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

|     (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      14 , 2008 | By:    | /s/       Christopher      Gilcher |   |
|-------------------------------------------|--------|-----------------------------------------|--------|
|                                      |   | Christopher      Gilcher                |   |
|                                      |   | Chief      Financial Officer            |   |

----

----
22117

#### The STATE, Respondent, v. LeGrant MULLER, Appellant.

(316 S. E. (2d) 409)

Supreme Court

*Sam R. Haskell*and *Harry B. Burchstead, Jr.,*Sumter, *for appellant.*

*Atty. Gen. T. Travis Medlock, Asst. Atty. Gen., Harold M. Coombs, Jr.,*and *State Attys., Agnes Dale Moore,*and *Susan A. Lake,*Columbia; and *Sol. Wade S. Kolb, Jr.,*Sumter, *for respondent.*

May 25, 1984.

Per Curiam:

Appellant was convicted of assault and battery of a high and aggravated nature and of carrying a concealed weapon and was sentenced to concurrent terms of eight (8) years and one (1) year, respectively. He contends the trial judge erroneously refused to charge the law of self-defense. We agree.

On December 25,1982, appellant and Rowland Tomlin were involved in a shooting incident at the apartment of appellant’s ex-wife. At trial, appellant testified he shot Tomlin after Tomlin took out a gun and began shooting at him.

The trial j udge’s refusal to charge the law applicable to self-defense was error because appellant’s testimony constituted sufficient evidence from which the jury could infer that appellant acted in self-defense. *State v. Adkinson,*311 S. E. (2d) 79 (1984); *State v. Jackson,*227 S. C. 271, 87 S. E. (2d) 681 (1955).

Appellant’s other exceptions are without merit and are *11dismissed under Rule 23 of the Rules of Practice of this Court.

Accordingly, appellant’s conviction on the charge of assault and battery of a high and aggravated nature is reversed and remanded for a new trial; the conviction for carrying a concealed weapon is affirmed.
17164

#### BEULAH JOHNSON, as Administratrix of the Estate of Woodrow Johnson, Respondent, v. ATLANTIC COAST LINE RAILROAD COMPANY and R. Q. POWELL, Appellants.

(92 S. E. (2d) 847)

*330*Messrs. Willcox, Hardee, Houck & Palmer,*of Florence, and *Norton & Norton,*of Marion, *for Appellants,*

/. *Ralph Gasque, Esq.,*of Marion, *for Respondent.*

May 17, 1956.

Stukes, Chief Justice.

This action for damages for the alleged wrongful death of plaintiff’s intestate-husband was commenced on March 24, 1947. It was brought for the benefit of plaintiff-widow and her and decedent’s children. Defendants answered in due time and alleged, *inter alia,*that plaintiff was not the qualified administratrix of the estate of the decedent and was without capacity to bring the action as administratrix.

There is no explanation of the long intervening lapse of time but at the May 1955 term of court plaintiff’s attorney moved for an order of voluntary nonsuit without prejudice, which defendants opposed. By order dated May 30, 1955, the court granted the motion, reciting that plaintiff admitted *331that she is not the duly appointed and qualified administra-trix of the estate and presumably asked for nonsuit without prejudice for the purpose of procuring her subsequent appointment as administratrix; defendants opposed upon the ground, quoting from the order, “that they have substantial rights which would be affected, principally because of the statute of limitations;” it was concluded that the statute may affect plaintiff’s rights, but the rights of the minor children were not at that date precluded by the passage of time.

It was unnecessary and thereby improper to pass upon the “rights” of the alleged beneficiaries in any subsequent action which may be brought. It was therefore error to do so, and the soundness of the conclusions will not be examined; appellants’ pertinent contentions of error are saved for re-assertion by them in any future action which may be brought upon the same cause, if they be so advised. However, the result of the order was correct and it will be affirmed in result.

