81ncere~, 

@'pp roved for Release by NSA on 06-19-2014 pursuantto E .0. 1352a 

--

~
~-~--M e ~ESfilif£D e 

Office Memorandum • uNITEn sTATEs GOVERNMENT 

TO AFSA-OOT DATE: l 7 July 1951 

FROM AFSA-J-2 

SUBJECT. USCIB 13/195 

l. AFSA-OOB has requested this Division to obtain comments on uscm 13/195 

:f'rom j'OU and AFSA-02. 

2. These comments, together with those al.ready submitted by AFSA-14, will 

be. used to prepare the position of AFSA in the premises. The AFSA point of view 

is to be presented at the next meeting o:f' USCIB, or when called :f'or by the Board. 

3. We "WOuld appreciate receiving j'Our comments on the paper be:f'ore 28 

July. 

eclassified and a ursuant to E .0. 1352
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A17A1037. ROY GARDNER v. STANLEY WILLIAMS, WARDEN.

Roy Gardner appeals the trial court’s order denying his application for a writ

of habeas corpus. The Supreme Court, however, has appellate jurisdiction over all

cases involving habeas corpus. See Ga. Const. of 1983, Art. VI, Sec. VI, Par. III (4). 

This appeal is therefore TRANSFERRED to the Supreme Court for disposition.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

February 13, 2017

02/13/2017
. ' 

. ' 

SUBJECT: 

0 (. REF ID:A414~926 

Printing Telegraph Cipher Arrangement • 

AMERICAN TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH COMPANY 

TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH BUILDING 

195 BROADWAY 

JOHN J. CARTY 

CHIEF ENGINEER 

BANCROFT GHERARDI NEW YORK ENGINEER OF PLANT 

KARL W •. WATERSON 

ENGINEER OF TRAFFIC 

Lieutenant-Colonel J. o. Ma.uborgne, 

Of'fic~ of the Chief Si~nal Officer; 

Washington, ·n. c. 

:Ml' dear Colonel Mauborgne: 

A.Pril '1, 1919. 

I am in rec&ipt of your letter of March 31, in regard . . to the printing telegraph cipher arrangement. , 

I note ~hat you say in regard to the poss1b1lit~ of 

,r-. • 

official action in connection with the matter, and I shall be ~ ., ~ ... 

interested in knowing the progress of events. I have no 

objection to your using any of the ~orrespondence which I ba.ve 

sent you in regard to this matter,_ in case yo~ desire to do so. 

Yours v~~-

. Acting Chief' E~ineer.· 

@'pproved for Release by NSA on 12-03-2014 pursuantto E.O. 1352a 

,,. 

/ 

I 

I
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
NORTH FORK BANCORPORATION, INC FORM 10-Q FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1997
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                          111520
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                            2619
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    1580580
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         1260755
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           1240673
<LOANS>                                        3310087
<ALLOWANCE>                                      55066
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 6413274
<DEPOSITS>                                     4418458
<SHORT-TERM>                                    365395
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             391552
<LONG-TERM>                                     770500
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        164666
<OTHER-SE>                                      302703
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 6413274
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  70201
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                39471
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   209
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                109881
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               33020
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               43811
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            66070
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                     1500
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 161
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  30028
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  42508
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       42508
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     25715
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .39
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .39
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.95
<LOANS-NON>                                      17961
<LOANS-PAST>                                      3264
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                 12803
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 53894
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      705
<RECOVERIES>                                       377
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                55066
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             55066
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
AMENDMENT TO 1992 INCENTIVE AND NONQUALIFIED STOCK OPTION PLAN

         Subject to adjustment as provided in Section 7 hereof, a total of Three
Million  (3,000,000)  shares of common stock,  $.01 par value ("Stock"),  of the
Company  shall be subject to the Plan.  The shares of Stock  subject to the Plan
shall consist of unissued shares or previously issued shares reacquired and held
by the Company or any  Subsidiary  of the Company,  and such amount of shares of
Stock shall be and is hereby  reserved for such  purpose.  Any of such shares of
Stock which may remain unsold and which are not subject to  outstanding  Options
at the termination of the Plan shall cease to be reserved for the purpose of the
Plan, but until termination of the Plan the Company shall at all times reserve a
sufficient  number  of  shares  of Stock to meet the  requirements  of the Plan.
Should any Option expire or be cancelled prior to its exercise in full or should
the number of shares of Stock to be  delivered  upon the  exercise in full of an
Option be reduced for any  reason,  the shares of Stock  theretofore  subject to
such Option may again be subject to an Option under the Plan.
pproved for Release by NSA on 

5-21-2014 ursuant to E.O. 1352 
r k4 s~ a~£ Al•v,:j du~'1Lt.A4.C.w.-f.s 

tJ '-«. rk4 solw.. t' o.,., of ~ P.,,. r

11 /4. 

Mae Lc, ,;...1. 

M.-.s S-.1t1~l~ f-o tA {Le lov-4.~"j" IJ NS) 

k.11s- 7k1 corv-1s'i'1wd..M~ Ar-~!1 

'('4 fl~$" lo .... I l1t1~ "4114! A// 

' Wl'-'l $ce.. l~J " h':.1 sec. (Jt.wJ·~ 

f'L.~ Pet"1., s."" 1~141
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 23

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We have issued our report dated March 31, 2003, accompanying the financial
statements included in the Annual Report of Ortec International, Inc.
on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002. We hereby consent to the
incorporation by reference of said report in the Registration Statements of
Ortec International Inc. on Form S-2 (File No. 333-102409, effective
January 23, 2003) Forms S-3 (File No. 333-42850 effective August 23, 2000,
File No. 333-46352, effective September 29, 2000, File No. 333-52019,
effective May 7, 1998 and File No. 333-80979, effective October 14, 1999) and
on Forms S-8 (File No. 333-47671, effective March 10, 1998 and File No.
333-80799, effective June 16, 1999).

GRANT THORNTON LLP

New York, New York
March 31, 2003
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6546

JAIME MARRERO,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

STEVENSON, Warden of Broad River Correctional Institution,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Florence. Margaret B. Seymour, Senior

District Judge. (4:15-cv-00517-MBS)

Submitted: November 17, 2016 Decided: November 21, 2016

Before WYNN, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jaime Marrero, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Senior 

Assistant Attorney General, Melody Jane Brown, Assistant 

Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Jaime Marrero seeks to appeal the district court’s order 

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying 

relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The order is 

not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a 

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012). 

A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a 

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies 

relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by 

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the 

district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is 

debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 

(2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). 

When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the 

prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural 

ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable 

claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. 

at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that 

Marrero has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we 

deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in 

forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 
3

presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED