alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Eron James TASCOE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. WARDEN OF LEE CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Respondent-Appellee, and The State of South Carolina; County of Dorchester; St. George South Carolina, Respondents.

No. 17-6720

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: November 6, 2017

Decided: November 13, 2017

Eron James Tascoe, Appellant Pro Se. Alan Wilson, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Ap-pellee. .

Before WILKINSON, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Eron James Tascoe seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the magis*275trate judge’s recommendation and dismissing as time-barred Tascoe’s 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. § 2258(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, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (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, 120 S.Ct. 1595.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Tascoe 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 presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED'*
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5

<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the financial
statements and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial
statements.
</LEGEND>

<MULTIPLIER> 1


<S>                                    <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                             3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                        JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                  306,216
<SECURITIES>                                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                         2,617,346
<ALLOWANCES>                             10,000
<INVENTORY>                           9,885,888
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                     12,912,007
<PP&E>                                   79,482
<DEPRECIATION>                           28,427
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                       13,847,174
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                 9,375,812
<BONDS>                                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         0
<PREFERRED>                                 590
<COMMON>                                    491
<OTHER-SE>                            4,345,281
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>         13,847,174
<SALES>                              10,701,627
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                     10,701,627
<CGS>                                 8,852,237
<TOTAL-COSTS>                         8,852,237
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           90
<INCOME-PRETAX>                         106,142
<INCOME-TAX>                             48,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                      58,142
<DISCONTINUED>                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               0
<CHANGES>                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                             58,142
<EPS-BASIC>                               .01
<EPS-DILUTED>                               .01



</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

We consent to the incorporationby reference (i) in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-140576) pertaining to the 2007 Omnibus Equity Incentive Plan of Fortress Investment Group LLC (ii) in the Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-153689) andrelated Prospectus of Fortress Investment Group LLC for the registration of Class A Shares, Preferred Shares, Depositary Shares, Warrants, Subscription Rights, Purchase Contracts and Purchase Units and (iii) Registration Statement (Form S-3 No.333-168954) and related Prospectus of Fortress Investment Group LLC for the registration of Class A Shares of our reports dated March 1, 2011, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Fortress Investment Group LLC and theeffectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Fortress Investment Group LLC, included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2010. 

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP 

New York, New York 

March 1, 2011
GARY MCGEE,

Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee. §

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 19

- 00125

- CR

Appeal from the

394th District Court

of Hudspeth County, Texas

(TC# 6070)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was no reversible

error in the judgment. We therefore affirm the judgment of the court below. This decision shall be

certified below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 23RD OF DECEMBER, 2020.

YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Justice

Before Alley, C.J., Rodriguez, and Palafox, JJ.
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
  (1)
    
    The Funds Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December
31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Annual Report), fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended; and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of the Fund.
 /s/ Ashmead PringleAshmead PringleChief Executive Officer
<PAGE>   1

                                                                      EXHIBIT 11
   

                                 BACOU USA, INC.
                 STATEMENT RE: COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS
                 -----------------------------------------------

                                 (in thousands)
    
                                   (unaudited)



   
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                            Three Months Ended    Nine Months Ended
                                               September 30,         September 30,
                                            ------------------    -----------------
                                             1998       1997       1998       1997
                                            -------    -------    -------   -------
                                                               (as restated)
<S>                                         <C>        <C>        <C>       <C>    
 
Basic:
  Weighted average shares outstanding        17,604     17,318     17,599     17,314
                                            =======    =======    =======   ========

  Net income                                $ 6,675    $ 2,453    $15,510   $ 10,830
                                            =======    =======    =======   ========
  Per share amount                          $  0.38    $  0.14    $  0.88   $   0.62
                                            =======    =======    =======   ========

Diluted:

  Weighted average shares outstanding        17,604     17,318     17,599    17,314

  Net effect of dilutive stock options
   based on the treasury stock method
   using the average market price               184         35        123        15
                                            -------    -------    -------   -------
 Total diluted shares                        17,788     17,353     17,722    17,329
                                            =======    =======    =======   =======
  Net income                                $ 6,675    $ 2,453    $15,510   $10,830
                                            =======    =======    =======   =======
  Per share amount                          $  0.38    $  0.14    $  0.88   $  0.62
                                            =======    =======    =======   =======

