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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-1046

BARRY J. BLUEFELD,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

BARRY S. COHEN; JOEL S. MEISEL; DAVID H. COHEN,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. 

Paula Xinis, District Judge. (8:15-cv-02857-PX)

Submitted: May 23, 2017 Decided: May 25, 2017

Before KING, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Barry J. Bluefeld, Appellant Pro Se. Matthew D. Matkov, SALTZ MATKOV PC, 

Wayne, Pennsylvania, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Barry J. Bluefeld seeks to appeal the district court’s order directing him to obtain 

counsel or face dismissal of his pending derivative shareholder action. This court may 

exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain 

interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen 

v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). The order Bluefeld seeks 

to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. 

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We deny Bluefeld’s motion

for 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
#### Sperry v. McKune

112,455

10/15/2015

Denied; cross-petition granted.

Unpublished
No. 12-5581.

#### Cox *v.*California.

Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.
Faulk, Scott (OST) 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

November 20, 2013 

Brianna Tangonan < briannat@hawaii.edu > 

Wednesday, November 20, 2013 8:48 PM 

EAS (OST) 

Mention Kalaupapa EAS 

Dear Department of Transportation (DOT), 

I am writing to support Mokulele Airline's 4-year bid to link Kalaupapa to Kahului, Honolulu, Kapalua, 

and Ho'olehua. Mokulele is the best candidate as they have lower fares, experienced friendly agents, frequent flights, 

multiple islands and ease of booking via Global Distribution System (Expedia, Travelocity, Orbitz, Priceline and etc.). It is 

important we have safe, stable and affordable service to Kaulapapa. 

Please select Mokulele to serve Kaulapapa for 4 years. 

Mahala, Brianna Tangonan 

1
July 12, 2010 

Air and Radiation Docket 

EPA West Building, Room 3334 

1301 Constitution Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20460 

Air Quality Services 

jUL 2 I ZQ10 

Re: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0837 

Comments on Reconsideration of Proposed Rule 

Amendments to the Protocol Gas Verification Program and Minimum Competency Requirements for 

Air Emission Testing 

75 FR 112, 33391-33420 (June 11, 2010) 

Ladies and Gentlemen, 

Air Quality Services, LLC (AQS) appreciates the opportunity to comment on EPA's proposed rule for Minimum 

Competency Requirements for Air Emission Testing . 

AQS is a small business that provides air pollution monitoring, testing, and consulting services to a variety of sources 

that are affected by the Part 75 CEMS program. We provide Relative Accuracy Testing to these facilities . We are 

vitally interested in all aspects of compliance monitoring and testing, and offer the following comments/questions : 

1 . Protocol Gas Verification Program (PGVP). The transition to the new program need to be clarified : how long 

can a cylinder that is in use before the effective date (of the new rule) continue to be used after the effective date? 

2. Minimum Competency Requirements for Air Emission Testing Bodies . AQS understands and fundamentally 

agrees with the establishment of minimum competency requirements. 

a. In order to provide the most flexibility to AETBs, and potentially reduce costs to sources, the AETB should 

have the ability to determine which test methods to select for "certification", and utilize an examination 

relevant to those test methods. Internal examinations should be afforded the same consideration as external 

examinations. 

b. In proposed §6.1 .2(d) of Part 75 Appendix A, EPA recommends that owners/operators request the AETB to 

produce the Quality Manual, audit results for the previous 12 months, any corrective actions in the previous 12 

months, and relevant training records . The development and implementation of a suitable Quality Manual 

(QM) is quite costly, and testing companies should not be expected to release such intellectual property . AQS 

recommends that EPA revise this recommendation so that the QM table of contents would be sufficient. 

c. AQS recommends that EPA clarify what is related to the "effective date" (which would then define the "date 

that is six months from the effective date of final rule"), and what is related to January l, 2011  Some 

statements seem contradictory . 

Thank you for the opportunity to submit comments on these important changes. Please contact me if you have 

questions or require additional information. 

