alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-7712

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

LEROY ANGLOSON STUART, a/k/a John,

Defendant - Appellant.

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

Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (5:92-cr-00114-BR-3; 5:16-cv-00593-BR)

Submitted: September 24, 2020 Decided: September 28, 2020

Before HARRIS and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit 

Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Leroy Angloson Stuart, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Leroy Angloson Stuart seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on 

his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge 

issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B). 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). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a 

prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists could find the 

district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong. See Buck v. 

Davis, 137 S. Ct. 759, 773-74 (2017). 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. 

Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 134, 140-41 (2012) (citing Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,

484 (2000)). 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Stuart 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. 11-10564.

#### Harris *v.*Felker, Warden.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Justice Breyer took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 56 (Monday, March 24, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 13871]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-7329]


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


DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Defense Science Board 1997 Summer Study Task Force on DoD 
Responses to Transnational Threats

ACTION: Notice of advisory committee meetings.

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

SUMMARY: The Defense Science Board 1997 Summer Study Task Force on DoD 
Responses to Transnational Threats will meet in closed session on April 
1-2, 1997 at the Institute for Defense Analyses, Alexandria, Virginia.
    The mission of the Defense Science Board is to advise the Secretary 
of Defense through the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and 
Technology on scientific and technical matters as they affect the 
perceived needs of the Department of Defense. At these meetings the 
Task force will provide an assessment of the DoD posture and recommend 
actions to improve this posture. Specifically, review the legislation, 
executive orders, prior studies and current activities of the 
government, identify the variety of threats which should be addressed 
by the Department, assess the nation's vulnerability to these threats, 
examine the DoD capabilities for playing its proper role in response, 
identify available and potential technologies which may be applicable 
for enhancing the protection of US Armed Forces, and recommend actions 
by the Department to position itself properly for this set of problems.
    In accordance with Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee 
Act, P.L. No. 92-463, as amended (5 U.S.C. App. II (1994)), it has been 
determined that these DSB Task Force meetings concern matters listed in 
5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(1) (1994), and that accordingly these meetings will be 
closed to the public.

Dated: March 19, 1997.
L.M. Bynum,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 97-7329 Filed 3-21-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5000-04-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> BD

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                      20,168,386
<RECEIVABLES>                               13,975,885
<SECURITIES-RESALE>                                  0
<SECURITIES-BORROWED>                                0
<INSTRUMENTS-OWNED>                                  0
<PP&E>                                       8,552,849
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              49,183,542
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<PAYABLES>                                   7,357,541
<REPOS-SOLD>                                         0
<SECURITIES-LOANED>                                  0
<INSTRUMENTS-SOLD>                                   0
<LONG-TERM>                                  9,967,008
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  1,500,402
<COMMON>                                       271,167
<OTHER-SE>                                   7,937,536
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                49,183,542
<TRADING-REVENUE>                                    0
<INTEREST-DIVIDENDS>                           661,007
<COMMISSIONS>                              114,935,907
<INVESTMENT-BANKING-REVENUES>                        0
<FEE-REVENUE>                               20,160,823
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             359,944
<COMPENSATION>                              14,763,834
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                789,542
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     355,346
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   355,346
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .04


</TABLE>
##### 



Exhibit 32.2
 
  1.
    
    The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2007, to
which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.2 (the Periodic Report) fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act, and2.
    
    The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
  By:
    /s/ Herm RosenmanHerm RosenmanSenior Vice President, Finance and Chief
Financial Officer
<PAGE>   1


                                                                   Exhibit 99(b)



Participating subsidiaries in the Amended and Restated
1985 Supplemental Employee Stock Purchase Plan for employees
of certain subsidiaries.



The following subsidiaries of Raychem Corporation have been designated by the
Administrator to participate in the Plan:


Raychem Ltd.
Raychem Aktiebolag
Raychem Canada Limited
Raychem del Peru, S.A.
Raychem Industrial Y Comercial Limitada
Raychem International
Raychem International Manufacturing Corporation
Raychem Produtos Irradiados Limitada
Raychem S.A. Industrial y Comercial
Raychem Technologias, S.A. de C.V.
Raychem Uruguay S.A.
Raychem de Venezuela, C.A.
Raychem Technologies Ltd.
#### Barron v. State

106,740

07/19/13

Denied.

Unpublished
Exhibit 10.8


 


AMENDMENT
TO

THE COGNITION THERAPEUTICS, INC.

2017 EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN


 


WHEREAS, Cognition Therapeutics, Inc.
(the “Company”) has adopted the Cognition Therapeutics, Inc. 2017 Equity Incentive Plan (the “Plan”);


 


WHEREAS, Section 12(a) of
the Plan permits the Board of Directors of the Company (the “Board”) to amend the Plan from time to time;


 


WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 3
of the Plan, a total of 798,908 shares of Common Stock of the Company, par value $.001 per share (“Common Stock”),
plus any share of Common Stock that would otherwise revert to the share reserve of the Company’s Amended and Restated 2007 Equity
Incentive Plan, have been reserved for issuance under the Plan;


 


WHEREAS, the Company desires
to increase the number of shares issuable under the Plan by 2,000,000 shares of Common Stock.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, the following
amendments and modifications are hereby made a part of the Plan subject to, and effective as of the date of, the approval of shareholders
of the Plan as amended:


 


		1.	Section 3(a) of the Plan is hereby amended by revising the first sentence of such section in
its entirety to read as follows:



 


“Subject to adjustment as described
below, the aggregate number of shares of common stock of the Company (“Company Stock”) that may be issued under this Plan
is equal to (i) 2,798,908 and (ii) the number of shares that may be added to this Plan pursuant to Section 3(b) (collectively
the “Share Reserve”), each of which may be granted as an Incentive Stock Option, up to the maximum limit set forth in Section 3(d) below.”


 


		2.	Section 3(d) of the Plan is hereby amended by revising the first sentence of such section in
its entirety to read as follows:



 


“Notwithstanding anything to
the contrary in this Section 3, subject to the provisions of Section 3(e) relating to capitalization adjustments, the aggregate
maximum number of shares of Company Stock that may be issued pursuant to the exercise of Incentive Stock Options shall be 2,798,908 shares
of Company Stock plus the amount of any increase in the number of shares that may be available for issuance pursuant to Grants pursuant
to Section 3(h), but in no event shall greater than 13,189,392 shares of Company Stock be issued as Incentive Stock Options (the
 “Maximum Incentive Stock Option Limit”).”


 


		3.	In all other respects, the Plan, as amended, is hereby ratified and confirmed and shall remain in full
force and effect.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , 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.

January 10, 2014

jam 

# Order

Clerk January 10, 2014

1 48353 ( 25 )

RICO MENEFEE

,

Plainti ff

- Appellant,

v SC: 1 48353

COA: 315557

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al

Defendant s

- Appellee s

.

___________________________________

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion to waive fees is considered and it

is DENIED because MCL 600.2963 requires that a prisoner pursuing a civil action be

liable for filing fees.

Within 21 days of the certification of this order, plaintiff shall p ay to the

Clerk of the Court the initial partial filing fee of $ 2 7.00, shall submit a copy of this order

with the payment, and shall refile the copy of the pleadings which is being returned

with this order. Failure to comply with this order shall result i n the appeal not being

filed in this Court.

If plaintiff timely files the partial fee and refiles the pleadings, monthly

payments shall be made to the Department of Corrections in an amount of 50 percent of

the deposits made to plaintiff’s account until the payments equal the balance due of

$3 4 8.00. This amount shall then be remitted to this Court.

Pursuant to MCL 600.2963(8) plaintiff shall not file further appeals in civil

actions in this Court until the entry fee in this case is paid in full.

Th e Clerk of the Court shall furnish two copies of this order to plaintiff and

return plaintiff’s pleadings with this order.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-Q
DECEMBER 31, 1995 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                            2722
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  2818
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    7509
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             2608
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             4901
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                          4901
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      7509
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   3244
<INCOME-TAX>                                      1103
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               2141
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   1103
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      3244
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .35
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .35
        

</TABLE>
#### State v. Montgomery

108,164

04/21/2016

Granted in part; vacated in part; remanded to Ct. of App.

Unpublished
No. 12-5455.

#### Hall *v.*Jones et al.

C. A. 8th Cir. Certio-rari denied.
#### Fields v. State

107,488

11/22/13

Denied

Unpublished
# t22p01p1
#### State v. Kindsvater

113,843

07/15/2016

Denied.

Unpublished
**TKP** IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 21 - 0644 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. KAITLYN DAWN POLICH ,

Defendant and Appellant .**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellee ’s motion for a 30 - day extension of time, and good cause appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellee is granted an extension of time to and including November 22 , 2023, within which to prepare, file, and serve its response brief

.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

October 16 2023

10/16/2023

Case Number: DA 21-0644
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 64 (Thursday, April 3, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 15896]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-8492]


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

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Dkt. C-3706]


Conopco, Inc.; Prohibited Trade Practices, and Affirmative 
Corrective Actions

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.

ACTION: Consent order.

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

SUMMARY: In settlement of alleged violations of federal law prohibiting 
unfair or deceptive acts or practices and unfair methods of 
competition, this consent order prohibits, among other things, Conopco, 
Inc., a New York-based manufacturer of margarine and spreads, doing 
business as Van Den Bergh Foods Company, from misrepresenting the 
amount of fat, saturated fat, cholesterol or calories in any spread or 
margarine; and requires the respondent to have adequate scientific 
substantiation for claims that any margarine or spread reduces the risk 
of heart disease, or causes or contributes to a risk factor for any 
disease or health-related condition. In addition, the consent order 
requires, for three years, that advertisements for Promise margarine or 
spreads must include the total fat disclosure and must disclose either 
the percentage of calories derived from fat or the fact that the 
product is not low in fat.

