alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18
- 7305

UMADINE HATCH , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. DR. WILSON, NC Correctional Institution for Women; KENNETH PRICE, M.D.; UNC HOSPITALS , Defendants

- Appellees , and DR. BUCKMIRE, Ear, Nose & Throat

- UNC Medical Center , Defendant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh

. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. ( 5:17

- ct

- 03030

- BO )

Submitted : December 20, 2018 Decided: December 27, 2018

Before DIAZ and RICHARDSON , Circuit Judges , and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Umadine Hatch , Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Pharr McCullough , Madeleine Michelle Pfefferle , YOUNG MOORE & HENDERSON, PA , Raleigh, North Carolina, for2 Appellee Stephen M. Wilson

.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.3 PER CURIAM:
Umadine Hatch seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting summary judgment and dismissing, for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, Hatch’s claims of deliberate indifference to her medical needs when she was a North Carolina prisoner

. We di smiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely
filed. Parties are accorded 30 days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district c ourt extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement.” Bowles v. Russell , 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2 007).
The district court’s order was entered on the docket on September 12, 2018

. The notice of appeal was filed on October 18, 2018

. * Because Hatch failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we 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

* For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack , 487 U.S. 266 (1988).
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 860 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 860

   To require a General Accounting Office study of activities of the 
    North/South Center in support of the North American Free Trade 
                               Agreement.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                 May 25 (legislative day, May 15), 1995

   Ms. Snowe introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
           referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To require a General Accounting Office study of activities of the 
    North/South Center in support of the North American Free Trade 
                               Agreement.
    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE STUDY OF ACTIVITIES OF THE NORTH/
              SOUTH CENTER IN SUPPORT OF THE NORTH AMERICAN FREE TRADE 
              AGREEMENT.

