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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24-6179

MICHAEL ANDREW PETERSON,

 Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

CHADWICK DOTSON,

 Respondent - Appellee.

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

Norfolk. Arenda L. Wright Allen, District Judge. (2:23-cv-00346-AWA-RJK)

Submitted: August 22, 2024 Decided: August 26, 2024

Before WILKINSON, WYNN, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael Andrew Peterson, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 24-6179 Doc: 12 Filed: 08/26/2024 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Michael Andrew Peterson seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the 

recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing as untimely Peterson’s 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2254 petition. See Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 134, 148 & n.9 (2012) (explaining that 

§ 2254 petitions are subject to one-year statute of limitations, running from latest of four 

commencement dates enumerated in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1)). The order is not appealable 

unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1)(A). 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, as here, 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. Gonzalez, 565 U.S. at 140-41 (citing Slack v. McDaniel, 

529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)).

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Peterson 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

USCA4 Appeal: 24-6179 Doc: 12 Filed: 08/26/2024 Pg: 2 of 2
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19
- 7280

DOUGLAS R. VAUGHN , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. CORRECT CARE SOLUTIONS, Medical Staff / Nurses; NURSE TERRY, Intake Nurse; NURSE ALVIN, Intake Nurse; NURSE CHELTON, Intake Nurse , Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Alexandria

. Leonie M. Brinkema , District Judge. ( 1:19

- cv
- 00565

- LMB

- IDD )

Submitted : February 20, 2020 Decided: February 24, 2020

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge , RUSHING , Circuit Judge, and TRAXLER , Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed and remanded by un published per curiam opinion

.
Douglas R. Vaughn, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Douglas R. Vaughn appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2018) complaint without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) for failure to
state a claim . The district court noted that Vaughn could feasibly state a claim for relief with a clearer statement of facts. We may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2018), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1 292 (2018); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545

- 47 (1949). Because the district court’s order explicitly states that Va ughn could potentially cure the defects identified, we conclude that the order Vaughn seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory order. See Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y,
Inc. , 807 F.3d 619, 623

- 24 (4th Cir. 2015); Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local
Union 392 , 10 F.3d 1064, 1066

- 67 (4th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and remand the case to the district court with instructions to allow Vaughn to amend his complaint. Goode , 807 F.3d at 630. We dispense with oral argume nt because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED AND REMANDED
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION OFPRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Annual Report of MagStar Technologies, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ending December 31,2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), I, Jon L. Reissner, President and Chief Executive Officer ofthe Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant § 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)          The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)          The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/ Jon L. Reissner                   |   |
|---------------------------------------|--------|
| Jon L. Reissner                       |
| President and Chief Executive Officer |
| April 14, 2005                   |

 

This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemedto be filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended, or otherwise subject to the liability of thatsection.

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM RETAIL
EQUITY PARTNERS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF AND FOR THE NINE
MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1999, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                               9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                              JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                           68,589
<SECURITIES>                                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCES>                                          0
<INVENTORY>                                           0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                168,225
<PP&E>                                        2,870,082
<DEPRECIATION>                                        0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                3,038,307
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            76,250
<BONDS>                                       3,299,334
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<COMMON>                                              0
<OTHER-SE>                                     (637,277)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  3,675,584
<SALES>                                               0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                392,877
<CGS>                                                 0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    65,585
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                319,248
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              254,803
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (246,759)
<INCOME-TAX>                                          0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (246,759)
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (246,759)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.73)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (0.73)



</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.1
                  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) and
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the filing by Malex, Inc. (the "Company") of the Quarterly
Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ending July 31, 2007 (the "Report"), I,
Bartly J. Loethen, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

1. The Report fully complies with the require

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

                                         /s/ Bartly J. Loethen
                                         -----------------------
                                         Bartly J. Loethen
                                         Chief Executive Officer


Dated:  September 12, 2007
## F IFTH 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE O F 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________ Case No. 5D22-1 740 LT Case No. 2 020 - 3 00668 - CFDB

_____________________________ J AMES L ONG , Appella nt, v. S TATE O F F LORIDA , Appellee .

_____________________________ On a ppeal from the Circuit Court for Volusia County. Leah R. Case , Judge . Ma tthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and Nancy Ryan, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant. Ashley M oody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Roberts J. Bradford, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee. Septem ber 12, 2023 P ER C URIAM . A FFIRMED . E DWARDS , C.J., H A RRIS , and K ILBANE , JJ., concur.2 _____________________________ Not fin al until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331 .

