alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-6602
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DWIGHT ROLLAND SHELTON, JR., Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Beckley. Elizabeth V. Hallanan, Senior District Judge. (CR-92-149, CA-96-424-5) Submitted: August 14, 1997 Decided: August 25, 1997 Before NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge, and BUTZNER and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dwight Rolland Shelton, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Michael Lee Keller, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversibleerror. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss substantially on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Shelton , Nos. CR-92-149; CA-96-424-5 (S.D.W. Va. Mar. 18, 1997). In addition, Appellant attempts to assert a claim raised for the first time in his objections to the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, contending that the district court erred in imposing a sentence for "crack" cocaine when Appellant pled guilty to a powder cocaine offense. Appellant's claim was not raised in his § 2255 motion, and he never made a motion to amend his initial filing. In any event, the claim is factually unsupported in the record. Further, nonconstitutional claims that could have been raised on appeal, but were not, may not be asserted in collateral proceedings. See Stone v. Powell , 428 U.S. 465, 477 n.10 (1976); United States v. Emanuel , 869 F.2d 795, 796 (4th Cir. 1989). A district court's technical application of the sentencing guidelines is a nonconstitutional claim. See United States v. Marin , 961 F.2d493, 496 (4th Cir. 1992). Because Appellant's claim alleges nonconstitutional error and could properly have been raised on appeal, his claim has been waived.3Accordingly, 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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TOSECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, Ernest Ortega, certify that:

|   |       |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       |
|--------|------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | (1)   | I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Towerstream Corporation for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018; and                                                                                                                                                                              |
|   |       |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       |
|   | (2)   | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; |
|   |       |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       |

 

Date: April 26, 2019

 

|   | /s/ Ernest Ortega                                                      |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Ernest Ortega			Chief Executive Officer

(Principal Executive Officer) |
No. 12-7024.

#### Miranda *v.*United States.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the Maui
Land & Pineapple Company, Inc. Balance Sheet as of June 30, 1997 and Statement
of Operations for the six months then ended, and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           1,923
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   12,106
<ALLOWANCES>                                       688
<INVENTORY>                                     21,148
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                38,341
<PP&E>                                         196,377
<DEPRECIATION>                                 108,313
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 138,454
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           15,106
<BONDS>                                         33,926
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        12,318
<OTHER-SE>                                      47,376
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   138,454
<SALES>                                         43,469
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                61,998
<CGS>                                           30,413
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   43,143
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,431
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,636
<INCOME-TAX>                                       975
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,661
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,661
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .92
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .92
        


</TABLE>
Heath Morton Eye InThe Sky Aerial Photography 76 Tanager Court Chillicothe, Ohio 45601

Federal Aviation Administration:

Specific Sections in which Eye In The Sky Aerial Photography is seeking anexemption: IN THE MATTER OFTHEPETITION FOREXEMPTION OF: EYE IN THE SKY AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY FOR AN EXEMPTION SEEKINGRELIEF FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF TITLE 14 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS SECTIONS 61.113(a) & (b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.409(a)(l) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b) CONCERNING COMMERCIAL OPERATION OF DJI PHANTOM 3 UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS PURSUANT TO SECTION 333 OF THE FAA MONDERNIZATION ANDREFORM ACT OF 2012 (PUBLIC LAW 112-95)

Extent ofreliefand ourreason for seekingrelief: In orderto use ourUnmanned Aircraft Systems for commercial use. We are seeking this exemption in orderto legally conductbusiness and comply with all Federal regulations and standards put forth by the FAA while operating our Unmanned Aircraft Systems.

How our request would benefit the public as a whole: Granting the petition for Eye In The SkyAerial Photography would allow for us to be able to efficiently, legally, economically, and safely perform aerial video and photography ofspecial events, sporting events, land survaillance, real estate, commercial inspections, and commercial maintenance over certain areas ofthese United States. Using Unmanned Aircraft Systems such as drone technology would greatly reduce negative impacts on the environment and also provide a safer altemative for businesses to conductland and equipmentinspections.

Reasons why the exemption wouldnot adversely affect safety, orhowthe exemption would provide a level ofsafety at least equal to the existing rule: By adhering to guidelines set forth bythe FAAwe wouldnotbe going above the recommended altitude nor flying atnight therefore avoiding any hazardous accidents such as colliding with a manned aircraft. We will also beregularly testflying and doing daily maintenance logs to ensure the quads are inproperworking order for eachjob or event as to prevent damage orbodilyinjury.
Summaryto publish inthe Federal Register stating-- 1. SEEKING RELIEF FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF TITLE 14 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS SECTIONS 61.113(a) & (b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b) CONCERNING COMMERCIAL OPERATION OF DJI PHANTOM 3 UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS PURSUANT TO SECTION 333 OF THE FAA MONDERNIZATION AND REFORM ACT OF 2012 (PUBLIC LAW 112-95) 2. We are seeking exemption in order to use our UAS for commercial use.

Submitted onJuly 22, 2015 by: Heath Morton Eye InThe Sky Aerial Photography 76 Tanager Court Chillicothe, Ohio 45601
Opinion issued March 11 , 2021

In The 

## Court of Appeals
For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01
- 20
- 00831
- CV

——————————— RELIABLE BUSINESS RESOURCES, LLC D/B/A RBR MACHINE, RLB PROPERTIES, LTD. GREEK LAKE EQUITIES, LLC, ROBERT KATTULA, ANDREW KATTULA , AND CUSTOM SPRING

MANUFACTURING, LLC , Appella nt s

V. RODGER BROGDON AND CHERYL BROGDON , Appell e e s

On Appeal from the 190th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Ca se No. 2020
- 03178

MEMORANDUM OPINION2

Appellant s ha ve filed an unopposed motion for voluntary dismissal of t he i r appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.2(a). The Court has not yet issued a decision in this appeal. Accordingly, we grant appellants ’ motion and dismiss the appeal

. We dismiss any pending motions as m oot

. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Kelly, Landau, and Hightower.
|                                                                        
|------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                        
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                          
|View History: Annual                                                    
|View History: Annual                                                    
|View History:                                                           
|                                                                        
|Texas Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                        
|                                                                        
|Texas Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption  (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                                                                                                                            |         |         |         |         |         |         |         | 645,058 | 711,720 | 741,902
|1970's                                                                                                                            | 769,500 | 784,773 | 802,112 | 828,139 | 817,194 | 763,107 | 729,946 | 732,428 | 757,853 | 717,462
|1980's                                                                                                                            | 536,766 | 505,322 | 347,846 | 307,717 | 326,662 | 307,759 | 302,266 | 355,765 | 318,922 | 291,977
|1990's                                                                                                                            | 394,605 | 297,233 | 293,845 | 296,423 | 298,253 | 333,548 | 330,547 | 301,800 | 330,228 |        
|- = 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: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                              
|View History: Annual                                                                        
|View History: Annual                                                                        
|View History:                                                                               
|                                                                                            
|New Hampshire Natural Gas Number of Commercial Consumers - Transported  (Number of Elements)
|                                                                                            
|                                                                                            
|New Hampshire Natural Gas Number of Commercial Consumers - Transported  (Number of Elements)
|                                                                                            

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1990's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 28     | 51    
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 26     | 51     | 213    | 300    | 331    | 400    | 433    |        |        |       
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 1,641  | 1,988  | 2,329  | 2,613  | 2,894  | 3,108  | 3,493  | 3,442  | 3,525  | 3,491 
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 3,345  | 3,271  | 3,335  |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = 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
Exhibit 31(c)

Certifications of the CEO

Pursuant to
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Donald B. Schroeder, certify that:



| | 1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the annual report on Form 10-K of Tim Hortons Inc.; and
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: March 31, 2010



/s/ DONALD B. SCHROEDERName: Donald B. SchroederTitle: Chief Executive Officer
### UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON,DC In the Matter of: CORNERSTONE AVIATION, INC. FAA OrderNo. 2012-12 DocketNos. Not Assigned FDMSNos. FAA-2011-0481, FAA-2011-0484, FAA-2011-0489 1 Served: December 27,2012 

### ORDERDISMISSING APPEAL2 OnAugust 27, 2012, Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") Richard C. Goodwin issued a written initial decision assessing Respondent Cornerstone Aviation, Inc. a $6,500 civil penalty. l On September 6, 2012, Complainant FAAfiled a notice ofappeal from the ALJ's decision. Underthe Rules ofPractice, Complainanthad a total of55 days to perfect its appeal by filing an appealbrief- 

### i.e., Complainant had 50 days from the ALJ's decision under 14 C.P.R. 

### § 13.233(c), plus 

### 5 additional days under the "mailingrule" in 14 C.F.R. 

### § 13.211(e). Fifty-five days from the ALJ's decision dated August 27,2012, was October 22, 2012. Thus, the deadline for Complainantto perfect its appeal by filing an appeal brief was October 22, 2012.

1Generally, materials filed in the FAA Hearing Docket (exceptfor materials filed in security cases) are also available for viewing at http://www.regulations.gov. 14 C.F.R. § 13.210(e)(l). 1 2 The Administrator's civil penalty decisions, along with indexes ofthe decisions, the rules ofpractice, and other information, are available on the Intemet atthe following address: www.faa.gov/about/o{fice org/headquarlers offices/age/pol adjudication/AGC400/Civil _Penalty!. See 14 C.P.R.§ 13.2JO(e)(2). In addition, Thomson Reuters/West Publishing· publishes Federal Aviation Decisions. Finally, the decisions are available through LEXIS (TR.ANS library) and WestLaw (FTR.AN-FAA database). For additional information, see the Web site.Complainanthas failed to perfect its appealby filing an appeal brief. Accordingly, Complainant's appeal is subjectto dismissal under 14 C.F.R. 

### § 13.233(d)(2). 3 

### THEREFORE, ITIS ORDERED THAT: Complainant's appeal is dismissed. 

### MICHAEL P. HUERTA ACTING ADMINISTRATOR Federal Aviation Administration



### VICKI S. LEEMON4 \("Manager, AdjudicationBranch

3 Section 13.233(d)(2) provides: TheFAA decisionmaker [the Administrator] may dismiss an appeal, on the FAA decisionmaker's own initiative or upon motion ofany other party, where a party has filed a notice ofappeal but fails to perfectthe appeal by timely filing an appeal briefwith the FAA decisionmaker. 4 Issued under authority delegated to the ChiefCounsel and the Assistant ChiefCounsel for Litigation by memorandum dated October 27, 1992, under 49 U.S.C. § 322(b) and 14 C.F.R. § 13.202 (see 57 Fed. Reg. 58,280 (1992)) and redelegated by the Assistant ChiefCounsel for Litigation to the Manager, Adjudication Branch, by Memorandum dated August 6, 1993. 

### 2
|                                                                        
|------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                        
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                          
|View History: Annual                                                    
|View History: Annual                                                    
|View History:                                                           
|                                                                        
|Alabama Natural Gas Supplemental Gas - Propane Air  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                        
|                                                                        
|Alabama Natural Gas Supplemental Gas - Propane Air  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                        

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1980's                                                                                                                            | 7      | 23     | 91     | 9      | 54     | 14     | 3      | 2      | 17     | 16    
|1990's                                                                                                                            | 14     | 28     | 25     | 44     | 5      | 0      | 18     | 21     | 2      | 4     
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      | 22     |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = 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
006P17

#### In the Matter of A.H., C.H.

Respondent-Mother’s PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31 (COA16-581)

Denied