Ordinarily, as here, a plaintiff is entitled on motion before trial to an order of voluntary nonsuit without prejudice, in the absence of resulting legal prejudice to the defendant. *Caulder v. Skipper,*S. C., 91 S. E. (2d) 321, and authorities there cited. *Romanus v. Biggs,*217 S. C. 77, 59 S. E. (2d) 645, which is largely relied upon by the instant appellants, was distinguished on its facts in *Brown v. Palmetto Baking Co.,*221 S. C. 183, 69 S. E. (2d) 598, and in *Wildhagen v. Ayers,*225 S. C. 384, 82 S. E. (2d) 609, and the distinction is equally apposite here. Appellants argue only the difficulty in locating their witnesses, if a new action should be brought and tried; but liability to defend another action does not constitute legal prejudice.

The order of voluntary nonsuit without prejudice is affirmed; but the reasons assigned therefor by the lower court are not passed upon.

Affirmed in result.

Taylop. Qxner, Legge and Moss, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 70 (Monday, April 13, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 19735]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-08365]


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

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS


Veterans' Advisory Committee on Rehabilitation, Notice of Meeting

    The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) gives notice under the 
Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. 2, that a meeting of the 
Veterans' Advisory Committee on Rehabilitation (VACOR) will be held on 
April 27, 2015, via teleconference. The meeting will last from 2:30 
p.m. (EST) until 5:00 p.m. (EST). To join the meeting, dial 1-800-767-
1750 with a participant code of 25743#.
    The purpose of the Committee is to provide advice to the Secretary 
on the rehabilitation needs of Veterans with disabilities and on the 
administration of VA's rehabilitation programs.
    During the meeting, Committee members will review recommendations 
and discuss best practices. The primary agenda topics will be to 
discuss future plans for VACOR.
    No time will be allocated at this meeting for oral presentations 
from the public. However, the entirety of the meeting is open to the 
public. Interested parties should provide written comments for review 
by the Committee to Marisa Liuzzi, Designated Federal Officer, Veterans 
Benefits Administration (28), 810 Vermont Avenue NW., Washington, DC 
20420, or via email at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#87eae6f5eef4e6a9ebeef2fdfdeec7f1e6a9e0e8f1"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="543935263d27357a383d212e2e3d1422357a333b22">[email protected]</span></a>. In the communication, 
writers must identify themselves and state the organization, 
association or person(s) they represent. Individuals who wish to call 
in to the meeting should RSVP to Marisa Liuzzi at (202) 461-9600, no 
later than close of business, April 20, 2015.

    Dated: April 8, 2015.
Rebecca Schiller,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2015-08365 Filed 4-10-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8320-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
EXHIBIT 99.b



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 Boston Capital Tax Credit Fund II Limited Partnership (the "Partnership") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Marc N. Teal, Sr. Vice President of C&M Management Inc., and Directory of Accounting of Boston Capital Corporation certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge, after due inquiry:



|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and                              
|--- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|    |                                                                                                                                                        
|(2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Partnership.



|                | Boston Capital Tax Credit Fund II Limited Partnership
|--------------- | -----------------------------------------------------
|                |                                                      
|                | By:                                                  
|                |                                                      
|                |                                                      
|                | By:                                                  
|                |                                                      
|                |                                                      
|                | By:                                                  
|                |                                                      
|                |                                                      
|Date:           |                                                      
|August 20, 2002 | By:                                                  
|                |                                                      
|                |                                                      
|                |
IIB 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3767 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 17, 2009 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 170 North Main Street in Smithfield, Utah, 

as the ‘‘W. Hazen Hillyard Post Office Building’’. 

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


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 3767 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. W. HAZEN HILLYARD POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

3 Postal Service located at 170 North Main Street in Smith4 field, Utah, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘W. 

5 Hazen Hillyard Post Office Building’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

8 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

9 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘W. Hazen Hillyard 

10 Post Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives November 16, 

2009. 

Attest: LORRAINE C. MILLER, 

Clerk. 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with BILLS
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

NERY RODOLFO GUERRA SALAZAR,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 08-72991

Agency No. A070-951-248

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted September 13, 2010** 

Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges. 

Nery Rodolfo Guerra Salazar, native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for

review of a Board of Immigration Appeals’ order summarily dismissing his appeal

from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum

FILED

SEP 22 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 08-72991

and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We

review for substantial evidence factual findings, INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S.

478, 481 & n.1 (1992), and de novo due process claims, Vasquez-Zavala v.

Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 1105, 1107 (9th Cir. 2003). We deny the petition for review. 

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s finding that Guerra Salazar failed to

establish the threats made against him in Guatemala rise to the level of persecution. 

See Lim v. INS, 224 F.3d 929, 936 (9th Cir. 2000). Substantial evidence also

supports the IJ’s finding that Guerra Salazar did not demonstrate he suffered past

persecution or has a well-founded fear of future persecution on account of a

protected ground. See Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. at 482. 

Because Guerra Salazar failed to meet the lower burden of proof for asylum,

it follows that he has not met the higher standard for withholding of removal. See

Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1190 (9th Cir. 2006). 

Finally, given the lack of nexus between the harm he allegedly suffered and

a protected ground, Guerra Salazar’s contention that the thirteen-year delay in the

adjudication of his asylum application violated his due process rights fails because

he has not shown prejudice. See Ngongo v. Ashcroft, 397 F.3d 821, 823 (9th Cir.

2005) (a petitioner must be prejudiced by a due process violation). 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
CHH EX 10.03 - AMEND - WHITE




Amendment to
Non-Competition, Non-Solicitation & Severance Benefit Agreement


This Amendment, dated this 25th day of March 2013, amends that certain Non-Competition, Non-Solicitation & Severance Benefit Agreement (“Agreement”) entered into on August 1, 2011 between Choice Hotels International, Inc. (“Choice”), a Delaware corporation with principal offices at 10750 Columbia Pike, Silver Spring, Maryland 20901, and David White (“Employee”).


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises contained in this Agreement, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree to the following terms:


1.  Section 6 is amended by adding to the end thereof:
The Release Agreement must be irrevocably effective within sixty (60) days following the Termination Date. Subject to the six (6) month delay referenced in Section 9(f), the payments shall begin or be made on the sixtieth day following the Termination Date.
2. Section 8(b) is amended by adding to the end thereof:
The Release Agreement must be irrevocably effective within sixty (60) days following the Termination Date. Subject to the six (6) month delay referenced in Section 9(f), the payments shall begin or be made on the sixtieth day following the Termination Date.
3.  Choice’s notification address in Section 10 of the Agreement shall be deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:
“Choice Hotels International, Inc.
One Choice Hotels Circle                
Rockville, Maryland 20850”


4.  All other provisions of the Agreement not affected by this Amendment remain in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on the date first set forth above.
	
			
	CHOICE HOTELS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
	 
	Employee

	 
	 
	 

	/s/ Patrick Cimerola
	 
	/s/ David L. White

	Patrick Cimerola
	 
	David L. White
Materials Not Included in

Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket

 Docket Number: FAA-2014-0620

 Directorate Identifier: 2013NM238AD

A330-57A3096, R04 --- 2/6/13

A330-57A3096, R03 --- 10/24/12

A330-57A3096, R02 --- 8/13/07

A330-57A3096, R01 --- 4/18/07

A340-57A4104, R03 --- 10/24/12

A340-57A4104, R02 --- 9/5/07

A340-57A4104, R01 --- 8/13/07

A340-57A5009, R02 --- 10/24/12

A340-57A5009, R01 --- 8/13/07

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in FDMS Docket and Maintained in the 

Supplemental AD Docket

MAY BE VIEWED AT: Federal Aviation Administration

Transport Airplane Directorate

Rules Docket

1601 Lind Ave. SW.,

Renton, WA 98057

425.227.1221

DURING THE HOURS OF: 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday,

except Federal holidays.

Form Date: 03/05/2008
# Virginia Guard medical professionals conduct medical information exchange in Tajikistan

/ Published Nov. 29, 2011

SANDSTON, Va. - A group of six medical professionals from the Virginia Air and Army National Guard traveled to Dushanbe, Tajikistan, earlier this year to conduct a medical information exchange with military forces there.

The five day trip was a follow on to a 2010 medical information exchange in Virginia and the goal was to assess and develop the medical readiness and capabilities of the Tajik Peacekeeping Forces in preparation for a 2013 NATO mission.