_____________________________
2022 EAVS Data Brief: Kansas EAVS Jurisdictions:

105 

 Voter Registration 

Active Reg. Voters as of Nov. 8, 20221 

1,830,216 

Reg. Forms Received2* 

709,206 

Total Confirmation Notices Sent3* 

237,940 

Voters Removed from Reg. Rolls4* 

131,563 

Source of Registration Applications5 

Motor Vehicle Dept. 36.6% 

Online 29.0% 

Mail, Email, Fax 12.3% 

Other 12.1% 

In Person 9.9% 

 Voting and Turnout 

Voters Participating By Mode6 

7 Turnout 

46.9% 

In-Person 

Election Day 

577,607 

57.9% 

Mail 

131,633 

13.2% 

In-Person

Early 

273,287 

27.4% 

Other 

15,073 

1.5% 

Total Voting Locations8: 1,110 

Total Poll Workers9: 7,653 

Election Technology 

Percentage of Jurisdictions Using...10 

100.0% 

Ballot 

Marking 

Devices 

92.4% 

Scanners

78.1% 

 Electronic 

Poll 

Books 

0.0% 

DREs w/o

VVPAT 

0.0% 

 DREs with 

VVPAT 

0.0% 

Hand 

Counting 

 Mail Ballots 

• 152,208 mail ballots transmitted11 

• 85.9% of transmitted mail ballots returned by voters12 

• 96.4% of returned mail ballots counted13 

• 1.1% of returned mail ballots rejected14 

• Did not conduct all-mail election15 

• Allowed drop boxes16 

• Allowed ballot curing17 

 Election Audits18 

-- Access audit 

-- Ballot design audit 

-- Ballot reconciliation 

audit 

✔ Compliance/ 

procedural audit 

-- Eligibility audit 

-- Legal audit 

✔ Logic and accuracy 

testing 

✔ Post-election 

tabulation audit 

-- Other 

Notes 

EAVS data and reports may be downloaded at www.eac.gov 

/research-and-data/datasets-codebooks-and-surveys. 

Responses of “Does not apply,” “Data not available,” and “Valid 

skip” are shown as zeroes or dashes. Percentages may not sum 

to 100% because of missing data or rounding. 

* Close of registration for 2020 

general election to close of 

registration for 2022 general 

election. 

1 A1b of EAVS. 

2 A3a of EAVS. 

3 A8a of EAVS. 

4 A9a of EAVS. 

5 Mail, Email, Fax is A4a/A3a. 

In Person is A4b/A3a. Online is 

A4c/A3a. Motor Vehicle Dept. is 

A4d/A3a. Other is the sum of 

A4e–A4l/A3a. May not sum to 

100% because of missing data. 

6 In-Person Election Day is F1b. 

Mail is F1d+F1g. In-Person Early 

is F1f. Other is F1c+F1e+F1h. 

7 F1a of EAVS divided by citizen 

voting age population (CVAP). 

8 D2a of EAVS. 

9 D7a of EAVS. 

10 F3a–f, F5a–F9a of EAVS; 

number of jurisdictions that 

responded “Yes” divided by

number of jurisdictions in 

state/territory. 

11 C1a of EAVS. 

12 C1b/C1a of EAVS. 

13 C8a/C1b of EAVS. 

14 C9a/C1b of EAVS. 

15 Q17 and Q17a of Policy 

Survey. 

16 Q19 of Policy Survey. 

17 Q20 of Policy Survey. 

18 Q36 of Policy Survey. See 

survey questionnaire for full 

definitions of each type of 

audit.
No. 12-5680.

#### Robinson *v.*United States.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                       1,124,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               15,292,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   681,000
<INVENTORY>                                  8,450,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            26,285,000
<PP&E>                                     151,503,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              53,683,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             125,475,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       15,261,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    11,749,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  80,430,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               125,475,000
<SALES>                                    148,627,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           148,627,000
<CGS>                                       85,339,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               85,339,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             28,182,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                10,383,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         17,799,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                17,799,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.52
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.51
        

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

111,577

12/14/2015

Denied.

Unpublished
No. 12-5686.

#### Ingram *v.*United States.

C. A. 2d Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
No. 12A184.

#### Daker *v.*Georgia.

Sup. Ct. Ga. Application for stay, addressed to Justice Sotomayor and referred to the Court, denied.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 50 (Friday, March 14, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 12162]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-6444]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. ER97-1566-000]


Southwestern Public Service Company; Notice of Filing

March 10, 1997.
    Take notice that on February 6, 1997, Southwestern Public Service 
Company (Southwestern) submitted an executed service agreement under 
its open access transmission tariff with e prime. The service agreement 
is for umbrella non-firm transmission service.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice 
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 18 CFR 385.214). All such motions or 
protests should be filed on or before March 21, 1997. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-6444 Filed 3-13-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                             238
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       54
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   292
<PP&E>                                         350,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 350,292
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           12,075
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     338,217
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   350,292
<SALES>                                              2
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     2
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 7,399
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (7,397)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (7,397)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
H. Res. 121 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

February 11, 2019. 

Resolved, That the House has heard with profound sorrow of the death of the Honorable Walter B. Jones, a Representative from the State of North Carolina. 

Resolved, That a committee of such Members of the 

House as the Speaker may designate, together with such 

Members of the Senate as may be joined, be appointed to attend the funeral. 