Sincerely, 

_~~C,G~~~'~,~ f ` . , 

` Daniel L. Todd, QEP, CHMM 

President JUL 19 Z010 

425 MAIN STREET * EVANSVILLE, IN 47708 * OFFICE: (812) 452-4785 * FAX: (812) 452-4786
Exhibit 12.1:    Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges

YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,(in thousands, except ratio)


2004


2005


2006


2007


2008Consolidated pretax income (loss)

$
521,212

$
721,051

$
567,108

$
(420,098
)
$
(405,764
)Share of distributed loss (income) of 50%-or-less-owned affiliates, net of equity pickup


(5,772
)

(315
)

260


(342
)

43,900Amortization of capitalized interest


41,764


45,483


48,708


41,689


61,146Interest


53,242


66,697


71,955


62,122


47,109Less interest capitalized during the period


(52,015
)

(65,959
)

(71,750
)

(62,024
)

(46,889
)Interest portion of rental expense


5,639


5,678


7,736


8,911


7,416EARNINGS (LOSS)

$
564,070

$
772,635

$
624,017

$
(369,742
)
$
(293,082
)Interest

$
53,242

$
66,697

$
71,955

$
62,122

$
47,109Interest portion of rental expense


5,639


5,678


7,736


8,911


7,416FIXED CHARGES

$
58,881

$
72,375

$
79,691

$
71,033

$
54,525Ratio of earnings (loss) to fixed charges


9.58


10.68


7.83


(5.21
)

(5.38
)


---



QuickLinks
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

January 14, 2009 

jm 

Order 

 

January 14, 2009 

137806 

LEONARD ARTHUR STRICKLAND III, 

 Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v SC: 137806 

 CoA: 288136 

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, 

 Defendant-Appellee. 

___________________________________ 

 On order of the Chief Justice, plaintiff-appellant having failed to pay the 

partial filing fee as required by the order of December 5, 2008, the Clerk of the Court is 

hereby directed to close this file.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.7

                                                            GRUPO CCR LETTERHEAD

                                                    Buenos Aires, March 10, 2003
FREE TRANSLATION

Grupo Incesa
La Paz, Bolivia
Present

Dear Sirs,

CCR-IRI, as a provider of information, authorizes Grupo Incesa, to use our
reports on the beer market in Bolivia, in the company's annual report and in its
Form 20-F.

We further consent to the use of our name in such Form 20-F which attaches this
consent as an exhibit thereto and to the incorporation of this consent into any
form that the Company must file.

/s/ Eliana Wallach
International Business Manager
<PAGE>
GRUPO CCR LETTERHEAD

                                                 Buenos Aires, February 28, 2003

FREE TRANSLATION

Mr. Faustino Arias
Quilmes Industrail S.A. (Quinsa)
Avda. Juan Domingo Peron 667
Capital Federal
Present

Ref: 20-F Registration to The New York Stock Exchange

CCR-IRI, as a provider of information, authorizes Quilmes Industrial S.A.
(Quinsa) , to use our reports on the beer industry in Paraguay corresponding to
the years 1996 to 2003 in the company's annual report and in its Form 20-F.

We further consent to the use of our name in such Form 20-F which attaches this
consent as an exhibit thereto and to the incorporation of this consent into any
form that the Company must file.

/s/ Ignacio Eiranova
Director
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

JARON BROWN,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 394 EAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 22nd day of January, 2019

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.
# C_2019126EN.01000401.xml

| 5.4.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 126/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.4.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 126/4

---

Special Report No 05/2019

FEAD-Fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived: ‘Valuable support but its contribution to reducing poverty is not yet established’

(2019/C 126/05)

The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that Special Report No 05/2019 ‘FEAD-Fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived: Valuable support but its contribution to reducing poverty is not yet established’ has just been published.

The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors' website: http://eca.europa.eu.

---
# Table 7.2

# RSE 7.2
III 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 157 

Recognizing Bread for the World, on the 35th anniversary of its founding, 

for its faithful advocacy on behalf of poor and hungry people in our 

country and around the world. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 21, 2009 

Mr. LUGAR (for himself, Mrs. LINCOLN, Mr. DURBIN, Mr. KOHL, Mr. 

BROWN, Ms. SNOWE, Mr. CASEY, Mr. KERRY, and Mr. MENENDEZ) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on 

the Judiciary 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing Bread for the World, on the 35th anniversary 

of its founding, for its faithful advocacy on behalf of 

poor and hungry people in our country and around the 

world. 

Whereas Bread for the World, now under the leadership of 

the Reverend David Beckmann, has grown in size and influence, and is now the largest grassroots advocacy network on hunger issues in the United States and on behalf 

of impoverished people overseas; 

Whereas members of Bread for the World believe that by addressing policies, programs, and conditions that allow 

hunger and poverty to persist, they are providing help 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
2 

•SRES 157 IS 

and opportunity far beyond the communities in which 

they live; 

Whereas Bread for the World has inspired the engagement 

of hundreds of thousands of individuals, more than 8,000 

congregations, and more than 50 denominations across 

the religious spectrum to seek justice for hungry and 

poor people by making our Nation’s laws more fair and 

compassionate to people in need; 

Whereas members of Bread for the World use hand-written 

letters and other personalized forms of communication to 

convey to their legislators their moral concern for the 

needs of mothers, children, small farmers, and other hungry and poor people; and 

Whereas Bread for the World has a strong record of success 

in working with Congress to— 

(1) strengthen our national nutrition programs; 

(2) establish and fund the Child Survival account 

that has helped reduce child mortality rates worldwide; 

(3) increase and improve the Nation’s poverty-focused development assistance to help developing countries 

in Africa and other underprivileged parts of the world; 

(4) pass the Africa: Seeds of Hope Act of 1998 that 

redirected United States resources toward small-scale 

farmers and struggling rural communities in Africa; 

(5) lead an effort to provide debt relief to the 

world’s poorest countries and tie debt relief to poverty reduction; and 

(6) establish an emergency grain reserve to improve 

the Nation’s response to humanitarian crises: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
3 

•SRES 157 IS 

1 (1) recognizes and commends Bread for the 

2 World, on the 35th anniversary of its founding, for 

3 its encouragement of citizen engagement, its advo4 cacy for poor and hungry people, and its successes 

5 as a collective voice; and 

6 (2) challenges Bread for the World to continue 

7 its work to address world hunger. 

Æ 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
# C_2019039EN.01001101.xml

| 1.2.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 39/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.2.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 39/11

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.9176 — Magna/Getrag Ford Transmissions Slovakia)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2019/C 39/04)

On 22 January 2019, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32019M9176. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32019M9176. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
# C_2019279EN.01000101.xml

| 19.8.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 279/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.8.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 279/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.9366 — BPCE/Auchan/Oney Bank)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2019/C 279/01)

On 26 July 2019, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in French and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32019M9366. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32019M9366. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
No. 11-10652.

#### Ybarra *v.*Baker, Warden.

C. A. 9th Cir. Motion of petitioner for remand, for stay of proceedings, or for leave to amend denied. Certiorari denied.
Agreement with Red Rock Partners



 EXHIBIT 10.16 
  
 STATE REVENUE SHARING
AGREEMENT 
 FOR TEXAS 
  
 This Revenue Sharing Agreement (RSA) covers 33,000 specimens received from the state of
Texas. One-time RSA fee: $750,000 (seven hundred fifty thousand dollars). Minimum annual storage fee per specimen: $50.00 (fifty dollars). 
  
 Term: A permanent RSA shall remain in effect as long as CRYO-CELL International, Inc., and/or any successor, continue to store cellular specimens commercially. In the
event of a merger or acquisition involving CRYO-CELL, this Agreement shall be grandfathered into the merger or acquisition transaction. 
  
 Partner’s entitlement begins when RSA is paid in full and is 37 1/2 % (thirty-seven and one-half percent) of the annual storage fees collected by CCEL. Partner will
receive their entitlement within 30 days (thirty days) following the end of the quarter in which CRYO-CELL received the revenues. 
  

	 	  	 STATE REVENUE SHARING
PARTNER
  
	  	 	  	 Terms of State
 Revenue Sharing Agreement
 ($750,000)

	 Name:
	  	 Red Rock Partners or its Assigns

	  	 	  
				
	Address:	  	 209 Painted Cliffs Drive, Sedona, AZ 86336

	  	 	  	 $50,000 non-refundable deposit

						
	Phone:	  	 520-282-1257

	  	Fax:	  	 520-282-7782

	  	 	  	 Balance of $700,000 due in full
 on or before August 30, 2001



 From a portion of their entitlement, Partner will
equally bear the cost of billing, collection and/or credit card charges for annual storage fees. This has been limited to $2.50 per “paid for” stored specimen, of which the Partner will be responsible for $1.25, and the Partner therefore
will receive 37 1/2 % (thirty-seven and one-half percent) of the annual storage fees collected by CCEL. In no instance will Partner be ever called on for an additional cash infusion. 
  
 CRYO-CELL agrees not to offer a RSA for the state identified above that will negatively impact Partner’s entitlement. 
  
 CRYO-CELL shall have the opportunity to operate in the above state without a partnership
after the 33,000 spaces have been filled. CRYO-CELL will, as soon as possible, refill any empty spaces that result from attrition from the 33,000 spaces, by immediately allocating new storage specimens to the above Partnership until it has been
refilled to 33,000 “paid for” spaces. 
  
 CRYO-CELL will hold Partner
harmless against any claims resulting from cellular storage activities. 
  
 Terms
of this Revenue Sharing Agreement cannot be changed unless mutually agreed to, in writing, by the Partner and CRYO-CELL (or any successor entity). 
  
 Agreed to this 30th day of May 2001. 
  
  

	 CRYO-CELL INTERNATIONAL, INC.
	 	 	 	 RED ROCK PARTNERS 

					
	By:	 	 /s/    DANIEL D.
RICHARD        

	 	 	 	By:	 	 /s/    SHIRLEY C.
CARIS        


	 	 	 Daniel D. Richard
 Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
	 	 	 	 	 	Shirley C. Caris, General Partner
	 	 	 	 	 	 	By:	 	 /s/    CHARLES D. NYBERG


	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	Charles D. Nyberg, General Partner
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-6934

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

TAMARA LLAMAS, a/k/a Tamara Deyton, a/k/a

Tamara Mullins, a/k/a Tamara Smith, a/k/a

Tammy,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District

Judge. (CR-97-63-H, CA-00-254-7-H)

Submitted: October 4, 2001 Decided: October 11, 2001

Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tamara Llamas, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Edward Skiver, Assistant

United States Attorney, J. Frank Bradsher, OFFICE OF THE UNITED

STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Tamara Llamas seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying her motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2001).

We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the

district court. United States v. Llamas, Nos. CR-97-63-H; CA-00-

254-7-H (E.D.N.C. filed Apr. 5, 2001; entered Apr. 9, 2001). We

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions

are adequately presented in the materials before the court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                             916
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           2,648
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                   736
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                   802
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                      3,905
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                         23,655
<ALLOWANCE>                                        386
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  33,773
<DEPOSITS>                                      26,316
<SHORT-TERM>                                     2,610
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                832
<LONG-TERM>                                      1,447
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              400
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       2,168
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                  33,773
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                    466
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                   59
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    52
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                   577
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                 201
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 266
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                              311
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       23
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   2
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                    207
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    204
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       121
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.02
<LOANS-NON>                                        321
<LOANS-PAST>                                        25
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   380
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       27
<RECOVERIES>                                        10
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  386
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                               157
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                 32
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            197
        

</TABLE>