</TABLE>
Rutland Plywood Site Visit

On September 11, 2013, EPA staff and managers visited Rutland Plywood Corporation’s manufacturing 

plant in Rutland, Vermont. Rutland Plywood has submitted comments on EPA’s recently proposed 

regulations implementing the Formaldehyde Standards for Composite Wood Products Act. Jack Barrett, 

President of Rutland Plywood, and Doug Babbitt, Executive Vice President, led EPA on a tour of the 

facilities. The tour included observing different steps involved in manufacturing (e.g., pressing, rotary 

lathe, lumber yard) and examples of different products manufactured by Rutland Plywood.
INDAGO FLIGHT

CHECKLIST

Arm wires Check

Arm Wire Connector Secure

Propellers Check

Propeller Friction Set

Propeller Direction Check

Motor Bell Check

Bolts Check

Landing Gear Locked

Arms Locked

Shell Check

Payload Secure

Battery Compartment Clear

Preflight Inspection Complete

Takeoff/Land Point Clear

Propeller Area Clear

Hand controller Charged

Flight Pack Charged

Vehicle Battery >10 min

Comms Strength Green

GPS Signal Green

Vehicle Heading Check

Map Uploaded

Flight Plan Uploaded

Payload Verify Video

HC Preflight Passed

Failsafes Set

Preflight Insp/Setup Complete

Safety Briefing Complete

Flight Mode HC Position

Prop Area Clear

Motors Armed

Left Joystick Advance

Clear of Terrain/Obstacles Check

Flight Mode As Desired

Vehicle Battery Monitor

Comms Strength Green

GPS Signal Green

Airspeed <15m/s

Wind Speed & Direction Check

During Spool up (Still on Ground)

Command full descent , disarm

During takeoff (<3m off ground)

Command full descent , disarm

Airborne/ Navigation

Option 1: Select “Land”

Option 2: Select “Home”-> “Land”

Option 3: In HC-POS, command 

descent , disarm on ground

Post Flight Inspection Complete

Flight Pack Removed/Stored

Payload Removed

Vehicle Folding Order 

Legs>Props>Arms

Low Battery

HC Mode:

Stage1: Overridable Decent

Stage2: Land Now

Guidance Mode:

Stage1: Fly Home

Stage2: Land Now

Loss of GPS

HC Mode:

Reverts to HC-ALT Mode

Guidance Mode:

Stage1: Hover no GPS

Stage2: After 5s Land Now 

Loss of Communications

Stage1: > 10s Fly Home

Stage2: > 30s Land @ Lnd Wpt

All Solid GPS Lock

Slow Blink Poor GPS Lock

Fast Blink Unusable GPS

Alternating Red/Green

Motor/ Hardware Error

No/Bad GPS Move Vehicle

High Vibration Bad Propellers,

 Loosen Prop-Nut

Not tracking straight Mag Cal

Toilet Bowl Effect Mag Cal

Bad Payload Control Clean Pins

Max Speed 15.6m/s (35mph)

Max Altitude 12,000ft. MSL

Max Climb Rate 2m/s (governed)

Max Decent Rate 2m/s (governed)

Max Wind 11.2m/s (25mph)

Ambient Temps -20°C to 45°C

Preflight Setup

Preflight Inspection Takeoff

Land Now / Abort

Airborne

Pack Up

Failsafes

Nav Light Indications

Failsafes

Troubleshooting

Failsafes

Flight Envelope

Failsafes
EXHIBIT
32.2












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 Annual Report of Opticon Systems, Inc (the “Company”) on
Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Cristino L. Perez,
Chief Accounting Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2001,
that:





The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.









Dated:
October 14, 2008





/s/
Cristino L.
Perez


Cristino
L. Perez, Chief Accounting Officer
#### Jose Alejandro VASQUEZ-TREJO, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 16-70434

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted October 23, 2017 *

Filed November 3, 2017

Robert G. Berke, Esquire, Attorney, Berke Law Offices, Canoga Park, CA, for Petitioner

OIL, M. Jocelyn Lopez Wright, DOJ— U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent

Before: LEAVY, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Jose Alejandro Vasquez-Trejo, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. *Avagyan v. Holder,*646 F.3d 672, 674 (9th Cir. 2011). We deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Vasquez-Trejo’s motion to reopen as untimely, where it was filed more than four years after his final order of removal, *see*8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Vasquez-Trejo failed to establish the due diligence required for equitable tolling of the filing deadline, *see Avagyan,*646 F.3d at 679 (equitable tolling is available to an alien who is prevented from timely filing a motion to reopen due to deception, fraud, or error, as long the alien exercises due diligence in discovering such circumstances).