The Virginia National Guard Office of the State Surgeon provided the Tajik Ministry of Defense Officer Corps with an MIE in Richmond in 2010 and Tajik participants requested a similar presentation in Dushanbe for additional Tajik medical personnel.

The Tajik Peacekeeping Organization Force will mobilize in 2013 in support of a NATO mission and will require trained medical personnel and medically ready contract and conscript forces.

Representatives from the Tajik Ministry of Defense, Ministry of Emergency Management, Tajik National Guard and civilian representatives were in attendance for the August information exchange.

Some of the topics covered included health care providers, education and capabilities; echelons of medical care, physical health assessment, dental readiness, Soldier readiness processing, physical profiling, behavioral health, combat operational stress, post traumatic stress, field hygiene and sanitation; emergency medical operations; and CERF-P mission and capabilities.

"It was a very good MIE between Tajik and Virginia National Guard representatives," said Army Sgt. 1st Class Ellen Billmyer, one of the Virginia participants. "Tajik representatives are eager to utilize Virginia National Guard medical assistance for the development of Tajik medical capabilities."
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

August 5, 2014

Order 

August 5, 2014

149178 & (84)

__________________________________________

In re RICHARD T. GORDON REVOCABLE

TRUST AGREEMENT.

__________________________________________

HUNTINGTON BANK, JUSTIN A. GORDON,

KATHLEEN L. BEATTY-GORDON, LAUREEN

M. GORDON, KELSEY A. GORDON, and

J. RUSSELL LABARGE, JR.,

Appellees,

v

MICHAEL G. GORDON,

Appellant.

SC: 149178

COA: 312884

Macomb PC: 2012-205162-TV

_________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the stipulation to dismiss the application for leave to 

appeal is GRANTED. The dismissal is with prejudice and without costs to any party.
### -82 -80 -78 -76 -74 -72

36 38 40 

## ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



## ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 

### 500 1000 1500 100 18 12 06 00 05/31 

## NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

# Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 31 May 07

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 39.06 N 76.88 WMeters AGL 

## ★ ■ ■
■ ■ 

## ★ ■ ■ ■ ■ 

## ★ ● ● ● ●



## ★ ● ● ● ●
? #

# 8

6 œ

>

œ

>

œ

>

œ.

>

Allegro q. = 120

f

œ œ

>

œ

>

œ.

>

œ œ

>

œ

>

œ

>

œ

>

œ

>

For ceremonial version,

jump to m. 100, 2nd beat

fi

J

œ

^

‰ ‰ Œ. œ Jœ œ Jœ

5

P

œ Jœ œ J

œ œ J

œ œ

. œ. œ.

? #

#  ̇. œ J

œ œ J

œ œ Jœ œ

. œ. œ. œ J

œ bœ

J

nœ

f

œ Jœ œ Jœ œ

J

œ œ Jœ

13

P

œ Jœ œ

j

œ œ

j

œ œ

. œ. œ.

? #

#  ̇. œ J

œ œ Jœ œ

j

œ œ

. œ. œ. œ J

œnœ J#œ

f

 ̇. œ J

œ œ Jœ

21

P

œ Jœ œ J

œ œ J

œ œ

. œ. œ.

? #

#  ̇. œ J

œ œ Jœ œ J

œ œ

. œ. œ. œ J

œ œ Jœ

f

 ̇. œ J

œ œ Jœ

29

P

œ Jœ œ

. œ. œ.

œ Jœ œ Jœ

? #

# œ J

œ œ

. œ. œ

.  ̇. œ. œ. œ J

œ œ

. œ. œ.

J

œ ‰ ‰ œ.

P

œ Jœ œ Jœ

37

œ Jœ œ J

œ œ J

œ œ

. œ. œ.

? #

#  ̇. œ J

œ œ J

œ œ Jœ œ

. œ. œ. œ J

œ bœ

J

nœ

f

œ Jœ œ Jœ œ

J

œ œ Jœ

45

P

œ Jœ œ

j

œ œ

j

œ œ

. œ. œ.

? #

#  ̇. œ J

œ œ Jœ œ

j

œ œ

. œ. œ. œ J

œnœ J#œ

f

 ̇. œ J

œ œ Jœ

53

P

œ Jœ œ J

œ œ J

œ œ

. œ. œ.

? #

#  ̇. œ J

œ œ Jœ œ J

œ œ

. œ. œ. œ J

œ œ Jœ

f

 ̇. œ J

œ œ Jœ

61

P

œ Jœ œ

. œ. œ.

œ Jœ œ Jœ

ALWAYS READY, ALWAYS THERE

Words & Music by

CW4 David A. Myers

40th Army Band, VTARNG

2nd Trombone

The Official March of the National Guard Bureau -Full Orchestra VersionDedicated to the Men and Women, Soldiers and Airmen of America's National Guard
? #

# œ J

œ œ

. œ. œ

.  ̇. œ. œ. œ J

œ œ

. œ. œ.

J

œ ‰ ‰ œ.

>

F

œ Jœ œ Jœ

69

œ Jœ œ J

œ œ J

œ œ

. œ. œ.

? #

#  ̇. œ J

œ œ J

œ œ Jœ œ

. œ. œ. œ J

œ bœ

J

nœ

f

œ Jœ œ Jœ œ

J

œ œ Jœ

77

P

œ Jœ œ

j

œ œ

j

œ œ

. œ. œ.

? #

#  ̇. œ J

œ œ Jœ œ

j

œ œ

. œ. œ. œ J

œnœ J#œ

f

 ̇. œ J

œ œ Jœ

85

P

œ Jœ œ J

œ œ J

œ œ

. œ. œ.

? #

#  ̇. œ J

œ œ Jœ œ J

œ œ

. œ. œ. œ J

œ œ Jœ

f

 ̇. œ J

œ œ Jœ

93

P

œ Jœ œ

. œ. œ.

œ Jœ œ Jœ

? #

# œ J

œ œ

. œ. œ

.  ̇. œ. œ. œ J

œ œ

. œ. œ.

Ceremonial version,

from m. 4 fi

J

œ ‰ ‰ œ.

>

F

‰ œ

- œ

- œ œ œ

- 101

œ

J

œ œ J

œ œ. œ.

? #

#

œ œ

- œ

- œ

J

œ

- œ

œ œ

- œ œ œ

- œ

- œ œ œ œ œ œ J

œ œ

J

œ œ. J

œ

‰ ‰ ‰ œ

- œ

- œ œ œ

- 109

œ

J

œ œ J

œ

? #

#

œ. œ œ

- œ

- œ. J

œ

‰ ‰

œ

- œ œ œ œ œ œ

-

œ œ œ œ œ œ

J

œ œ J

œ

J

œ

‰ ‰ Œ. ‰ œ

- œ

- œ œ œ

- 117

? #

#

œ

J

œ œ J

œ œ. œ. œ œ

- œ

- œ

J

œ

- œ

-

œ œ œ œ œ œ

- œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ. J

œ

‰ ‰

? #

# ‰

œ

>œ

>

œ. >

125

œ. Jœ

‰ ‰ ‰ œ

>œ

>>

œ. Jœ

‰ ‰

œ. > œ

>

œ

>

œ

> œ

>

J

œ

>

ƒ

œ

>

J

œ

> >

œ. >

 ̇.

sfp

 ̇.  ̇. Jœ

^

‰‰Œ.

ƒ

ALWAYS READY, ALWAYS THERE

Official March of the National Guard Bureau

-2nd Trombone2
Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed March 24 , 2015

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14- 14 -00414- CV

SHAWNA K. MILNE, Appellant

V.
KOOROSH OLYAIE, Appellee

On Appeal from County Civil Court at Law No. 1

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1045855

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

This is an appeal from a judgment signed May 19 , 201 4 . The clerk’s record
was filed June 26 , 201 4

. No reporter’s record was taken . No brief was filed.

On January 27 , 2015, this court issued an order stating that u nless appellant
submitted a brief on or before February 26, 2015 , the court would dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b).
Appellant filed no response. Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Christopher, Donovan and Wise.