DATES: Complaint and Order issued January 23, 1997.\1\

    \1\ Copies of the Complaint and the Decision and Order are 
available from the Commission's Public Reference Branch, H-130, 6th 
Street and Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20580.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Anne Maher, FTC/S-4002, Washington, D.C. 20580. (202) 326-2987.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On Friday, November 15, 1996, there was 
published in the Federal Register, 61 FR 58562, a proposed consent 
agreement with analysis In the Matter of Conopco, Inc., for the purpose 
of soliciting public comment. Interested parties were given sixty (60) 
days in which to submit comments, suggestions or objections regarding 
the proposed form of the order.
    No comments having been received, the Commission has ordered the 
issuance of the complaint in the form contemplated by the agreement, 
made its jurisdictional findings and entered an order to cease and 
desist, as set forth in the proposed consent agreement, in disposition 
of this proceeding.

(Sec. 6, 38 Stat. 721; 15 U.S.C. 46. Interprets or applies sec. 5, 
38 Stat. 719, as amended; 15 U.S.C. 45, 52)
Benjamin I. Berman,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-8492 Filed 4-2-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-M
No. 12-5696.

#### Brown *v.*United States.

Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-29-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                MAY-1-1999
<CASH>                                           1,972
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,760
<ALLOWANCES>                                       225
<INVENTORY>                                     30,391
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                44,016
<PP&E>                                          33,339
<DEPRECIATION>                                  12,279
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  67,009
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,894
<BONDS>                                         18,979
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            60
<OTHER-SE>                                      39,992
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    67,009
<SALES>                                         35,300
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                35,300
<CGS>                                           23,220
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   23,220
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                10,979
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 216
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    885
<INCOME-TAX>                                       354
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                531
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       531
<EPS-BASIC>                                    $0.09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    $0.09


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 65 (Friday, April 4, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 16099]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-8482]


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


FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 27

[GN Docket No. 97-50; FCC 96-278]


The Wireless Communications Service (``WCS''); Correction

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Correction to final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document contains corrections to the final rules which 
were published Monday, March 3, 1997 (62 FR 9636). The rules contain 
the licensing procedures and technical standards for the Wireless 
Communications Service (``WCS'').

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 21, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Josh Roland or Matthew Moses, Wireless 
Telecommunications Bureau, (202) 418-0660.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The final regulation that is the subject of this correction 
designated the information required to be disclosed on applications in 
the WCS for a radio station authorization or for consent to assignment 
or transfer of control, including applications filed on FCC Forms 175 
and 600.

Need for Correction

    As published, the final rules contains an inadvertent omission in 
the text which is in need of correction.

Correction of Publication

    Accordingly, in FR Doc. 97-5128 published on March 3, 1997 (62 FR 
9636), make the following correction. On page 9669, in column 2, the 
first sentence of paragraph (a)(1) is corrected to read as follows:


Sec. 27.307  [Corrected]

    (a) * * *
    (1) A list of its subsidiaries, if any. Subsidiary means any FCC-
regulated business five per cent or more of whose stock, warrants, 
options or debt securities are owned by the applicant or an officer, 
director, stockholder or key management personnel of the applicant. 
This list must include a description of each subsidiary's principal 
business and a description of each subsidiary's relationship to the 
applicant. * * *
* * * * *
Federal Communications Commission
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-8482 Filed 4-3-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
Statement for EPA Hearing, Atlanta, GA – Transport Rule 9/1/10

Nancy Larson, Ross-Bain Green Building LLC, Atlanta, GA

Good afternoon. I’m here today to express my support for the proposed Transport Rule as a concerned citizen and parent.

I work with a local green building consultancy and my work involves helping project teams to design and build energy efficient, healthy buildings which reduce CO2 emissions and other detrimental air pollutants and slow the demand for coal-fired power plants.

High performance green buildings also help reduce illnesses and increase occupant performance. They help to create healthier communities by encouraging alternative transportation, like biking, walking, and mass transit.

But we do not have control over air pollutants which are coming in from other areas.

This issue reminds me of a conversation I had some years ago with a gentleman in Southeast Asia who was a professional mosquito eradicator. He was working to control a strain of malarial mosquitoes along the border of Thailand and Burma. The Thai government was putting measures in place to help reduce the mosquito population but the Burmese government was doing nothing and unfortunately mosquitoes, like air pollutants, don’t respect borders.

We still won’t be able to breathe healthy air in Georgia in spite of our collective efforts if harmful emissions from other areas are affecting our air quality here, so it is critical that the new Transport rule be put in place to protect our health and the health of our children. The proposed rule has already been shown to have significant health benefits, and like green building, will save money and improve human health, rather than harming our health. Thank you.