alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Frankie L. MCCOY, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, (“DPSCS”); Gary Maynard, Secretary, DPSCS; *Gregg*L. Hershberger, Secretary, DPSCS; Commissioner Stouffer; Dayena Corcoran, Warden; Laura Armstead, Assistant Warden; CEO of Maryland Correctional Enterprises, Shiloh; Correctional Officer Bivens; Correctional Officer Nivens; Correctional Officer Washington; Correctional Officer Henry; Correctional Officer Osles; Correctional Officer Gatewood; Correctional Officer Kramo; Correctional Officer Daughtery; Correctional Officer Bailey; Correctional Officer Fliggins; Correctional Officer Mackall; Social Worker Rembraundat; Social Worker Carya, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-7028

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: November 21, 2017

Decided: November 28, 2017

Frankie L. McCoy, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Stephanie Judith Lane-Weber, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

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

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Frankie McCoy, Sr., appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his civil action asserting claims under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C.A. §§ 701 to 7961 (West 2008 & Supp. 2017); the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 to 12213 (2012); and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *McCoy v. Md. Dep’t of Pub. Safety & Corr. Servs.,*No. 1:16-cv-00090-JFM, 2017 WL 3251558 (D. Md. July 28, 2017). We grant McCoy’s motion to amend/correct his informal brief. 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*
##### 



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
  (1)
    
    The Trusts Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended
December 31, 2007, 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 Trust.
 /s/ Thomas J. FernandesThomas J. FernandesChief Financial OfficerDate: March 25, 2008
<PAGE>   1

                                 Exhibit 4(c)



                                July 21, 1997



Walter Stepan
President and CEO
Bacou USA, Inc.
10 Thurber Boulevard
Smithfield, RI  02917

      Re:   Citizens Bank of Rhode Island's Revolving Line of Credit Agreement
            dated May 21, 1997

Dear Mr. Stepan:

      I am writing to set forth our agreement with respect to a certain
Revolving Line of Credit Agreement by and between Bacou USA, Inc. ("Bacou") and
Citizens Bank of Rhode Island (the "Bank") dated May 21, 1997 (the "Agreement").
In specific, I am writing to set forth our agreement with respect to amending
the definition of "Revolving Credit Termination Date", which definition appears
on Page 2 of the Agreement. As we have agreed, that definition is hereby amended
to read as follows:

      "Revolving Credit Termination Date." Revolving Credit Termination Date
      means April 30, 1998, unless extended in writing by Lender."

      Except as modified and amended hereby, the Agreement shall remain in full
force and effect and is in all other respects ratified and confirmed. Please
indicate your acceptance of this modification to the Agreement by signing where
indicated below.

                                   Sincerely,

                                   CITIZENS BANK OF RHODE ISLAND


                                   By:   /s/J. Bruce Hallworth
                                      ------------------------ 
                                         J. Bruce Hallworth
                                         Senior Vice President
<PAGE>   2
                                 AGREED AND ACCEPTED BY:

                                 BACOU USA, INC.

                                 By:  /s/ Walter Stepan
                                    -------------------------------------
                                      Walter Stepan
                                      President & Chief Executive Officer

                                 Dated: 8/4/97

                                 By:  /s/ Philip B. Barr
                                    -------------------------------------
                                      Philip B. Barr
                                      Executive Vice President
                                      and Chief Financial Officer

                                 Dated: 8/4/97



                                      -2-
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Troy Leon THOMPSON, Appellant. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Connie M. THOMPSON, Appellant. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Shelton OWENS, Appellant.

Nos. 10625-10627.

United States Court of Appeals Fourth Circuit.

Argued Oct. 3, 1966.

Decided Oct. 14, 1966.

James B. Ledford, Charlotte, N. C. (William M. Nicholson, Charlotte, N. C., on the brief) for appellants.

William H. Murdock, U. S. Atty. (H. Marshall Simpson, Asst. U. S. Atty., on the brief) for appellee.

Before BOREMAN, BRYAN and BELL, Circuit Judges.

