alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lewellyn Terrell VAUGHT, a/k/a Gee Bee, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-7121

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: December 19, 2017

Decided: December 22, 2017

Lewellyn Terrell Vaught, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer P. May-Parker, Stephen Aubrey West, Assistant United States Attorneys, Laura Howard, Scott Andrew Lem-mon, Joshua Bryan Royster; Timothy Severo, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before SHEDD, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges,

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Lewellyn Terrell Vaught appeals the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for reduction of sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *United States v. Vaught,*No. 7:10-cr-00075-D-2 (E.D.N.C. filed Aug. 16, 2017 & entered Aug. 17, 2017), 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*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 7
<CIK> 0001007008
<NAME> VALLEY FORGE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                           476,265
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                       2,558
<MORTGAGE>                                           0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                 586,887
<CASH>                                           4,515
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                           2,215,669
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                         119,845
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,178,038
<POLICY-LOSSES>                              2,540,154
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                                  0
<POLICY-OTHER>                                 142,776
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                           48,003
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,500
<OTHER-SE>                                     251,765
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,178,038
<PREMIUMS>                                     158,324
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                             18,108
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                            (17,902)
<OTHER-INCOME>                                   5,262
<BENEFITS>                                     151,002
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                      6,065
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                            13,714
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (6,989)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (2,993)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,996)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                        (234)
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,230)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (84.60)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (84.60)
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                       0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                  0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                    0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                   0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                     0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                      0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0


</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Phillip Jerome MURPHY, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-7548

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: February 22, 2018

Decided: February 27, 2018

Phillip Jerome Murphy, Appellant Pro Se. William David Muhr, Assistant United States Attorney, V. Kathleen Dougherty, Norfolk, Virginia; Kevin Patrick Hudson, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Newport News, Virginia, for Appellee.

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

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Phillip Jerome Murphy seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (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 motion 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 Murphy has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the *332materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED*
#### Gary Lee SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Officer J. AITA; Salisbury City, Defendants-Appellees, and Salisbury City Police Department; PFC J. Sander, #1122; PFC J. Dimare; PFC J. Burt, Defendants.

No. 17-6783

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: January 31, 2018

Decided: February 14, 2018

Gary Lee Smith, Appellant Pro Se. Ernest I. Cornbrooks IV, KARPINSKI, CO-LARESI *&*KARP, PA, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Before AGEE, KEENAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

*164PER CURIAM:

Gary Lee Smith appeals the district court’s order dismissing in part his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint for failure to state a claim. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *Smith v. Aita,*No. 8:14-cv-03487-CCB, 2016 WL 3693713 (D. Md. July 12, 2016). 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*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                          122381
<SECURITIES>                                     58566
<RECEIVABLES>                                    36432
<ALLOWANCES>                                      1974
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                238283
<PP&E>                                          213458
<DEPRECIATION>                                   89419
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  699361
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            98950
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           228865
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        543720
<OTHER-SE>                                    (348317)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    699361
<SALES>                                          56956
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 56956
<CGS>                                            51294
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    98000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                3202
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   9520
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               9520
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      9520
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .19
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .19



</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 29 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        S.Con.Res.29
                                      Agreed to October 12, 1995        

                       One Hundred Fourth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
  the fourth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-five

                          Concurrent Resolution

Whereas the Senate wishes to mark the 3,000th anniversary of King 
  David's establishment of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel; and
Whereas Jerusalem, the City of David, has been the focal point of 
  Jewish life; and
Whereas Jerusalem, the City of Peace, has held a unique place and 
  exerted a unique influence on the moral development of Western 
  Civilization; and
Whereas no other city on Earth is today the capital of the same 
  country, inhabited by the same people, speaking the same language, 
  and worshipping the same God as it was 3,000 years ago: Now, 
  therefore, be it

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That the Architect is directed to make the necessary arrangements for a 
date in October to be mutually agreed upon by the Speaker of the House 
of Representatives and the Majority Leader of the Senate, after 
consultation with the Minority Leaders of the two Houses, for the use 
of the Rotunda for a celebration of the founding of the city of 
Jerusalem.
  Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.

  Attest:

                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.
```
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 Washington, D.C. 20549
 Amendment No. 1
to
 FORM 10-Q
 QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2009
 Commission File No: 0-27848
 BIOFIELD CORP.
  Delaware
    
    13-3703450(State of other jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization)
    
    (Employer Identification Number)1615 Walnut Street, 3 rd Floor, Philadelphia, PA
    
    19102(Address of principal executive offices)
    
    (Zip Code)
 
 þ o
 o þ
  Large Accelerated Filer 
oAccelerated Filer oNon-Accelerated Filer o(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)Smaller Reporting Company þ o þ
 AS OF MAY 8, 2009, THERE WERE 28,486,833 SHARES OF COMMON STOCK OUTSTANDING AND 12,300,000 SHARES
OF VOTING PREFERRED STOCK OUTSTANDING.




---



##### 



EXPLANATORY NOTE




---



##### 



SIGNATURES
  BIOFIELD CORP.Date:  December 22, 2009
    By:
    /s/  David Bruce HongDavid Bruce HongChief Executive OfficerBy:
    /s/  David Bruce HongDavid Bruce HongChief Financial Officer
| (logo) WELLS FARGO | **Corporate Trust Services**

  MAC R1204-010  9062 Old Annapolis Road  Columbia, MD 21045  Tel: 410 884 2000  Fax: 410 715 2380 |
|--------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

J.P.Morgan Chase CommercialMortgage Securities Corp. 

383 Madison Avenue 

31st Floor 

New York, New York 10179 

 

Re:          Annual Statement of Compliance for JPMBB Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust2014-C23, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2014-C23 

 

Per the Pooling and ServicingAgreement dated as of September 1, 2014 (the "Agreement"), theundersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., asCertificate Administrator ("Wells Fargo"), hereby certifies asfollows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2016 (the "ReportingPeriod"): 

 

(a)           A review of WellsFargo's activities during the Reporting Period and of its performance under theAgreement has been made under such officer's supervision; and 

 

(b)          To the best of suchofficer's knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of itsobligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout theReporting Period. 

 

 

February 27, 2017 

 

 

 

/s/ Brian Smith

BRIAN SMITH 

Vice President

 

 

| Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. | (logo) Together we’ll  go far |
|------------------------|-------------------------------------|
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. James Charles COX, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-7162

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: January 18, 2018

Decided: January 22, 2018

James Charles Cox, Jr.,' Appellant Pro Se. Angela Hewlett Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and SHEDD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

James Charles Cox, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of ap-pealability 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 motion 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 Cox has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability 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*
No. 11-1304.

No. 11-1312.

#### Hart *v.*Texas; and Hart *v.*Texas.

Ct. App. Tex., 14th Dist. Cer-tiorari denied. Reported below: 342 S. W. 3d 659.
~j ~\ .,1.--\1 

# National Archives andRecords Administration

--_._----------------------------------



## Office ofthe Federal Register iJj(j7

Ms. Nancy Molitor Regulations Division (AGe-20D) Office ofthe Chief Counsel Federal Avjatian Administration, DOT 800 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20591 Oem Ms. Molitor: The material listed inthe attachment is approved tor incorporation by reference in 14CFR Part 39. This approval is contingent upon the final rule containing any language changes, which were agreed upon by our staffs. The approval to incorporate by reference this publication(s) is effective on the effective date ofyour final rule. Ifyou wish.to enforce some other edition ofthe publication(s) approved, you must: 1. Publish notice oftilechange in the Federal Register, and amend the Code ofFederal Regulations; and 2. Ensure that acopy ofthat edition IS on file at the Office ofthe Federal Register; and 3. Notify me Inwriting of the change. Sincerely, 

## 4%.~j.,,~ -f~ RAYMOND A. MOSLEY Director ofthe Federal Register Federal RegIster Attorney: 

# {L..~ Attachment



### u.s. mail addIes.~: 86(11Adelphi Road, College Park, MD 2074.0-6001 Office location: 800 Norlh Capitol Street, NW, Suite 700, Washington, DC 20002-42';4 ['cderal RCbrister web sites: http;/!www.archil'cs.g<w/fcdcral-registcr!lnd http://www,gpO<lCCcss.gov/naraJm:orporatioll by Referellce

FAA Docket No. 2006-26691; Dir. !d. 2006-CE-89-ED; Amdt. 39-15043: AD 1007-10-02

Reims Aviation Industries dated April 25, 2005 FAA Docket No. 2007-18IOO; Dir. Id. 2007-i'v'M-103-A'/); AI/uk 39-15045: AD 2007-1Q-04
Boeing MD80-55A065 dated April 25, 2007 FAA Docket NO.2005-21 748: Dir. !d. 2005-NM-07 /~AD; Ail/dE- 39-/5044; AD 2007-/0-03
Boeing Boeing Boeing

Primed 5/41200i 767-26-0118 767-26A0123 767-26A0130 2
2 dated December 21. 2004 dated August 22, 2002 dated October 31. 2006

Pa;.:eIof/
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

REGION IX

75 Hawthorne Street

San Francisco, CA 94105

November 1, 2011

Ursula Kramer, Director

Pima County Department of Environmental Quality

150 W. Congress Street

Tucson, A rizona 85701

- 1317

Dear Ms. Kramer:

Thank you for your timely submission of the Pima County 2010 Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan

. We have reviewed the submitted document and have found that it is complete, informative, very detailed

and meets all of the requirements for annual network p lans as required by our regulations set forth under

40 CFR Part 58.10. We specifically approve the discontinuation of the Broadway and Swan PM 10

monitor per 40 CFR Part 58.20 (f). While this letter serves as official approval of the annual network

plan, i t does not constitute approval of system modifications that may take place in the future. We will

continue to work with your district to review system changes as they proceed.

If you have any questions regarding this letter or enclosed comments , please feel free to contact me at

(415) 972

- 3851 or Michael Flagg at (415) 972

- 3372

.

Sincerely,

/s/

Matthew Lakin, Manager

Air Quality Analysis Office

Air Division

Enclosure

cc: Wayne Byrd , PDEQ

Ted Gould , PDEQComments on the Pima County 201 0 Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan

Please update next year’s annual network plan to reflect the following comments:

C oncentrations used to assess minimum monitoring requir ements in Table 5: PM 10 Design

Criteria should not exclude pending exceptional event requests.

Prince Road PM 10 is identified as source impact, microscale site in the tables on page 14 and 26,

while the narrative on page 27 describes the monitor as “representative of a neighborhoo d scale”.
**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 Quarterly Report of Homeland Security Capital Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31,            2009, as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, in the capacities and on the date indicated below, hereby 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, as amended; and |
|--------|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company. |
|--------|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|         | HOMELAND SECURITY CAPITAL CORPORATION |
|--------------|---------------------------------------|
|         |                                  |   |
|         |                                  |   |
|         |                                  |   |
| May 15, 2009 | By:                                   | /s/ Michael T. Brigante |
|         | Name:                                 | Michael T. Brigante |
|         | Title:                                | Chief Financial Officer and |
|         |                                  | Principal Accounting Officer |

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authentications, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Homeland Security Capital Corporation and will be retained            by Homeland Security Capital Corporation and furnished to the United States Securities and Exchange Commission or its Staff upon request.