Resolved, That the Sergeant-at-Arms of the House be 

authorized and directed to take such steps as may be necessary for carrying out the provisions of these resolutions and 

that the necessary expenses in connection therewith be paid 

out of applicable accounts of the House. 

Resolved, That the Clerk communicate these resolutions 

to the Senate and transmit a copy thereof to the family of 

the deceased. 
2 

•HRES 121 EH 

Resolved, That when the House adjourns today, it adjourn as a further mark of respect to the memory of the deceased. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
.... > 0:,

Richard Sprott To Richard Long/P2/R8/USEPA/US@EPA. Jonah <RSPROTT@utah.gov> Staller/RC/R8/USEPNUS@EPA, Ron RutherfordlENF/RBlUSEPA/US@EPA. ' 12/09/200402:10 PM cc Bill Sinclair <BSINCLAIR@utah.gov>, Dianne Nielson <DNIELSON@utah.gov> 

### bee SUbject Excess Emissions Rule Meeting

As each of you are aware, DAQ has been workini on an excess emissions rule for quite some time. We received some pretty strong feedback regarding the proposal that went out for comment so we will not be taking that version to the Air Quality Broard for approval. However, we do need to move forward with an improved rule. A number of you indicated a willingness to seek solutions so we would like toget key interested parties together to disucss the issues and how we might go forward. We think it would be helpful to better understand the basis for EPA's excess emissions policy and the concerns that business might 'have. We will be addressing conceptual issues and do not intend to discuss specific rule language, etc. at this point. Hopefully, this 

### might lead to ideas that 

### will help in a new process. The attached provides a bit more detail, but we are looking at Tues or Wed, Jan 18 or 19 from about 10-3. We could include a .working lunch. Please let me know ASAP if either of these days would work for you. I'll get back later with more details on agenda. If any of you have suggestions for the meeting, we'll be happy to take those, For Dick and Jonah: Please forward to others 

### in EPA. who may be attending whose names I don't have at this point. Thanks, Rick

/ 'Excess Emission; Meeling. 01-05,

## doc

. , 

# fa'/11 CY?- f</N: 

# 6C62-(05 

# -ora• " I



### Excess Emissions RuleMeeting

Purpose: Explore howto advance animproved excess emissionsrule for Utah. The meeting will provide an opportunity to explainthe basis and background for EPA'sexcess emissions policy and for the regulated community to askquestions and explain any concernsthey may have. We hope to get anunderstanding ofthekey issues for eachgroup that 

### will assist in crafting a newrule in the future. We 

### will not be discussing specific language orproposals atthis meeting

.. Dateand Location: lOAM -3 

### PM, TBA (Tuesday or Wednesday, January 18 

### or 19?), 

### Room TBA Background: The USEPA updated its policy onexcess emissions in ajointmemofrom OECA and OAR in 1999. Region VIIIhasrequested that Utah revise its Unavoidable Breakdown Rule to be consistent with the new EPA policy. UDAQ has been working on the update for several years and very intensely during 

### 2004. A rule was proposed for commentbythe 

### Utah Air Quality Board. The proposa! drew strongcomments from 

### all sides and 

### will not be brought forward in its currentform.
invitees:


### StateofUtah



### . HQEPA Rick Sprott Ron Rutherford

- OECA .Cheryl Heying OAQPS

.**R~gg** 

### Olsen 

## OGe

.Bryce.Bird • FreclNelson RegulatedCommunity 

## Chris Stephens DennisArfmann Reed Searle ',EPA 

### Region 8 Steve Christiansen DickLong Mike Tomko Regiona! Counsel Rep(s) Mike Jenkins :-Air Program StaffMember Jim Holtkamp Lee Peacock

.• t,
IV 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 1065 

Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to require a reading 

of the names of members of the Armed Forces who died in the previous 

month as a result of combat. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 24, 2020 

Mr. CARTWRIGHT (for himself, Mr. FITZPATRICK, Mrs. WALORSKI, Ms. NORTON, Mr. PASCRELL, and Mr. SEAN PATRICK MALONEY of New York) 

submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee 

on Rules 

RESOLUTION 

Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to 

require a reading of the names of members of the Armed 

Forces who died in the previous month as a result of 

combat. 

1 Resolved, That— 

2 (a) Clause 1 of rule XIV of the Rules of the House 

3 of Representatives is amended by adding after the third 

4 item the following new item: 

5 ‘‘Fourth. On the first legislative day of each 

6 month, a reading of the names of members of the 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 1065 IH 

1 Armed Forces who died in the previous month as a 

2 result of combat.’’. 

3 (b) Clause 1 of rule XIV is amended by redesignating 

4 the fourth through the ninth items as the fifth through 

5 the tenth items. 

6 (c) Rule XIV of the Rules of the House of Represent7 atives is amended by adding at the end the following new 

8 clause: 

9 ‘‘7. The Speaker shall not read the name of any mem10 ber of the Armed Forces under clause 1 if any family 

11 member informs the Speaker that the family member does 

12 not wish to have the name of that individual read.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS