alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

March 24, 2021

No. 04

- 20

- 00588

- CR

Gary Thomas CRAYTON, Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

From the 379th Judicial District Co urt , Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2015CR9248 Honorable Ron Rangel , Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

On March 19, 2021 , Appellant’s court

- appointed appellate counsel filed an Anders brief and a motion to withdraw

. See Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967) ; High v. State

, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978) . In counsel’s certification to this
court, Appellant’s counsel explained that he took the following steps:

• notified Appellant that counsel filed an Anders brief and a motion to withdraw, and provide d Appellant with a copy of the documents;

• advised Appellant of his right to review the appellate record and file a pro se brief;

• provided Appellant with a copy of the appellate record ; and

• advised Appellant of his right to seek discretionary review in the Court of Criminal Appeals if this court determines his appeal is frivolous.

See Kelly v. State , 436 S.W.3d 313, 318

– 20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); Ex parte Owens , 206 S.W.3d 670 , 674 n. 28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006); Meza v. State , 206 S.W.3d 684 , 688

– 89 (Tex. C rim. App. 2006).
The State filed a letter conditionally waiving its right to file a brief.If Appellant desires to file a pro se brief, we ORDER Appellant to do so within thirty

days of the date of this order

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.6(a). If Appellant files a pro se brief, the State may file a responsive brief not later than thirty days after the date Appellant’s pro se brief is filed in this court. See id. R. 38.6(b). If this court determines Appellant’s appeal is frivolous, Ap pellant may file a petition for discretionary review with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 68.4. Appellant must file the petition with the Clerk of the Court of Criminal Appeals within thirty days after this court issues its judgm ent. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 68.2(a). The petition should be addressed to Clerk of the Court of Criminal Appeals, P.O. Box 12308, Austin, Texas 78711.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is held in abeyance pending further order of this court.

_________________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 24th day of March, 2021

.

___________________________________ MICHA EL A. CRUZ

, Clerk of Court
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-6532
DARRYL ASMAR, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ROBIN CUFFY, Director Food Services, FCI Morgantown; LESLIE R. BIL OTTI, Cook Supervisor, FCI Morgantown; BRENDA BARRETT, Health Services Director, FCI Morgantown; WILLIAM THOMPSON, Warden, FCI Morgantown, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. William M. Kidd, Senior District Judge. (CA-95-73-1) Submitted: December 12, 1996 Decided: December 18, 1996 Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Darryl Asmar, Appellant Pro Se. Patrick Michael Flatley, Assistant United States Attorney, Daniel W. Dickinson, Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his complaint brought under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics , 403 U.S. 388 (1971). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Asmar v. Cuffy , No. CA-95-73-1 (N.D.W. Va. Mar. 22, 1996). 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
# DLA civilian, Army reservist promoted to brigadier general

/ Published April 21, 2021
LOS ANGELES, 
Army Reserve Col. John M. Dreska, a civilian Defense Logistics Agency Land and Maritime division chief, was promoted to the rank of brigadier general April 11 and assumed command of the Los Angeles-based 311th Expeditionary Sustainment Command.

Dreska is an Ohio native and 1992 graduate of the Ohio State University. Over the course of his nearly three decades in uniform he’s balanced his time between active-duty military service, the U.S. Army Reserve and his Department of Defense civilian career.

Dreska has served with the Defense Logistics Agency since 1996 and specializes in military tires, batteries and engines at the Columbus-based Land and Maritime logistics hub.

The newly promoted general officer has held a number of titles throughout his military career including director of the Counter-ISIS Train and Equip Fund, Multi-National Forces-Iraq operations officer and commander of several logistics teams and units. His operational deployments include tours in Iraq, Afghanistan, Kuwait and Somalia. With the promotion comes a change of title and increased responsibility for Dreska as he assumes command of the 79th Theater Sustainment Command’s 311th ESC.

The ESC headquarters provides operational and tactical level support within the theater sustainment command and is responsible for command and control of units in Nevada, Arizona and California.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v David Salter, Appellant.

[769 NYS2d 777]

— Judgment unanimously affirmed. Counsel’s motion to be relieved of assignment granted *(see People v Crawford,*71 AD2d 38 [1979]). (Appeal from Judgment of Ontario County Court, Doran, J. — Criminal Sale Controlled Substance, 3rd Degree.) Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Green, Pine, Hurlbutt and Kehoe, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 118 (Friday, June 19, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 33754]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-16287]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION


Southeastern States Regional Fairness Board; Public Hearing

    The Southeastern States Regional Fairness Board Public Hearing is 
to be held on August 21, 1998, starting at 1:00 p.m. at the BellSouth 
Building, 333 Commerce, Nashville, TN 37201, in space being donated by 
the BellSouth Corporation, to receive comments from small businesses 
concerning regulatory enforcement or compliance taken by Federal 
agencies. Transcripts of these proceedings will be posted on the 
Internet. These transcripts are subject only to limited review by the 
National Ombudsman.
    For further information contact: Gary P. Peele, telephone (312) 
353-0880.

    Dated: June 15, 1998.
Shirl Thomas,
Director, Office of External Affairs.
[FR Doc. 98-16287 Filed 6-18-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
No. 09-1426.

#### City of New York, New York, et al., Petitioners v. Susan Ross Green, Executrix of the Estate of Walter Green, Deceased.

562 U.S. 947, 131 S. Ct. 125,

178 L. Ed. 2d 242,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7703.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.

Justice Sotomayor took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.

Same case below, 359 Fed. Appx. 197.
No. 09-11301.

#### Marcelle Dorsey, Petitioner v. Kenneth McKee, Warden.

562 U.S. 872, 131 S. Ct. 175,

178 L. Ed. 2d 105,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6780.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
# Disposition Services training provides foundational knowledge for workforce

/ Published Sept. 28, 2022
BATTLE CREEK, Mich., 
                Disposition Services training provides foundational knowledge for workforce                            Mike Cannon, the Director of DLA Disposition Services, addresses the audience of a pilot training course in the Hart-Dole-Inouye Federal Center in Battle Creek, Michigan.            SHARE IMAGE:Download ImageImage DetailsPhoto By: DLA Disposition ServicesVIRIN: 220921-D-OS362-014Incoming Defense Logistics Agency Disposition Services’ employees will take a foundational training course providing them with knowledge on the “why” behind the processes they perform in their day-to-day jobs.

“This course will give employees a true understanding of who we are as an MSC [Major Subordinate Command],” said Disposition Services Resource Management Director Chris Judd. “It will show them why we do what we do, and how important and unique we are to DLA and the DOD.”

The foundational course is under development with input from each Disposition Services’ directorate as well as several subject matter experts – specifically targeted to employees new to Disposition Services.

A pilot course took place September 22 and 23 with new hires to those that have been with the MSC for less than a year from various sites. Feedback was collected by the participants to improve the final course iteration.

“The purpose of this training is to teach people why we do the things we do,” said DLA Disposition Services Chief of Staff Peter Foreman. “This training will show our workforce why those things are important and why we exist as an organization and provide baseline knowledge that is common to every Disposition Services employee.”

Regardless of job title, anyone joining the Disposition Services team will learn about how their job affects the organization. The course will present participants with an understanding of how important they are and how critical their daily tasks are to supporting the warfighter.

Course topics include a history of the agency, overview of the current mission, safety, controlled property verification, inventory, receiving usable property and scrap, hazardous material public sales, hazardous waste disposal, contracting metrics, and more.

“It was our goal to ensure our employees know how important they are and how critical their day-to-day mission is,” Judd said. “We are working very hard to make the training interesting, valuable and specifically targeted to new employees while at the same time trying not to overload them with too much information.”

