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### UNPUBLISHED



# UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT



#  U NITED S TATES OFA MERICA ,

Plaintiff-Appellee,
v. No. 02-4227



# 
J OSEPHB ULLOCK ,

Defendant-Appellant. 

# 
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge.

(CR-98-133) Submitted: October 17, 2002 Decided: October 29, 2002 Before WIDENER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

COUNSELCraig W. Sampson, LAW OFFICE OF CRAIG W. SAMPSON, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant. Michael Cornell Wallace, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

OPINION
PER CURIAM:Joseph Bullock appeals the district court’s order on remand granting specific performance as the remedy for the United States’ breach of its plea agreement with him. In a brief filed by counsel pursuant to Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967),* Bullock argues the district court should have deferred to his preference of rescission in selecting a remedy. We disagree. Bullock contends the concurring opinions in Santobello v. New York , 404 U.S. 257, 263 (1971), indicate a district court should consider the defendant’s preference in selecting a remedy for a breach of a plea agreement. Based on our review of the record and the relevantcase law, however, we find this contention unpersuasive. Courts consistently confer upon district courts unfettered discretion in selecting a remedy for a breach of a plea agreement. See, e.g. , United States v. Jureidini , 846 F.2d 964, 965-66 (4th Cir. 1988). Furthermore, we findthe timing and context of Bullock’s request to vacate his plea agreement attenuates his reliance on those concurring opinions. See Santobello , 404 U.S. at 267, 268. Nor do we find other error in the district court’s finding that Bullock was entitled only to specific performance of his plea agreement. We have examined the entire record in this case in accordance with the requirements of Andersand find no meritorious issues for appeal.Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order granting specific performance. This court requires that counsel inform his client, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further *Bullock was notified of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief, but he has not done so. 2 U NITED S TATES v. B ULLOCKreview. If the client requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel maymove in this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on the client.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.
AFFIRMED 3 U NITED S TATES v. B ULLOCK
#### James J. ANNIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida; Gulf County Detention Facility, Appellees.

CASE NO. 1D17-584

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Opinion filed August 4, 2017

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Gulf County. John L. Fishel, II, Judge.

AFFIRMED.
# C_2019428EN.01004101.xml

| 20.12.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 428/41 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.12.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 428/41

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.9503 — Gardner Denver/Ingersoll Industrials)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2019/C 428/09)

1.

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| — | Ingersoll-Rand U.S. HoldCo, Inc. (‘IR Industrials’, United States), belonging to the group Ingersoll-Rand plc (Ireland), |
| --- | --- |

—

Ingersoll-Rand U.S. HoldCo, Inc. (‘IR Industrials’, United States), belonging to the group Ingersoll-Rand plc (Ireland),

| — | Gardner Denver Holdings, Inc. (‘GDI’, United States). |
| --- | --- |

—

Gardner Denver Holdings, Inc. (‘GDI’, United States).

GDI acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of IR Industrials.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.

2.

| — | IR Industrials is the industrial business of Ingersoll-Rand, active in air and gas compressors, blowers, gas systems and services, power tools and material handling systems, as well as utility and consumer low-speed vehicles, |
| --- | --- |

—

IR Industrials is the industrial business of Ingersoll-Rand, active in air and gas compressors, blowers, gas systems and services, power tools and material handling systems, as well as utility and consumer low-speed vehicles,

| — | GDI is a provider of air and gas compression equipment and aftermarket parts and services sold for industrial, energy and medical industries. GDI designs, manufactures and markets compressors, pumps and blowers, and vacuums for a range of industrial applications. |
| --- | --- |

—

GDI is a provider of air and gas compression equipment and aftermarket parts and services sold for industrial, energy and medical industries. GDI designs, manufactures and markets compressors, pumps and blowers, and vacuums for a range of industrial applications.

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

4.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

M.9503 — Gardner Denver/Ingersoll Industrials

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

E-mail: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Fax: +32 22964301

| Postal address: |
| --- |
| European Commission |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

Postal address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

1

---
265A16

#### State v. Jose Merlin Henriquez Portillo

1. Def’s Notice of Appeal of Right Pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-30(1) Raising Allegedly Substantial Constitutional Question

2. State’s Motion to Dismiss Notice of Appeal

1.- .

