alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 30 (Monday, February 14, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8298-8299]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03128]


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

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

[Notice: (22-011)]


NASA Advisory Council; Meeting

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) 
announces a meeting of the NASA Advisory Council (NAC).

DATES: Tuesday, March 1, 2022, 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time; and 
Wednesday, March 2, 2022, 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time.

ADDRESSES: Meeting will be virtual only. See WebEx and audio dial-in 
information below under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Marcia Guignard, NAC 
Administrative Officer, NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC 20546, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d3beb2a1b0bab2fdb4a6bab4bdb2a1b793bdb2a0b2fdb4bca5"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="93fef2e1f0faf2bdf4e6faf4fdf2e1f7d3fdf2e0f2bdf4fce5">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: As noted above, this meeting will be 
available to the public by WebEx and audio dial-in only. WebEx 
connectivity by computer and by phone is provided below. The WebEx 
event address for Tuesday, March 1, 2022 is: https://nasaenterprise.webex.com/nasaenterprise/j.php?MTID=m592e90e8ce149588f4e7b2a2d2e46f4c the event number (access 
code) is 2761 749 9803; the password is FWkhxrp$738 (case sensitive). 
Any interested person may join by phone by dialing the WebEx toll 
access number 1-415-527-5035 or 1-929-251-9612, and then entering the 
numeric participant passcode: 39549770. The WebEx event address for 
Wednesday, March 2, 2022 is: https://nasaenterprise.webex.com/nasaenterprise/j.php?MTID=m4981df9b7f36ffe1170da5b0e9ea048c the event 
number (access code) 2760 447 2272; the password is HTsKj9iD$23 (case 
sensitive). Any interested person may join by phone by dialing the 
WebEx toll access number 1-415-527-5035 or 1-929-251-9612, and then 
entering the numeric participant passcode: 48755943.

[[Page 8299]]

    The agenda for the meeting will include reports from the following:

--Aeronautics Committee
--- Human Exploration and Operations Committee
--- Science Committee
--- STEM Engagement Committee
--- Technology, Innovation and Engineering Committee

    It is imperative that the meeting be held on this date to 
accommodate the scheduling priorities of the key participants.

Patricia Rausch,
Advisory Committee Management Officer, National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2022-03128 Filed 2-11-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510-13-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Jose Herrera MENENDEZ, DOC # T75942, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D16-5406

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 23, 2018.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
#### Britney L. BAIN, Petitioner v. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT, Respondent

2016-1333

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

February 10, 2017

*1008Michael Brady, Law Office of Michael T. Brady, Winthrop, WA, argued for petitioner.

Shari A. Rose, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, argued for respondent. Also represented by Benjamin C. Mizer, Robert E. Kirschman, Jr., Allison Kidd-Miller.

(Lourie, Hughes, and Stoll,' Circuit Judges).

JUDGMENT

Per Curiam

This Cause having been heard and considered, it is Ordered and Adjudged:

AFFIRMED. *See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.
Baltasar JIMENEZ, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Melba JIMENEZ, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-0219

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 14, 2018

BY ORDER OF THE COURT:

Pursuant to the notice of voluntary dismissal filed herein, this appeal is dismissed.
Kenneth S. FOUTS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-4573

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 2, 2018

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Steven L. Seliger, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

AFFIRMED .

Ray, Bilbrey, and Winokur, JJ., concur.
Kristian FOSTER, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-3187

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

November 21, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 30 (Monday, February 14, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8304-8305]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03244]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE:  3:00 p.m. on Thursday, February 17, 2022.

PLACE:  The meeting will be held via remote means and/or at the 
Commission's headquarters, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549.

STATUS: This meeting will be closed to the public.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:  Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, 
the Secretary to the Commission, and recording secretaries will attend 
the closed meeting. Certain

[[Page 8305]]

staff members who have an interest in the matters also may be present.
    In the event that the time, date, or location of this meeting 
changes, an announcement of the change, along with the new time, date, 
and/or place of the meeting will be posted on the Commission's website 
at https://www.sec.gov.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has 
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth 
in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (6), (7), (8), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR 
200.402(a)(3), (a)(5), (a)(6), (a)(7), (a)(8), (a)(9)(ii) and (a)(10), 
permit consideration of the scheduled matters at the closed meeting.
    The subject matter of the closed meeting will consist of the 
following topics:
    Institution and settlement of injunctive actions;
    Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings;
    Resolution of litigation claims; and
    Other matters relating to examinations and enforcement proceedings.
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in 
the scheduling of meeting agenda items that may consist of 
adjudicatory, examination, litigation, or regulatory matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:  For further information; please 
contact Vanessa A. Countryman from the Office of the Secretary at (202) 
551-5400.
    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552b.