    (a) Study of Certain Activities of the North/South Center During 
Consideration of the North American Free Trade Agreement.--The 
Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct a study on the 
activities of the North/South Center located in Miami, Florida that had 
the affect of encouraging Congress to approve implementing legislation 
for the North American Free Trade Agreement. This study shall include, 
but shall not be limited to, consideration of whether any United States 
Government funds were used for books (including Assessments of the 
North American Free Trade Agreement published in 1993), publications, 
or other activities which had the affect of advocating congressional 
approval of the North American Free Trade Agreement, and whether such 
materials or activities violated any laws, regulations, or guidelines 
on the use of Federal funds for lobbying activities.
    (b) Report to Congress.--Not later than six months after the date 
of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United States 
shall prepare and submit a report of the findings of such study to the 
Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and Committee on 
International Relations of the House of Representatives.
                                 <all>
```
City Manager 

JOE C. THOMAS 

City Attorney 

DAVID F. RICHARDS 

Post Office Box 760 

Clovis, New Mexico 

88102-0760 

Phone (575) 769-7828 

April 4th, 2013 

MrDougVoss 

Great Lakes Airlines 

CLOVIS CITY COMMISSION 

Mayor 

DAVID M. LANSFORD 

Mayor Pro-Tern 

LENVOHS 

Commissioners 

CHRIS BRYANT 

RANDAL S. CROWDER 

JUAN F. GARZA 

FIDEL MADRID 

ROBERT SANDOVAL 

DAN STODDARD 

SANDRA TAYLOR-SAWYER 

_, ... ,, 

····i •······ 

Dear Mr. Voss; 

Great Lakes Air Service from Clovis, NM to Denver CO 

It is the City's desire to provide the best possible air service to the citizens of Clovis. 

The City, along with the Federal Aviation Administration and State of New Mexico 

has invested a significant amount of funding into this Airport. As a part of this 

investment the city is attempting to provide efficient and reliable air service to a major 

hub and has selected your Airline to accomplish this. 

We are concerned that since establishing the route to Denver the level of service 

provided by Great Lakes has been less than acceptable. The citizens of this 

community are not able to depend on your service to be on time or to even fly on any 

chosen day. 

Since this contract began on December 1, 2012 and continuing through February 28, 

2013 the scheduled flights displayed the following deviations: 

TOTAL FLIGHTS SCHEDULED 

Departures 169 

Arrivals 171 

FLIGHTS CANCELLED FOR OTHER THAN WEATHER/ ATC 

Departures 9 

Arrivals 8 

LATE FLIGHTS 

Departures 

Arrivals 

1-5 Minutes 

6+ Minutes 

1-15 Minutes 46 

16+ Minutes 87 

6 

69 

..... ./cont .... 
Mr. Doug Voss 

Great Lakes Airlines 

April 4th, 2013 

Page -2-

These numbers do not truly reflect the magnitude of the concern when considering the number of 

flights that are more than one hour late. As you know, service like this drives customers away 

and we feel that this is occurring in Clovis. The City will never be able to establish an effective 

and efficient service when the airline that serves the community cannot establish and maintain a 

published schedule for flights. 

We also have concern that the change in routing which eliminated the only New Mexico stop 

was not discussed with the City prior to being published. We feel that a change of this magnitude 

should have been explained and agreed upon prior to a final decision being made unilaterally by 

Great Lakes Airlines. 

It is my sincere hope that Great Lakes will work expeditiously to correct the issues addressed in 

this letter. I would also appreciate receiving your written response outlining your proposed 

corrective actions. 

Sincerely, 

David M. Lansford 

Mayor 

cc: Mr. Dennis DeVaney, US DOT EAS Program
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 48 (Friday, March 11, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14040-14041]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-05203]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Southwest Research Institute-Cooperative 
Research Group on Mechanical Stratigraphy and Natural Deformation in 
the Permian Strata of Texas and New Mexico: Implications for 
Exploitation of the Permian Basin--Phase 2

    Notice is hereby given that, on February 14, 2022, pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Southwest Research 
Institute--Cooperative Research Group on Mechanical Stratigraphy and 
Natural Deformation in the Permian Strata of Texas and New Mexico: 
Implications for Exploitation of the Permian Basin--Phase 2 (``Permian 
Basin--Phase 2'') has filed written notifications simultaneously with 
the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing 
changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose 
of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust 
plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. 
Specifically, Noble Energy, Inc. changed its name to Chevron U.S.A. 
Inc.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned 
activity of the group research project. Membership in this group 
research project remains open, and Permian Basin--Phase 2 intends to 
file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in 
membership.
    On August 15, 2019, Permian Basin--Phase 2 filed its original 
notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of 
Justice published a notice

[[Page 14041]]

in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on 
September 13, 2019 (84 FR 48377).
    The last notification was filed with the Department on January 10, 
2020. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to 
Section 6(b) of the Act on January 31, 2020 (85 FR 5719).

Suzanne Morris,
Chief, Premerger and Division Statistics, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 2022-05203 Filed 3-10-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
# EUR-Lex - 32003D0363 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 32003D0363

**2003/363/EC: Commission Decision of 14 May 2003 approving the plan for the eradication of classical swine fever in feral pigs in certain areas of Belgium (Text with EEA relevance) (notified under document number C(2003) 1529) **

*
Official Journal L 124 , 20/05/2003 P. 0043 - 0044 *

Commission Decision

of 14 May 2003

approving the plan for the eradication of classical swine fever in feral pigs in certain areas of Belgium

(notified under document number C(2003) 1529)

(Only the French and Dutch texts are authentic)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2003/363/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 2001/89/EC of 23 October 2001 on Community measures for the control of classical swine fever(1), and in particular Article 16(1), thereof,

Whereas:

(1) In November 2002 classical swine fever was confirmed in the feral pig population in Belgium.

(2) In the light of the epidemiological situation, Belgium has submitted a plan for the eradication of classical swine fever in feral pigs in the concerned areas of Belgium.

(3) The submitted plan has been examined and found to comply with the provisions of Directive 2001/89/EC and should therefore be approved.

(4) For the sake of transparency it is appropriate to indicate in the present Decision the geographical areas of Belgium where the eradication plan shall be implemented.

(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 plan submitted by Belgium for the eradication of classical swine fever in feral pigs in the areas referred to in the Annex is approved.

Article 2

Belgium shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions for implementing the plan referred to in Article 1.

Article 3

This Decision is addressed to Belgium.

Done at Brussels, 14 May 2003.

For the Commission

David Byrne

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 316, 1.12.2001, p. 5.

ANNEX

The territory of Belgium located in-between:

- the motorway E40 (A3) from the border with Germany until the cross with road N68,

- then, the road N68 in the southern direction, at Eupen continuing into the Aachenerstraße until the cross with the Paveestraße,

- then, the Paveestraße until the cross with the Kirchstraße,

- then, the Kirchstraße, continuing into the Bergstraße and the Neustraße until the cross with the road Olengraben,

- then, the road Olengraben, continuing into the Haasstraße until the cross with the Malmedystraße,

- then, the Malmedystraße, continuing into the road N68 in the southern direction until the cross with the road N62,

- then, the road N62 in the eastern and the southern direction until the cross with motorway E42 (A27),

- then, the motorway E42 (A27) until the border with Germany.
<PAGE>   1


                                                                      EXHIBIT 11

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         EARNINGS PER SHARE CALCULATION
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                       THREE MONTHS                   NINE MONTHS
                                          ENDED                          ENDED
                                       SEPTEMBER 30,                  SEPTEMBER 30,
                                   1997            1996           1997          1996
                               -----------    ------------   ------------  -------------
<S>                            <C>            <C>            <C>           <C>      
Weighted Average Shares         7,528,102       5,138,836      7,508,200      4,588,202
Outstanding

Net Loss                       $ (626,524)    $(2,701,700)   $(4,581,089)   $(5,200,913)
                               ----------     -----------    -----------    -----------
Primary Loss Per Share         $    (0.08)    $     (0.53)   $     (0.61)   $     (1.13)
                               ----------     -----------    -----------    -----------
</TABLE>
HRTMENTO F 

## •mmKi m SERVE D JUN E 7 , 201 1 U.S . DEPARTMEN T O FTRANSPORTATIO N

OFFIC E O FHEARING S WASHINGTON , D C IN TH E MATTE RO F EMPIR E FLIGH T ACADEM Y FA A DOCKE T NO . [T O B E ASSIGNED ]

(Civi l Penalt y Action ) FDM S NO . FAA-2011-029 0 ORDE RO FCHIE FADMINISTRATIV E LA WJUDG E GRANTIN G MOTIO N FO REXTENSIO N O FTIM E B y motio n date dJun e 6 , 2011 , Complainan t move dfor

an extensio n o f

tim e t o answe r Respondent' s Motio n for Partia l Summary Judgment . Complainan t state s tha t

Responden t

ha d indicate di t

ha dn o objectio n t o th e extension . Fo r goo dcaus e shown , Complainant' s motio n i s granted . Complainant' s answe r t o Respondent' s motio n may b e file do n o r befor e Jun e 24 , 2011 . S O ORDERED . lonni e A . Yode : Chie f Administrativ e LawMdg e* ' ! ^ •s^ M i'A- .



### ^/ , Fpm mFAA-201 1 -029 0 (Civil Perialt

y Action )

Federa l Aviatio n Administration 80 0 Independenc e Avenue , S.W . Washington , D C 2059 1 Attention : Hearing Docke t Clerk , Al J Wilbu r Wrigh t Building ONE COP Y (VIA FIRST-Od f Gregor y S . Winton , Respondent' s Couns ^ Th e Aviation La

w Fir m On e ResearchCourt , Suitse45 0 Rockville , M

D 2085 0 TEL : 301^294-855 0 , . s>l^, FAX : 301-294-252 5 Zachar y M . Herman , Complainant' s Co t Offio e o f j^ltifgiona l Counsel , AEA-.?, . Easter n Region Federa l Avia|iQ n Administratio n ; , , 1 Aviatio n Plit^a , Roo

m56 1 Jamaica , N

Y 1143 4 TEL : 718-553-325 8 FAX : 718-533-569 9 The Honorable Ronni e A . Yoder , Chief Administrativ e La

w Judg e U.S . Departmen

t of Transportatio n ' Offic e o f Heaijiigs , M-20 , Roo

m£12^31 ! i ^ e New'Jersey Avenue , S.E . Wiashingtor

^ D C 2059 0 TEL : 202-366-214 2 FAX : 202-366-753 6

' Servic e WfliSt)

y U.S . Mail . Fo r

servicftjto

j Aviatio n A(^^itiiation , 600 Indi0pendeQC9,'j£( D C 20591 ; Atj^tipn : Hearin g Docke t Clerik , M ir- '



### rESYCdS^BVFAX )

Bf?i' - :^.i !

':.'eiO X t > I.- -
^MM'Ml' V

•'• ^ 

# H *i ! T^CTHm M 

### ^l^^ M ( . j^jiSiKaKlfl K y '• ^H^SKS S ;' / >^'>%lagBl^B '.''^^ ^ 

# '"' 1 ^^iM H 'l^^i^H^H I 

### m|H H 

# ^^^ 1

W^^^KB^ ^ ji " 

