alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UN PUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23

- 6325

DAMORIUS D. GAINES, a/k/a Damorius Dontavis Gaines, a/k/a Damorius Dontavious Gaines,

Petitioner

- Appellant,

v.
WARDEN JACKSON,
Respondent

- Appellee

.

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

. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior District Judge. ( 4:23

- cv
- 00411

- HMH )

Submitted : August 24, 2023 Decided: August 29, 2023

Before QUATTLEBAUM and HEYTENS , Circuit Judges , and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Damorius D. Gaines , Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-6325 Doc: 10 Filed: 08/29/2023 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM:

Damorius D. Gaines seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his
28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). The magistrate ju dge recommended that relief be

denied and advised Gaines that failure to file timely , specific objections to this
recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the

recommendation.
The timely filing of specific objections to a magistrate judge’s recommendation is
necessary to preserve appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when the
parties have been warned of the consequences of noncompliance. Martin v

. Duffy , 858
F.3d 239, 245 (4th Cir. 2017); Wright v. Collins , 766 F.2d 841, 846

- 47 (4th Cir. 1985); see

also Thomas v. Arn , 474 U.S. 140 , 154

- 55 (1985). Gaines has forfeited appellate review
by failing to file objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendation after receiving
proper notice. Accordingly, w e deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
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.

DISMISSED USCA4 Appeal: 23-6325 Doc: 10 Filed: 08/29/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
# C_2014304EN.01000101.xml

| 9.9.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 304/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.9.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 304/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7281 — Lur Berri/PAI Partners/Labeyrie Fine Foods)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2014/C 304/01

On 8 July 2014, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in French language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7281. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7281. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---

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

1

---
PCA Perspectives on Key Portland 

Cement NESHAP Issues

May 2012
Overview

 Modification to particulate matter (PM) emission 

limit to address rulemaking petition

 Technology implications for PM and other 

pollutants associated with new PM limit

 Compliance deadline extension necessary to 

address technology implications

 Universe of impacted cement facilities

1
Modification to PM Emission Limit

 Rulemaking petition addressing PM limit 

forwarded to EPA by Holcim in November 2011

 New PM data from continuous measuring 

devices provided to EPA

 Data indicate a significant variability in PM 

emissions over an extended period

 When variability is appropriately considered in 

PM limit calculation, emission limit is higher. 

(0.04 to 0.07 lbs/ton of clinker)

2
PM Technology Implications

 Facilities equipped with electrostatic 

precipitators may be able to modify, rather than 

replace existing units

 Facilities equipped with baghouses will confront 

alternative design options, likely resulting in 

new designs for existing units and the possibility 

of avoiding, in some instances, the installation 

of a new unit

 Exhaust fan size and design will be 

reconsidered as it must be coordinated with the 

size and design of the PM control device

3
Technology Implications for Other Pollutants

 Controls to limit HCl, mercury and total hydrocarbon 

emissions impact PM emissions; all sorbent 

technologies, such as lime and carbon injection, 

increase particulate loading

 Differential impacts need to be factored into the 

design and operation of both PM and other pollutant 

controls

 Controls for the four pollutants must work in tandem 

to ensure continuous compliance

4
Time Needed to Prepare for Compliance

1-4/13 4-8/13 8-12/13 1-6/14 6-12/14 1-3/15 4-8/15

New 

Engineering 

Study

Selection of 

Technology 

Providers

Technology 

Procurement

Process

Detailed 

Technology 

Design and 

Final 

Engineering

Equipment 

Fabrication 

and Permitting

Construction 

and Tying into 

Existing 

Operation

5

Technology

Commissioning
Impacted Cement Facilities

 PCA conducted a survey to determine technology 

implications of modified PM limit

 18 of 23 PCA members companies provided responses

 Information collected from 92 of approximately 150 U.S. 

cement kilns

 21 kilns have electrostatic precipitators

 70 kilns have baghouses

 1 kiln has both

 63% of kilns equipped with electrostatic precipitators 

will reconsider technology selections and compliance 

approach

 43% of kilns equipped with baghouses will do the same

 44% of kilns will reevaluate technology selections for 

other pollutants 6
Thank You!
Re: Exemption No. 12123 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2015-1589

Towhom it may concern:

Rise Above Images LLC. is requesting amendments to their existing 333 exemption as listed and described below. The purpose forthe amendments isto be able to offerthe services as listed in the existing 333 exemption. Each amendmentwill serve to increasethe functionality and usefulness of UASs and the increased functionality will serve to create safer working environments in the industries in which they are deployed.