*562PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of the record, the briefs and oral arguments of counsel, the court finds the evidence was sufficient to warrant the convictions of the appellants for violating the Internal Revenue statutes relating to non-taxpaid whiskey, 26 U.S.C. §§ 5601(a) (12), 5205(a) (2) and 5604(a) (1), and observes no error at trial. The judgments on appeal will not be disturbed.

Affirmed.
#### BIN SHEN, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 14-73046

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 24, 2017 *

Filed June 1, 2017

Jisheng Li, Attorney, Law Office of Jisheng Li, Honolulu, HI, for Petitioner

OIL, Rachel Louise Browning, Trial Attorney, Juria L. Jones, Trial Attorney, *885DOJ — 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: THOMAS, Chief Judge, and SILVERMAN and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Bin Shen, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings, *Zehatye v. Gonzales,*453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006), and we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s conclusion that, even if credible, Shen failed to demonstrate the harm he experienced in China rose to the level of persecution. *See He v. Holder,*749 F.3d 792, 796 (9th Cir. 2014) (applicant must show “substantial evidence of further persecution” apart from spouse’s forced abortion); *Gu v. Gonzales,*454 F.3d 1014, 1019-21 (9th Cir. 2006) (evidence did not compel the conclusion that petitioner suffered past persecution). Substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s conclusion that Shen did not establish a fear of future persecution in China based on the past family planning incidents. *See Gu,*454 F.3d at 1022 (9th Cir. 2006) (petitioner did not “present compelling, objective evidence demonstrating a well-founded fear of persecution.”). Thus, his asylum claim fails.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Exhibit
23.1








CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





We
consent to the incorporation by reference in (i) Registration Statement
Nos. 333-149583 and 333-163842 of Duncan Energy Partners L.P. on Form S-3;
and (ii) Registration Statement No. 333-164852 of Duncan Energy Partners L.P. on
Form S-8 of our reports dated March 1, 2010, relating to the consolidated
financial statements of Duncan Energy Partners L.P. and subsidiaries (which
report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory
paragraph indicating the financial statements of the Company were prepared
from the separate records maintained by Enterprise Products Partners L.P. or
affiliates and may not necessarily be indicative of the conditions that would
have existed or the results of operations if the Company had been operated as an
unaffiliated entity), and the effectiveness of Duncan Energy Partners L.P. and
subsidiaries’ internal control over financial reporting, appearing in this
Annual Report on Form 10-K of Duncan Energy Partners L.P. for the year ended
December 31, 2009.











/s/
DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP





Houston,
Texas


March 1,
2010
### C OURT OF 

### A PPEALS FOR THE



### F IRST 

### D ISTRICT OF 

### T EXAS AT 

### H OUSTON



### O RDER ON 

### M OTION

Cause Number: 01

- 13

- 00956

- CR

Trial Court Cause

Number: 1886153

Style: Kerry Bernard Laurent

v The State of Texas

Date motion filed * : September 9, 2014

Type of motion: Motion for Extension of Time to File Reply Brief

Party filing motion: Appellant

Document to be filed: Reply Brief

Is appeal accelerated? Yes No

If motion to extend time:

Original due date: September 10, 2014

Number of previous extensions granted: 0

Date Requested: October 10, 2014

Ordered that motion is:

Granted

If document is to be filed, document due: October 10, 2014

Absent extraordinary circumstances, the Court will not grant additional motions to extend time

Denied

Dismissed ( e.g. , want of jurisdiction, moot)

Other:

Judge's signature: /s/ Laura Carter Higley

Acting individually Acting for the Court

Panel consists of

Date: September 1 6 , 2014
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5872 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify the taxation of 

mead and certain low alcohol by volume wine. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 14, 2016 

Mr. NUNES (for himself and Mr. THOMPSON of California) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify 

the taxation of mead and certain low alcohol by volume 

wine. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Low Alcohol Wine 

5 Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. MODIFICATION OF TAXATION OF MEAD AND CER7 TAIN LOW ALCOHOL BY VOLUME WINE. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 5041 of the Internal Rev9 enue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the 

10 following: 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5872 IH

1 ‘‘(h) MEAD AND LOW ALCOHOL BY VOLUME

2 WINE.— 

3 ‘‘(1) TAX AND TAX RATE.—For purposes of 

4 subsections (a) and (b)(1), mead and low alcohol by 

5 volume wine shall be treated as still wines containing 

6 not more than 14 percent of alcohol by volume. 