    Dated: February 10, 2022.
Vanessa A. Countryman,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-03244 Filed 2-10-22; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
#### Mihran MELKONYAN, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 15-71037

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted August 9, 2017 *

Filed August 14, 2017

Inna Lipkin, Esquire, Counsel, Law Offices of Inna Lipkin, Redwood City, CA, for Petitioner

Sharon Michele Clay, Esquire, Trial Attorney, OIL, DOJ—U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel, *244Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent

Before: SCHROEDER, TASHIMA, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

*

**The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Mihran Melkonyan, a native of the Soviet Union and a citizen of Armenia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his applications for adjustment of status and a waiver under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(i). We dismiss the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s discretionary denial of Melkonyaris application for a waiver of inadmissibility under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(i), where Melkonyan does not raise a colorable constitutional claim or question of law that would invoke our jurisdiction. *See*8 U.S.C. §§ 1182(i)(2), 1252(a)(2)(B)(i); *Corona-Mendez v. Holder,*593 F.3d 1143, 1146 (9th Cir. 2010).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
#### Tavon P. SINGLETARY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. State of MARYLAND; The Attorney General of the State of Maryland, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 17-6601

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: July 20, 2017

Decided: July 25, 2017

Tavon P. Singletary, Appellant Pro Se. Edward John Kelley, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Before DUNCAN and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this' circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Tavon P. Singletary seeks to appeal an order of the district court dated April 27, 2017. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); *Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp.,*337 U.S. 541, 545-46, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). Our review of the docket does not reveal an order entered on that date. To the extent that Singletary seeks to appeal the district court’s orders ordering him to file a response to the Respondent’s motion to dismiss or returning improperly filed discovery motions, those orders are not final nor are they immediately appealable interlocutory or collateral orders. Moreover, although the district court dismissed Sin-gletary’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition after he filed his notice of appeal, his premature notice of appeal cannot he saved by the doctrine of cumulative finality. *In re Bryson,*406 F.3d 284, 288 (4th Cir. 2005). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with *264oral 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*
Order filed, May 28, 2015

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO S . 14

- 15

- 00064

- CR 14

- 15

- 00065

- CR 14

- 15

- 00066

- CR

____________ WILLIAM MARKS , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the Co unty Crim inal C our t at Law No 7

Harris County, Texas Trial Co urt Cause No. 1852392 , 1852393, 1852394



### ORDER
The reporter’s record in this case was due May 07, 2015

. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.1. The court has not received a request to extend time for filing the record. The record has not been filed with the court. Because the repor ter’s record has not been filed timely, we issue the following order.

We order Sandra Powell , the official court reporter, to file the record in this appeal within 30 days of the date of this order

. PER CURIAM
#### IN RE: Brent Renard CHRISTIAN, Petitioner.

No. 17-1181

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: July 31, 2017

Decided: August 9, 2017

Brent Renard Christian, Petitioner Pro Se.

Before WILKINSON and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Brent Renard Christian petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. Our review of the district court’s docket reveals that the district court adopted the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissed Christian’s § 2255 motion. Accordingly, because the district court has recently decided Christian’s ease, we deny the mandamus petition as moot. We grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and ar*208gument would not aid the decisional process.

*PETITION DENIED*
**EXHIBIT
      23**





April
      18,
      2005





Luna
      Technologies International, Inc.


61-A
      Fawcett Road


Coquitlam,
      British Columbia


Canada
      V3K 6V2





Re:
            Luna
                Technologies International, Inc. - Form S-8





Dear
      Sir/Madame:





We
      consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement on Form
      S-8
      Number 333-112647 of our report dated March 31, 2005 on the financial statements
      of Luna Technologies International, Inc. as of December 31, 2004 and the
      reference to us under the heading "Experts" in the Registration Statement.





Sincerely,





"Dale
      Matheson Carr-Hilton LaBonte"


**Dale
      Matheson Carr-Hilton LaBonte**


(formerly
      LaBonte & Co.)


Chartered
      Accountants


Vancouver,
      British Columbia
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 11

                       3CI COMPLETE COMPLIANCE CORPORATION
                 STATEMENT RE: COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS
                                   (UNAUDITED)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                   FOR THE            FOR THE             FOR THE             FOR THE
                                               THREE MONTHS ENDED THREE MONTHS ENDED  THREE MONTHS ENDED NINE MONTHS ENDED
                                                   JUNE 30,           JUNE 30,            JUNE 30,           JUNE 30,
                                                     1999               1998                1999               1998
                                               ------------------ ------------------  ------------------ -----------------
<S>                                            <C>                <C>                 <C>                <C>
Weighted average common shares outstanding
  - basic earnings per share                            9,197,325          9,116,026           9,199,432         9,143,519

Common stock issuable upon assumed conversion
  - of stock options and warrant                               --                 --           7,750,000                --
                                               ------------------ ------------------  ------------------ -----------------

Adjusted weighted average common shares
  outstanding - diluted earnings per shares             9,197,325          9,116,026          16,949,432         9,143,519
                                               ================== ==================  ================== =================

Net income                                               (145,130)            36,715             371,270           (63,055)
                                               ================== ==================  ================== =================

Net income per share - basic                                (0.02)              0.01                0.04             (0.01)
                                               ================== ==================  ================== =================