1. Relieffrom restriction

### #2 forfilming in closed set movie ortelevision production Rise Above Images LLC. has extensive video and film production experience and would liketo be able to use UASsfor such purposes as called out in the 333 exemption. It istherefore

__**___,r'-""e~qu.esting** relief1ro_m_restriction

## #2. Qn the 333**elC~mption_j()r** gperation in clo§e<t§eL

__ _u

___ _ environments for movie and television production. Rise Above Images proprietary Motion Picture and Television Flight Operations for Unmanned Aerial Systems·and 

### if requested will be mailed directly to 333exemptions@faa.gov.

2. Relieffrom restriction #15 prohibiting nightflight. Rise Above Images would like the ability to perform roof inspections on large commercial buildings with flat roofs. In warmer seasons/climates, spots ofa roofthat are leaking have collected waterthat retains the day's heatfor a few hours longerthan the rest ofthe roofthat has not been compromised. The traditional method for locating leaks, or wet spots on largeflat roofs is to use a handheld thermal imaging camera shortly after nightfall and have the technician walk the roofto identify leaks. While many safety features are in place, every year, several people become distracted and accidentally walk off an edge in the dark resulting in serious injury ordeath. This is a very dangerousjobthat commercial roofing companies would like to make much safer and even save lives by using UASs. Since the thermal imaging needs to be done shortly after sunset, and after several hours does notyield results, Rise Above Images is requesting only partial relief from limitation #15 and seeking permission to operate upto 4 hours after sunset. Rise Above Images will still maintain visual flight rules and only fly underVFR conditions.
Jan. Term, 1860.

#### McKay vs. The Board of Supervisors of the County of Outagamie, and others.

This case is similar in principle to that of *Boss m. The Bowd, of fS'U'pei'visors, <&e., ante,*p. 26,. and is decided in the same manner.

APPEAL from the Circuit Court of *Outagamie*County.

The complaint was the same as in the case of *Moss vs. The Board of Supervisors of Outagamie Oounty, ante, p.*26, and a demurrer to the complaint was overruled, from which decision the appeal was taken.

June *i.*

*By the*Court,

Cole, J.

In the case of *Moss vs. The Board of Supervisors of Outagamie*County, just decided, we held that a person purchasing a part of one of the even sections in the Eox and Wisconsin Improvement grant, acquired a right or interest therein, which was subject to taxation under the laws of this state, even before the passage of the act of congress of June 8th, 1858. We suppose that decision, in effect, disposes of this case.

*47Tbe order overruling tbe demurrer to tbe complaint filed herein, must be reversed, and tbe case remanded for further proceedings. '

Dixon, C. J., dissented, for tbe reasons assigned in bis dissenting opinion in tbe case of *Ross vs. The Supervisors of Outagamie County, ante,*p. 26.
knwn_ex102.htm

 
 EXHIBIT 10.2
  
 AMENDMENT NO. 6 TO
 CONVERTIBLE REDEEMABLE PROMISSORY NOTE 
 DATED JANUARY 31, 2018
  
 This AMENDMENT NO. 6 TO CONVERTIBLE REDEEMABLE PROMISSORY NOTE dated JANUARY 31, 2018 in the principal amount of US$519,833 (this “Amendment”) is made and entered into as of September 27, 2021, by and between J3E2A2Z LP (the “Holder”), and Know Labs, Inc., a Nevada corporation f/k/a Visualant, Incorporated (the “Company”).
  
 WHEREAS, the Company is a party to that certain Convertible Redeemable Promissory Note dated January 31, 2018 (the “Debenture”) payable to Holder (capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise defined shall have the meanings set forth in the Debenture); 
  
 WHEREAS, the Promissory Note currently had a Maturity Date of September 30, 2021; and
  
 WHEREAS, the Holder and the Company wish to amend the Promissory Note to extend the Maturity Date and increase the interest rate;
  
 Now, therefore, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereby agree as follows.
  
 1. Amendment of Maturity Date. The Maturity Date of the Debenture is hereby amended to March 31, 2022.
  
 2. Interest Rate. The interest rate remains 6%. 
  
 3. No Other Changes. Except as specifically set forth in this Amendment, the terms of the Debenture remain in full force and effect. 
  
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment as of the date first above written.
  
 	 Company:
	
	  
	  

	 KNOW LABS, INC.
	  