2. Allowed
#### State v. Toro

110,777

07/22/2015

Denied

Unpublished
131P16-3

#### Somchoi Noorsob v. Supreme Court of North Carolina

Petitioner’s *Pro Se*Motion for Notice to Appeal and Request for Certificate of Appealability

Dismissed 10/17/2016
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 75 (Monday, April 20, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 19492]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-10362]


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

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

[FEMA-1209-DR]


Georgia; Amendment to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster for the 
State of Georgia, (FEMA-1209-DR), dated March 11, 1998, and related 
determinations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 7, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Madge Dale, Response and Recovery 
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, 
(202) 646-3260.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster for the State 
of Georgia, is hereby amended to include the following areas among 
those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the 
catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President in his 
declaration of March 11, 1998:

    Henry and Spalding Counties for Individual Assistance.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) 
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 83.537, Community 
Disaster Loans; 83.538, Cora Brown Fund Program; 83.539, Crisis 
Counseling; 83.540, Disaster Legal Services Program; 83.541, 
Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 83.542, Fire Suppression 
Assistance; 83.543, Individual and Family Grant (IFG) Program; 
83.544, Public Assistance Grants; 83.545, Disaster Housing Program; 
83.548, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.)
Lacy E. Suiter,
Executive Associate Director, Response and Recovery Directorate.
[FR Doc. 98-10362 Filed 4-17-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6718-02-P
No. 12-6237.

#### Cochran *v.*United States.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.
SCWC-11-0000625

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

 

SIERRA CLUB,

Petitioner/Appellant-Appellee,

vs.

CASTLE & COOKE HOMES HAWAI#I, INC., and 

THE LAND USE COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I, 

Respondents/Appellees-Appellants,

OFFICE OF PLANNING, STATE OF HAWAI#I, DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND

PERMITTING, and NEIGHBORHOOD BOARD NO. 25,

Respondents/Appellees-Appellees.

 

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

(CAAP-11-0000625; CIV. NO. 10-1-2424-11)

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

(By: Nakayama, Acoba, McKenna, and Pollack, JJ.,

with Recktenwald, C.J., dissenting separately)

Upon consideration of the Motion for Reconsideration

filed by Respondents-Appellees-Appellants Castle & Cooke Homes

Hawai#i, Inc., filed January 2, 2014, and the records and files

herein, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion is denied.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, January 10, 2014.

Benjamin M. Matsubara, 

Curtis T. Tabata, and 

Wyeth M. Matsubara

for respondent-appellee-appellant

Castle & Cooke Homes, Hawai#i,

Inc.

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr.

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

/s/ Richard W. Pollack 

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCWC-11-0000625

10-JAN-2014

01:33 PM
III 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 611 

Congratulating the Cumberland Valley Athletic Club on the 48th anniversary 

of the running of the JFK 50-Mile Ultra-Marathon. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

AUGUST 5, 2010 

Mr. CARDIN (for himself, Ms. MIKULSKI, Mr. BAUCUS, and Mr. LUGAR) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on 

the Judiciary 

NOVEMBER 19, 2010 

Committee discharged; considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Congratulating the Cumberland Valley Athletic Club on the 

48th anniversary of the running of the JFK 50-Mile 

Ultra-Marathon. 

Whereas President John F. Kennedy set as a national goal 

the improvement of the health of the members of the 

United States Armed Forces; 

Whereas President Kennedy, in 1963, issued an Executive 

order challenging United States Marine officers to finish 

a 50-mile race in 20 hours, matching a similar challenge 

issued in 1908 by President Theodore Roosevelt; 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

SRES 611 ATS 

Whereas, since that Executive order, thousands of Americans, 

not just servicemen and women, have taken up the challenge of the JFK 50-Mile Ultra-Marathon; 

Whereas, since the inception of the JFK 50-Mile Ultra-Marathon, all members of the Armed Services have been invited to meet the challenge set by Presidents Kennedy 

and Roosevelt over an historic race course; 

Whereas between 30 and 40 percent of participants in the 

JFK 50-Mile Ultra-Marathon each year are active duty 

military or veterans; 

Whereas each of the branches of the United States Armed 

Forces fields at least 1 team each year in the JFK 50- 

Mile Ultra-Marathon, and the Navy typically fields several teams; 

Whereas much of the course of the JFK 50-Mile Ultra-Marathon is located on Federal land, including the historic 

C&O Canal, the Appalachian Trail, and Antietam Battlefield; 

Whereas the JFK 50-Mile Ultra-Marathon includes the War 

Correspondents Memorial Arch, a national monument located in Gathland State Park in the State of Maryland; 

and 

Whereas following the assassination of President Kennedy, 

the first JFK 50-Mile Ultra-Marathon was organized as 

a way to honor President Kennedy, and has been held 

annually, rain or shine, ever since: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) commends and congratulates the past, 

3 present, and future participants and organizers of 

4 the JFK 50-Mile Ultra-Marathon; and 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
3 

SRES 611 ATS 

1 (2) requests the Secretary of the Senate to 

2 transmit an enrolled copy of this resolution to the 

3 Cumberland Valley Athletic Club as an expression of 

4 the best wishes of the Senate for a glorious year of 

5 celebration. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-6812

DOUGLAS E. MELTER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, named as United States Employed,

Defendant - Appellee.

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

Richmond. M. Hannah Lauck, District Judge. (3:22-cv-00391-MHL-MRC)

Submitted: May 30, 2024 Decided: June 3, 2024

Before GREGORY and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Douglas E. Melter, Appellant Pro Se. Jonathan Holland Hambrick, Assistant United States 

Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6812 Doc: 12 Filed: 06/03/2024 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Douglas E. Melter appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil action filed 

under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(b), 2671-80. We have reviewed the 

record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. 

Melter v. United States, No. 3:22-cv-00391-MHL-MRC (E.D. Va. July 3, 2023). We deny 

Melter’s motion for appointment of counsel and 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

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6812 Doc: 12 Filed: 06/03/2024 Pg: 2 of 2
#### State v. Wilson

111,263

08/20/2015

Denied

Unpublished
#### State v. Williams

106,598

106,599

08/19/13

Denied.

Unpublished
III 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 30 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 15, 2011 

Received 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Providing for a conditional adjournment of the House of 

Representatives and a conditional recess or adjournment 

of the Senate. 

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 

2 concurring), That when the House adjourns on the legisla3 tive day of Thursday, March 17, 2011, Friday, March 18, 

4 2011, or Saturday, March 19, 2011, on a motion offered 

5 pursuant to this concurrent resolution by its Majority 

6 Leader or his designee, it stand adjourned until 2 p.m. 

7 on Tuesday, March 29, 2011, or until the time of 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

HCON 30 RDS 

1 any reassembly pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent 

2 resolution, whichever occurs first; and that when the Sen3 ate recesses or adjourns on any day from Thursday, 

4 March 17, 2011, through Friday, March 25, 2011, on a 

5 motion offered pursuant to this concurrent resolution by 

6 its Majority Leader or his designee, it stand recessed or 

7 adjourned until noon on Monday, March 28, 2011, or such 

8 other time on that day as may be specified in the motion 

9 to recess or adjourn, or until the time of any reassembly 

10 pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, which11 ever occurs first. 

12 SEC. 2. The Speaker of the House and the Majority 

13 Leader of the Senate, or their respective designees, acting 

14 jointly after consultation with the Minority Leader of the 

15 House and the Minority Leader of the Senate, shall notify 

16 the Members of the House and the Senate, respectively, 

17 to reassemble at such place and time as they may des18 ignate if, in their opinion, the public interest shall warrant 

19 it. 

Passed the House of Representatives March 15, 

2011. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 1350 AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002

 

In connection with the Annual Report of Reef Global Energy VII, L.P.(the Partnership) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31,2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the Report), I, David M. Tierney, principal financial officer of Reef GlobalEnergy VII, L.P., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:

 

(1)           TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)           Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Partnership.

 

 
| Date: April 15, 2009 | /s/ David M. Tierney                              |
|---------------------------|---------------------------------------------------|
|                      | David M. Tierney                                  |
|                      | Chief Accounting Officer—Public Partnerships |
|                      | Reef Exploration, L.P.                            |
|                      | (principal financial and accounting officer)      |

 

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to §906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Partnership for purposes of§18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

 

A signed original of this written statement required by §906 has beenprovided to the Partnership and will be retained by the partnership andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
#### IN the INTEREST OF: N.S., a Minor

150 EDA 2017

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

07/21/2017

CP-51-AP-0001180-2016 (Philadelphia)

Affirmed
|                                                                            
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                            
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                    
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                              
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                              
|View History:                                                               
|                                                                            
|No chart available.                                                         
|No chart available.                                                         
|                                                                            
|                                                                            
|Michigan Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed from Natural Gas  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                            

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1990's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        | -      | 0      | 0      | 0     
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 5/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 6/28/2024
|                                                        
|--------------------------------------------------------
|                                                        
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                          
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                          
|View History:                                           
|                                                        
|Colorado Natural Gas Repressuring  (Million Cubic Feet) 
|                                                        
|                                                        
|Colorado Natural Gas Repressuring  (Million Cubic Feet) 
|                                                        

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1960's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 8,501  | 6,645  | 3,257 
|1970's                                                                                                                            | 2,227  | 1,960  | 415    | 709    | 266    |        | 220    | 327    | 218    | 256   
|1980's                                                                                                                            | 196    | 398    | 227    | 388    | 94     | 748    | 485    | 593    | 2,241  | 6,703 
|1990's                                                                                                                            | 10,986 | 6,267  | 9,085  | 10,995 | 11,347 | 15,040 | 10,715 | 7,172  | 7,244  | 6,397 
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 6,423  | 7,263  | 7,479  | 8,885  | 9,229  | 9,685  | 10,285 | 10,625 | 11,945 | 11,173
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 10,043 | 10,439 | 0      | 0      | NA     | 0      | NA     | NA     | NA     | 0     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024