Net income per - share diluted                              (0.02)              0.01                0.02             (0.01)
                                               ================== ==================  ================== =================
</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jimmy Lee WILLIAMS, a/k/a Jimmy Lee Williamson, a/k/a J. J. Williamson, a/k/a Jimmy Williamson, a/k/a Jimmy C. Williamson, a/k/a Jimmy J. Williamson, a/k/a Jimmy L. Williamson, a/k/a Ayamawat Bidziil, a/k/a J. Edwards, a/k/a John Bruce, a/k/a Aaron Bruce, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-4272

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: November 17, 2016

Decided: November 21, 2016

Carol Ann Bauer, Morganton, North Carolina, for Appellant. Jill Westmoreland Rose, United States Attorney, Anthony J. Enright, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.,

PER CURIAM:

Jimmy Lee Williams pled guilty to conspiracy to defraud the United States, 18 U.S.C. § 371 (2012), and money laundering and aiding and abetting money laundering, 18 U.S.C. § 1956(a)(l)(B)(i) and 2 (2012). The district court sentenced Williams to a total of 105 months’ imprisonment. Williams appeals, raising a single claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.

Unless an attorney’s ineffectiveness conclusively appears on the face of the record, ineffective assistance claims are not generally addressed on direct appeal. United States v. Benton, 523 F.3d 424, 435 (4th Cir. 2008). Instead, such claims should be raised in a motion brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012), in order to permit sufficient development of the record. United States v. Baptiste, 596 F.3d 214, 216 n.1 (4th Cir. 2010).. Because the record does not conclusively establish that counsel provided ineffective assistance to Williams, we conclude that this claim should be raised, if at all, in a § 2255 motion.

Accordingly we affirm the judgment of the district court. We deny Williams’ motion to file a pro se brief. See United States v. Penniegraft, 641 F.3d 566, 569 n.1 (4th Cir. 2011). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conten-tiops are adequately presented in the materials before this .court and argument would not aid the. decisional process.

AFFIRMED
<<Isler
      CPA Letterhead>>

















**CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS**








We
      consent to the incorporation by reference in the Annual Report on Form 10-K
      for
      the year ended December 31, 2006 of our report on the consolidated financial
      statements of Pacific Continental Corporation, included in the Annual Report
      to
      Shareholders of Pacific Continental Corporation for the year ended December
      31,
      2004.








**/s/
      Isler CPA, LLC**








**Successor
      to; ZIRKLE, LONG, TRIGUEIRO & WARD, L.L.C.**














Eugene,
      Oregon


February
      9, 2007
Adrian Vernard CRANEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-2890

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed May 23, 2018

Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender and Timothy J. Ferreri, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

KELLY, MORRIS, and LUCAS, JJ., Concur.
#### Robert HAUGHIE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. State of MARYLAND, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 17-6424

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: July 20, 2017

Decided: July 25, 2017

*255Robert D. Haughie, Appellant Pro Se.

Before DUNCAN and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Robert D. Haughie appeals the district court’s order construing his petition for a writ of error coram nobis as a petition for a writ of mandamus and denying relief. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. A writ of error coram nobis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1651 (2012) can be used to vacate a conviction when there is a fundamental error resulting in conviction and no other means of relief is available. *United States v. Morgan,*346 U.S. 502, 509-11, 74 S.Ct. 247, 98 L.Ed. 248 (1954); *United States v. Mandel,*862 F.2d 1067, 1074-75 (4th Cir. 1988). Haughie failed to establish the grounds needed to obtain relief under this writ. To the extent that Haughie sought mandamus relief, the district court correctly stated that the federal courts do not have jurisdiction to grant mandamus relief against state officials, *Gurley v. Superior Court of Mecklenburg ay.,*411 F.2d 586, 587 (4th Cir. 1969), and do not have jurisdiction to review final state court orders, *Disk of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman,*460 U.S. 462, 482, 103 S.Ct. 1303, 75 L.Ed.2d 206 (1983). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. 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*
Sandy Michelle OGLESBY v. STATE

CR-16-0428

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

June 30, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 170 (Tuesday, September 3, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 54365]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-21373]

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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 8447]

Foreign Affairs Policy Board Meeting Notice: Closed Meeting; 
Notice of Rescheduling

    The meeting of the Foreign Affairs Policy Board, formerly scheduled 
for September 9, 2013, has been rescheduled to September 11, 2013. See 
78 FR 51266, for the prior notice for the meeting as well as the 
Department's closed meeting determination.
    For more information, contact Samantha Raddatz at (202)-647-2972.

    Dated: August 27, 2013.
Andrew McCracken,
Designated Federal Officer.
[FR Doc. 2013-21373 Filed 8-30-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-10-P
```
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLICACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to theincorporation by reference in Registration Statements (No. 333-142221, No. 333-118588and No. 333-13947) on Form S-8 of our report dated March 16,2010, relating to the consolidated financial statements of TGC Industries, Inc.and subsidiary and the effectiveness of TGC Industries, Inc. andsubsidiary’s internal control over financial reporting, which appear in thisAnnual Report on Form 10-K/A, Amendment No. 1, of TGC Industries, Inc.,for the year ended December 31, 2009.

 

/s/ Lane GormanTrubitt, L.L.P.

 

Dallas, Texas

May 3, 2010

 

1

----