	  	 	 
	 By: 
	/s/ Phillip A. Bosua 	
		Phillip A. Bosua	 
	Its:	Chief Executive Officer 	 
	  
	  
	  

	 Holder: 
	  

	  
	  
	  

	  
	 /s/ Ronald P. Erickson
	  

	  
	 RONALD P. ERICKSON, MANAGER 
	  

	  
	 J3E2A2Z LP
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                           1,051
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,733
<ALLOWANCES>                                       555
<INVENTORY>                                      7,797
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                17,191
<PP&E>                                          20,900
<DEPRECIATION>                                (11,328)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  32,741
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           26,355
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            97
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    32,741
<SALES>                                         24,982
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                26,389
<CGS>                                           13,395
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   11,612
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,500
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,118)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       333
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (785)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (785)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.08)


</TABLE>
# C_2015177EN.01000101.xml

| 30.5.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 177/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.5.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 177/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7537 — ARDIAN France/F2i SGR/F2i Aeroporti)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2015/C 177/01)

On 21 April 2015, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32015M7537. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32015M7537. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---

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

1

---
# C_2016151EN.01000201.xml

| 28.4.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 151/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.4.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 151/2

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

27 April 2016

(2016/C 151/03)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1303 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 125,79 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4428 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,77475 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,1613 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0998 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,2013 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,034 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 312,12 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,3918 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,4640 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 3,1908 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4885 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4223 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,7671 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6504 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5251 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 299,53 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 16,3510 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,3411 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,4773 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 14 915,43 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,4318 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 52,973 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 73,7837 |
| THB | Thai baht | 39,707 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 3,9826 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 19,6578 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 75,1273 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1303

JPY

Japanese yen

125,79

DKK

Danish krone

7,4428

GBP

Pound sterling

0,77475

SEK

Swedish krona

9,1613

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0998

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,2013

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

27,034

HUF

Hungarian forint

312,12

PLN

Polish zloty

4,3918

RON

Romanian leu

4,4640

TRY

Turkish lira

3,1908

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4885

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4223

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,7671

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6504

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5251

KRW

South Korean won

1 299,53

ZAR

South African rand

16,3510

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,3411

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,4773

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

14 915,43

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,4318

PHP

Philippine peso

52,973

RUB

Russian rouble

73,7837

THB

Thai baht

39,707

BRL

Brazilian real

3,9826

MXN

Mexican peso

19,6578

INR

Indian rupee

75,1273

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
# C_2015306EN.01000102.xml

| 17.9.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 306/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.9.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 306/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7738 — Naxicap/Banque publique d’investissement/DEFTA Group)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2015/C 306/02)

On 9 September 2015, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in French language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32015M7738. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32015M7738. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---

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

1

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

INGRAM MOORE,

Petitioner

v.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS 

PHILADELPHIA COUNTY,

Respondent

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 167 EM 2016

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 30th day of November, 2016, the Application for Leave to File 

Original Process and the Petition for Writ of Mandamus and/or Extraordinary Relief, to 

the extent it seeks a writ of mandamus, are GRANTED. 

The Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County is DIRECTED to adjudicate 

Petitioner’s pending filing within 90 days. The Prothonotary is DIRECTED to serve this 

order on the President Judge of the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County.
```

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 56 (Tuesday, March 24, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 15620]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-06662]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Administration for Children and Families

[CFDA Number 93.623]

Announcement of the Award of a Single-Source Grant to Compass 
Family and Community Services in Youngstown, OH

AGENCY: Family and Youth Services Bureau (FYSB), ACYF, ACF, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of the award of a single-source grant to Compass Family 
and Community Services in Youngstown, OH.

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

SUMMARY: The Administration on Children, Youth and Families (ACYF), 
Family and Youth Services Bureau (FYSB), Division of Adolescent 
Development and Support (DADS), announces the award of a single-source 
grant in the amount of $144,000 to Compass Family and Community 
Services of Youngstown, OH, under the Basic Center Program.

DATES: Awarded funds will support activities from 04/01/2015 through 
03/31/2016.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This single-source award will allow Compass 
Family and Community Services to operate a short-term emergency shelter 
for runaway and homeless youth for males and females ages 11 to18. The 
program's goals are to alleviate the problems of runaway and homeless 
youth by reuniting families, whenever possible, or finding alternative 
living arrangements; strengthening family relationships; building 
positive relationships with supportive adults; and helping youth decide 
on constructive courses of action. Compass Family and Community 
Services is a non-profit organization.
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Holloway, Central 
Office Program Manager, Runaway and Homeless Youth Program, Division of 
Adolescent Development and Support, Family and Youth Services Bureau, 
1250 Maryland Avenue SW., Suite 800, Washington, DC 20024; Telephone: 
202-205-9560; Email: [email protected].

    Statutory Authority:  The Basic Center Program (BCP) grants are 
authorized by section 311(a)(1) of the Runaway and Homeless Youth 
Act, 42 U.S.C. 5711(a)(1), most recently amended by Public Law 110-
378 on October 8, 2008.

Mary M. Wayland,
Senior Grants Policy Specialist, Division of Grants Policy, Office of 
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2015-06662 Filed 3-23-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4182-04-P
```