Because the due diligence determination is dispositive, we do not reach Vasquez-Trejo’s remaining contentions regarding compliance with *Matter of Lozada,*19 I. & N. Dec. 637 (BIA 1988), or the alleged ineffective assistance of prior counsel. *See Simeonov v. Ashcroft,*371 F.3d 532, 538 (9th Cir. 2004) (courts and agencies ar.e not *756required to decide issues unnecessary to the results they reach).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

________________ Nos. 19 - 1782, 19 - 1794 , 19 - 1795 , 19 - 1796, 19 - 1993 , 19 - 1994 , 19 - 1995 , 19 - 1996

________________ NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner (Cross Respondent) v. ALARIS HEALTH AT CASTLE HILL,

Respondent (19 - 1782) Petitioner (19 - 1993) ALARIS HEALTH AT ROCHELLE PARK, Respondent (19 - 1794) Petition (19 - 1994) ALARIS HEALTH AT BOULEVARD EAST, Respondent (19 - 1795) Petitioner (19 - 1995) ALARIS HEALTH AT HARBORVIEW,

Respondent (19 - 1796) Petitioner (19 - 1996)

________________ Petition for Review and Cross - Application For Enforcement of an Order of The National Labor Relations Board (Nos. 22 - CA - 125034 , 22 - CA - 125866 , 22 - CA - 1 40619 ) Nos. 22 - CA - 124968 , 22 - CA - 125899 , 22 - CA - 140560) (Nos. 22 - CA - 12507 6 , 22 - CA - 125866 , 22 - CA - 131372 , 22 - CA - 140582) (Nos. 22 - CA - 125023 , 22 - CA - 125882 , 22 - CA - 140591)

_ _______________ Submitte d Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a)

March 12, 20202 Before: McKEE, AMBRO, and PHIPPS, Circuit Judges

(Opinion filed May 4, 2020 ) ORDER AMENDING NOT PRECEDENTIAL OPINION AMBRO, Circuit Judge IT IS NOW ORDERED that the Motion by Petitioner/Respondent NLRB requesting a correction is hereby granted and the Court’s Not Precedential Opinion in the above case filed May 4, 20 20 , be amended as follows: On page 1 0 , first line, replace the word “ Union’s ” with “ Board’s ” so the phrase reads: “ we grant the Board’s petition ” . By the Court, s/ Thomas L. Ambro Circuit Judge Dated: May 12, 2020 kr/ cc: All Counsel of R ecord
_________________________________________ 

 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 10, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

132974(24) Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 132974 

 COA: 274219 

Kent CC: 71-014614 

CHESTER PATTERSON,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s May 30, 2007 

order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was 

entered erroneously. 

p0830 

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

September 10, 2007 

 Clerk
# EUR-Lex - 32003D0101 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 32003D0101

**2003/101/EC: Commission Decision of 13 February 2003 amending for the 12th time Decision 2000/284/EC establishing the list of approved semen collection centres for imports of equine semen from third countries (Text with EEA relevance) 	(notified under document number C(2003) 499) **

*
Official Journal L 041 , 14/02/2003 P. 0046 - 0059 *

Commission Decision

of 13 February 2003

amending for the 12th time Decision 2000/284/EC establishing the list of approved semen collection centres for imports of equine semen from third countries

(notified under document number C(2003) 499)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2003/101/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 92/65/EEC of 13 July 1992, laying down animal health requirements governing trade in and imports into the Community of animals, semen, ova and embryos not subject to animal health requirements laid down in specific Community rules referred to in Annex A (I) to Directive 90/425/EEC(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1282/2002(2), and in particular Article 17 (3)(b) thereof,

Whereas:

(1) Commission Decision 2000/284/EC(3), as last amended by Decision 2002/776/EC(4), established the list of approved semen collection centres for imports of equine semen from third countries.

(2) The competent authorities of Australia and the United States of America officially informed the Commission of the approval in accordance with the provisions of Directive 92/65/EEC of an additional equine semen collection centre respectively.

(3) It is appropriate to amend the list of approved centres in the light of new information received from the third countries concerned, and to highlight the amendments in the Annex for clarity.

(4) Decision 2000/284/EC should be amended accordingly.

(5) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The Annex to Decision 2000/284/EC is replaced by the text in the Annex to this Decision.

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 13 February 2003.

For the Commission

David Byrne

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 268, 14.9.1992, p. 54.

(2) OJ L 187, 16.7.2002, p. 3.

(3) OJ L 94, 14.4.2000, p. 35.

(4) OJ L 267, 4.10.2002, p. 30.

ANNEX

"ANEXO/BILAG/ANHANG/ΠΑΡΑΡΤΗΜΑ/ANNEX/ANNEXE/ALLEGATO/BIJLAGE/ANEXO/LIITE/BILAGA

>TABLE>"
Exhibit
      32.2





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 Annual Report of V2K International, Inc. (the “Company”) on
      Form 10-KSB for the year ending September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Jerry A. Kukuchka,
      Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer) of the Company, certify,
      pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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.








Date:
                December 21, 2007
            /s/
              Jerry A. KukuchkaJerry
                A. Kukuchka, Chief Financial OfficerPrincipal
                Financial Officer
##### 



EXHIBIT 10.9
  AMENDMENT
    TO
    CUSTODY AGREEMENT
  THIS AMENDMENT
  RECITALS :
  WHEREAS
  WHEREAS
  NOW, THEREFORE
  AMENDMENT:
  Securities, Cash and Other
    Assets.
  Account.
  Instructions from Customer.
     1




---



##### 



Manner of Holding
    Securities.
  Actual Collection
    Required.
  Custodian Not a Fiduciary.
  Reporting.
  Custody Agreement Terms.
  Counterparts.
   2




---



##### 



IN WITNESS WHEREOF
    By:
    /s/  Garland
    S. Tucker, IIIName: Garland
    S. Tucker, III
    Its: President and CEO    By:
    /s/  Patricia
    BonnemereName: Patricia
    Bonnemere
    Its: Vice President 3
# Službeni list C 374/2013

| | ISSN 1977-1088
  doi:10.3000/19771088.C_2013.374.hrv |
| --- | --- |
| Službeni list
  Europske unije | C 374 |
| | |
| Hrvatsko izdanje | Informacije i objave | 5620. prosinca 2013. |

ISSN 1977-1088

doi:10.3000/19771088.C_2013.374.hrv

Službeni list

Europske unije

C 374

Hrvatsko izdanje

Informacije i objave

5620. prosinca 2013.

---

| Obavijest br. | Sadržaj | Stranica |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | IV.   Obavijesti |
| | OBAVIJESTI INSTITUCIJA, TIJELA, UREDA I AGENCIJA EUROPSKE UNIJE |
| | Nadzorni odbor OLAF-a |
| 2013/C 374/01 | Izvješće o aktivnostima nadzornog odbora OLAF-a – siječanj 2012. – siječanj 2013. | 1 |

Obavijest br.

Sadržaj

Stranica

IV.   Obavijesti

OBAVIJESTI INSTITUCIJA, TIJELA, UREDA I AGENCIJA EUROPSKE UNIJE

Nadzorni odbor OLAF-a

2013/C 374/01

Izvješće o aktivnostima nadzornog odbora OLAF-a – siječanj 2012. – siječanj 2013.

1

| HR | |
| --- | --- |

HR

---

IV. Obavijesti

OBAVIJESTI INSTITUCIJA, TIJELA, UREDA I AGENCIJA EUROPSKE UNIJE

Nadzorni odbor OLAF-a

| 20.12.2013 | HR | Službeni list Europske unije | C 374/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.12.2013

HR

Službeni list Europske unije

C 374/1

---

Izvješće o aktivnostima nadzornog odbora OLAF-a

siječanj 2012. – siječanj 2013.

(2013/C 374/01)

Ovaj će dokument biti objavljen u posebnom izdanju Službenog lista Europske unije na hrvatskom jeziku ako zadovolji potrebne uvjete.

---