### H^TM?^'"^f?-. BIMJ^^^ X *gd

^ 

# [l^teS v 

# K^«":; . H^^M" . H|^^4^' ^ ^^^H^^u^^l'" " 

# m/l^kp. l ^•H^sSKSSla^

' ^|^HJHn[^vs 9 th

e folloy^i i 

### ^HHH|p3itig--^uii)-2^ # 1^1^ : Federa l 

### lip5i^»hington

,

fM'''- .
Order entered November 6, 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 13

- 00878

- CR

MARIO LOPEZ JUCUP, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 265th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Co urt Cause No. F10

- 55339

- R



### O RDER

The Court ORDERS the trial court to make findings of fact regarding whether appellant

has been deprived of the clerk’s and reporter’s records because of ineffective counsel, indigence,

or for any other reason.

 The trial co urt shall first determine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal. If the trial court determines that appellant does not desire to prosecute the appeal, it shall make a finding to that effect.

 If the trial court determines that appellant desire s to prosecute the appeal, it shall next determine whether appellant is indigent and entitled to proceed without payment of costs for the clerk’s and reporter’s records. If appellant is entitled to proceed without payment
of costs, the trial court shall m ake a finding to that effect. Moreover, if appellant is indigent, the trial court is ORDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure effective representation, which may include appointment of new counsel. If the trial court finds appellant is not indigent, it shall determine whether retained counsel has abandoned the appeal. The trial court shall next determine: (1) the name and address of each court reporter who

recorded the proceedings in this cause; (2) the court reporter’s explanation fo r the delay in filing the reporter’s record; and (3) the earliest date by which the reporter’s record can

be filed.

 The trial court shall next determine the date by which the clerk’s record will be filed.

We ORDER the trial court to transmit a supplemen tal record, containing the written

findings of fact, any supporting documentation, and any orders, to this Court within THIRTY

DAYS of the date of this order.

The appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with this order. It shall be

reinstate d thirty days from the date of this order or when the supplemental record is received,

whichever is earlier.

/s/ LANA MYERS

JUSTICE
#### Dennis Lee CARTWRIGHT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Hoyt C. CUPP, Superintendent, Oregon State Penitentiary, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 80-3502.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted June 11, 1981.

Decided July 13, 1981.

Rehearing Denied Aug. 6, 1981.

Dennis Lee Cartwright, pro se.

Rudolph S. Westerband, Asst. U. S. Atty., Salem, Or., for defendant-appellee.

Before GOODWIN and SNEED, Circuit Judges, and Halbert,* District Judge.

*

 The Honorable Sherrill Halbert, Senior United States District Judge for the Eastern District of California, sitting by designation.

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Dennis Lee Cartwright pled guilty to murder and was sentenced to life imprisonment. After being denied an early parole, he commenced state post-conviction proceedings alleging constitutional defects in his guilty plea.

*1104After taking his state court remedies to the intermediate appellate level without success, he brought federal habeas corpus proceedings and now appeals a summary judgment in favor of the state. While Cartwright alleges that he has exhausted his state court remedies, there is nothing in the record to show that he sought review in the Oregon Supreme Court. He recites only that he appealed to the Oregon Court of Appeals. The district court should have dismissed the petition for failure to exhaust. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b). *See Carothers v. Rhay,*594 F.2d 225, 228 (9th Cir. 1979); *Williams v. Nelson,*431 F.2d 932 (9th Cir. 1970).

Affirmed.
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">The People of the State of New York, Respondent,<br><br>against<br><br>Nicholas L. Douglas, Appellant.</font></b></div><br><br><p>Appellate Advocates (Benjamin S. Litman of counsel), for appellant.Queens County District Attorney (John M. Castellano, Johnnette Traill and Anastasia Spanakos of counsel), for respondent.</p><p>Appeal from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Stephanie L. Zaro, J.), rendered November 5, 2015. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the third degree. Assigned counsel has submitted a brief in accordance with Anders v California (386 US 738 [1967]), seeking leave to withdraw as counsel.</p><p>ORDERED that the judgment of conviction is affirmed.</p><p>We are satisfied with the sufficiency of the brief filed by defendant's assigned counsel pursuant to <i>Anders v California</i> (386 US 738 [1967]), and, upon an independent review of the record, we conclude that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel's application for leave to withdraw as counsel is, therefore, granted (<i>see id.</i>;<i> Matter of Giovanni S. [Jasmin A.]</i>, 89 AD3d 252 [2011]; <i>People v Paige</i>, 54 AD2d 631 [1976]; <i>cf. People v Gonzalez</i>, 47 NY2d 606 [1979]).</p><p>PESCE, P.J., WESTON and ALIOTTA, JJ., concur.</p><br>ENTER:<br>Paul Kenny<br>Chief Clerk<br>Decision Date: February 02, 2018<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_2_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
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 Cienega Creek Holdings Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB/A for the year ended March 31, 2008 as filed with
the Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof (the  "Report"),
the undersigned,  in the  capacities  and  on  the  dates  indicated  below,
herby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:

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:  August 13, 2008


/s/ Michael A. Klinicki
-------------------------------------
Michael A. Klinicki, C.F.O., Treasurer and
principal accounting officer