7 ‘‘(2) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of paragraph 

8 (1)— 

9 ‘‘(A) MEAD.—The term ‘mead’ means a 

10 wine— 

11 ‘‘(i) containing not more than 0.64 

12 gram of carbon dioxide per hundred milli13 liters of wine, except that the Secretary 

14 may by regulations prescribe such toler15 ances to this limitation as may be reason16 ably necessary in good commercial prac17 tice, 

18 ‘‘(ii) which is derived solely from 

19 honey and water, 

20 ‘‘(iii) which contains no fruit product 

21 or fruit flavoring, and 

22 ‘‘(iv) which contains less than 8.5 per23 cent alcohol by volume. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 5872 IH

1 ‘‘(B) LOW ALCOHOL BY VOLUME WINE DE2 FINED.—The term ‘low alcohol by volume wine’ 

3 means a wine— 

4 ‘‘(i) containing not more than 0.64 

5 gram of carbon dioxide per hundred milli6 liters of wine, except that the Secretary 

7 may by regulations prescribe such toler8 ances to this limitation as may be reason9 ably necessary in good commercial prac10 tice, 

11 ‘‘(ii) which is derived— 

12 ‘‘(I) primarily from grapes, or 

13 ‘‘(II) from grape juice concen14 trate and water, 

15 ‘‘(iii) which contains no fruit product 

16 or fruit flavoring other than grape, and 

17 ‘‘(iv) which contains less than 8.5 per18 cent alcohol by volume.’’. 

19 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

20 this section shall apply to wines removed during calendar 

21 years beginning after December 31, 2016. 

Æ 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 751 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 751

   To provide that certain games of chance conducted by a nonprofit 
     organization not be treated as an unrelated business of such 
                             organization.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                  May 3 (legislative day, May 1), 1995

   Mr. Exon introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To provide that certain games of chance conducted by a nonprofit 
     organization not be treated as an unrelated business of such 
                             organization.

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

SECTION 1. CONDUCTING OF CERTAIN GAMES OF CHANCE NOT TREATED AS 
              UNRELATED TRADE OR BUSINESS.

    Section 1834 of the Tax Reform Act of 1986 is repealed for games 
conducted after October 22, 1986, and subparagraph (A) of section 
311(a)(3) of the Tax Reform Act of 1984 shall be applied and 
administered as if such section 1834 (and the amendments made by such 
section 1834) had not been enacted.
                                 <all>
```
##### 



Exhibit 35.2
 SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT FOR
 KEYCORP STUDENT LOAN TRUST 2006-A
 
  1.
    
    A review of the activities and performance of the Subservicer under the Subservicing
Agreement, dated as of December 1, 2006, between the Subservicer and KeyBank National
Association, as Master Servicer (the Servicing Agreement), for the period from December
7, 2006 (the date of issuance of asset-backed securities by the KeyCorp Student Loan Trust
2006-A) through December 31, 2006 (the Reporting Period) has been made under the
supervision of the undersigned; and2.
    
    To the best knowledge of the undersigned, based on such review, the Subservicer has
fulfilled all of its obligations under the Servicing Agreement in all material respects
throughout the Reporting Period.
  GREAT LAKES EDUCATIONAL LOAN SERVICES, INC.By:
    /s/ Michael J. NoackName:
    Michael J. NoackTitle:
    Chief Servicing OfficerBy:
    /s/ Bruce J. RaskeName:
    Bruce J. RaskeTitle:
    Chief Administration and Loan
Consolidation Officer
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 49 (Monday, March 14, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 14317]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-05348]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration


Notice of Intent To Release Certain Properties From All Terms, 
Conditions, Reservations and Restrictions of a Quitclaim Deed Agreement 
Between the City of Melbourne and the Federal Aviation Administration 
for the Melbourne International Airport, Melbourne, FL

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA hereby provides notice of intent to release 5.0 acres 
at the Melbourne International Airport, Melbourne, FL from the 
conditions, reservations, and restrictions as contained in a Quitclaim 
Deed agreement between the FAA and the City of Melbourne, dated August 
6, 1947. The release of property will allow the City of Melbourne to 
use the property for other than aeronautical purposes. The property is 
located located on 680 N Apollo Boulevard at the Melbourne 
International Airport in Brevard County. The parcel is currently 
designated as surplus property. The property will be released of its 
federal obligations for the purpose of selling the property at fair 
market value for commercial operation of an existing building and 
parking lot for the United States Postal Service. The fair market value 
lease of this parcel has been determined to be $1,800,000. Documents 
reflecting the Sponsor's request are available, by appointment only, 
for inspection at the Melbourne International Airport and the FAA 
Airports District Office.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 125 of The Wendell H. Ford Aviation 
Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century (AIR-21) requires the 
FAA to provide an opportunity for public notice and comment prior to 
the ``waiver'' or ``modification'' of a sponsor's Federal obligation to 
use certain airport land for non-aeronautical purposes.

DATES: Comments are due on or before April 13, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Documents are available for review at Melbourne 
International Airport, and the FAA Airports District Office, 8427 
SouthPark Circle, Suite 524, Orlando, FL 32819. Written comments on the 
Sponsor's request must be delivered or mailed to: Marisol Elliott, 
Community Planner, Orlando Airports District Office, 8427 SouthPark 
Circle, Suite 524, Orlando, FL 32819.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marisol Elliott, Community Planner, 
Orlando Airports District Office, 8427 SouthPark Circle, Suite 524, 
Orlando, FL 32819.

Bartholomew Vernace,
Manager, Orlando Airports District Office, Southern Region.
[FR Doc. 2022-05348 Filed 3-11-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
**Exhibit
      32.2**








CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO


18
      U.S.C
      SECTIONS 1350,


AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES -OXLEY ACTS OF 2002








In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Wireless Xcessories Group, Inc. (the
      “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2005 as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report”), I
      Ronald E. Badke, Chief 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, to the best of my knowledge, that:





(1)
      The
      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 report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.








Date: November
                  4, 2005
                By:
                /s/ Ronald
                  E. BadkeRonald
                  E. BadkeChief
                  Financial Officer
# EUR-Lex - 32003R1813 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 32003R1813

**Commission Regulation (EC) No 1813/2003 of 15 October 2003 amending Regulation (EEC) No 2273/93 determining the intervention centres for cereals **

*
Official Journal L 265 , 16/10/2003 P. 0023 - 0024 *

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1813/2003

of 15 October 2003

amending Regulation (EEC) No 2273/93 determining the intervention centres for cereals

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 of 30 June 1992 on the common organisation of the market in cereals(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1104/2003(2), and in particular Article 5 thereof,

Whereas:

(1) The intervention centres are set out in the Annex to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2273/93(3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1938/2002(4). Certain Member States have submitted requests to make amendments to some of those centres.

(2) Regulation (EEC) No 2273/93 should be amended accordingly.

(3) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The Annex to Regulation (EEC) No 2273/93 is hereby amended in accordance with the Annex to this Regulation.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 15 October 2003.

For the Commission

Franz Fischler

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 181, 1.7.1992, p. 21.

(2) OJ L 158, 27.6.2003, p. 1.

(3) OJ L 207, 18.8.1993, p. 1.

(4) OJ L 297, 31.10.2002, p. 6.

ANNEX

The Annex to Regulation (EEC) No 2273/93 is amended as follows:

1. In the BUNDESREPUBLIK DEUTSCHLAND-Schleswig-Holstein section, the "Burg auf Fehmarn" centre is renamed "Fehmarn".

2. In the SUOMI/FINLAND section, the "Loviisa" centre is replaced by "Kaipiainen".

3. In the FRANCE section, in the department "Loiret-45", "maize" is deleted from the "Patay" centre and "barley" is added to the "Meung-sur-Loir" centre.