By February 2023, each new Disposition Services employee – regardless of their prior time spent in the DOD or DLA – will take the course.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-7748

COREY LORENZO WOODFOLK,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

STATE OF MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, District Judge. (CA02-3836)

Submitted: February 11, 2005 Decided: March 2, 2005

Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Corey Lorenzo Woodfolk, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Ann Rapp Ince,

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland,

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Corey Lorenzo Woodfolk, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal

the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254

(2000) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit

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

§ 2253(c)(1) (2000); see Reid v. Angelone, 369 F.3d 363, 368-69,

374 n.7 (4th Cir. 2004). 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) (2000). A prisoner

satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists

would find that the district court’s assessment of his

constitutional claims is debatable and that any dispositive

procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or

wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003);

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d

676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the

record and conclude that Woodfolk has not made the requisite

showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny

Woodfolk’s motion to amend the pleadings, 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
# Employee Assistance Program provides mental health services for DLA Troop Support employees at no cost

/ Published May 3, 2023
PHILADELPHIA, 
Taking time to check in with your fellow colleagues is a major focus as National Mental Health Awareness Month begins.  

“As Americans, we have a duty of care to reach out to one another and leave no one behind,” President Joseph R. Biden wrote in this year’s proclamation. “But so many of our friends, colleagues, and loved ones are battling mental health challenges, made worse but the isolation and trauma of COVID-19.” 

As Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support civilian employees are returning to the worksite, there are various services available to assist them – some which are at no cost – through the Employee Assistance Program. Magellan Federal, a third-party firm, provides the counseling services, which in most cases are confidential.  

“Our counselors are mandatory reporters in the instances of suspected: self-harm, harm of others, and child or elder abuse,” said Renee Dwornitski, the DLA field consultant for Magellan.  “Counsellors also may be limited in terms of confidentiality should they be subpoenaed.” 

By either calling 1-866-580-9046 and informing the technicians of your DLA Troop Support affiliation; accessing www.magellanascend.com and navigating the prompts; or by emailing Dwornitski, at dwornitskir@magellanfederal.com, employees can be connected to a variety of services including: counseling, work-life services and manager support. 

“Everyone is so different, and it comes down to recognizing the unique circumstances of each person,” said Dwornitski. “You may want to consider challenging the thoughts that are coming up due to your concerns. By challenging those thoughts, you’re catching them when they arrive—you can’t control the fact that they are coming your way, but you can catch them. 

“And then you can ask: is this thought helping me? Is it serving me now? What evidence do I have for or against it?” said Dwornitski. “It’s difficult to talk about it in general terms but in therapy it’s a little easier to address.” 

Although field consultants like Dwornitski have the credentials to perform clinical duties—such as diagnosing mental health conditions—the counselling services provided through the EAP are non-clinical but, should the need arise, the counselee may be referred to a different provider for such treatment within the network of the counselee’s health insurance. 

Renee Dwornitski is a licensed professional counselor in Pennsylvania with more than 17 years of experience in the field of behavioral health. She has worked with various populations in outpatient, inpatient, residential, and community settings. 

For more information on the other services—such as in the areas of: adult care and aging; childcare and parenting; daily living; education; moving; pet ownership; pregnancy and adoption; relationships; and special needs—available through the EAP, please visit: www. Magellanascend.com
**EXHIBIT
        32.1**
  **STATEMENT
        OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**
 **PURSUANT
        TO SECTION 1350 OF TITLE 18 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE**
  Pursuant
        to Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code, the undersigned, Thomas
        Granville, Chief Executive Officer of Axion Power International, Inc (the
        “Company”), hereby certifies that:
 The
          Company’s Form 10 KSB Annual Report for the year ended December 31, 2006 (the
“Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 15(d) of the
          Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
  The
          information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
          the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 /s/
                  Thomas GranvilleThomas
                  Granville, Chief Executive OfficerDated:
                  April 4, 2008
Exhibit 13.1

CERTIFICATION OF CEO AND CFO

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the annual report of Atlatsa Resources Corporation (the Registrant) filed under cover of Form 20-F for the
period ended December 31, 2014, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Harold Motaung as Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant and Boipelo Lekubo as Chief Financial Officer of the
Registrant, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of his knowledge that:

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

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



|                   |  |                        
|------------------ |  | -----------------------
|/s/ Harold Motaung
|By:                |  | Harold Motaung         
|                   | 
|Title:             |  | Chief Executive Officer
|                   | 
|Dated:             |  | March 31, 2015         



|                   |  |                        
|------------------ |  | -----------------------
|/s/ Boipelo Lekubo
|By:                |  | Boipelo Lekubo         
|                   | 
|Title:             |  | Chief Financial Officer
|                   | 
|Dated:             |  | March 31, 2015         

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall
not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Registrant for purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
No. 09-10855.

#### Carlos Aviles Armenta, Petitioner v. Jacqueline Chatman, et al.

562 U.S. 854, 131 S. Ct. 114,

178 L. Ed. 2d 70,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6371.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 371 Fed. Appx. 452.
1400 North Hurstbourne Parkway Louisville, KY 40223 502.329.3000 Tel June 15,2012
U.S. Department ofTransportation Docket Operations, M-30 West Building Ground Floor, Room Wl2-140 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590
Subject: NPRM 2009-NM-234-AD Rl DocketNo. FAA-2010-0547 Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-234-AD 

# ;XPAf1TMENTOF**r~i/;NSPORTATION**


### ,'Xi=T**nPE.R 11** **T'0~1S** ., ',,._t VI ,{'"'\ I i1 

# Wl Jl/N 

# 22 A II: 

# 0

# g**R~ference:** IAINPRM 2009-NM-234-AD Rl, DocketNo. FAA-2010-0547 dated June I, 2012 IBINPRM 2009-NM-234-AD, DocketNo. FAA-2010-0547 dated June 3, 2010 ICIBoeing Service Bulletin 757-57-0068, dated September 15,2009 IDIBoeing Service Bulletin 757-57-0068, Rev.l, Dated July 9, 2011

To Whom ItMay Concern:

United Parcel Service Co. (UPS), has reviewed the reference I AINPRM and has the following comments:
Reference/A/, paragraph (q) requires inspection ofB757 aircraft in accordance with the work instructions in Reference IDI. UPS concurs with the technical reasons for the inspections and have been accomplishingthem since February 2011 in accordance with Reference IBI and ICI, and IDI after the revision was released. UPS has been recording results ofthe inspection in a**mo~e** simplified manner using the exact work-steps from Reference ICI or IDI. UPS has not been completing Appendix A ofReference IDI which is a table for recording inspection results since this was not'a requirement per Reference IBI. UPS requests that the reporting requirements perAppendix A of Reference ICIbe effective from AD effective date going forward and retroactively the data can be provided to Boeing in any format due to the fact the level ofdetail required to complete Appe))dix A may not be available. UPS also requests previous credit for inspections**bt~** provided since the requirements ofreference ICI or IDIhave been followed with the exception ofthe discrepancy data being exactly in theAppendix A format. Accomplishing the inspections again to complete Appendix A ofReference IDI would provide no benefit to the airline community because any discrepancies found during the initial inspections that were not detailed in Appendix A would have been corrected prior to further flight per Reference ICI or IDI and can notbe repro<;Juced or found on a second inspection. ·
UPS. is committed to ensuring full compliance and maintaining the highest level ofsafety in our operation. Please contact Jacqueline Davis, at (502) 329-3632 ifyou have any questions.
Sincerely,

Quality Assurance

DH:JD:mkc
No. 10-5674.

#### Jose Gallegos-Lopez, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 934, 131 S. Ct. 335,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7642.

178 L. Ed. 2d 217,

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.

*218Same case below, 357 Fed. Appx. 103.
#### Lakeside Realty LLC v County of Sullivan

3d Dept: 140 AD3d 1450

denied
================================================================================


                                  EXHIBIT 32.2


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES?OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection  with the Annual Report of Terra  Systems,  Inc., on Form
10-KSB for the year ended  December 31, 2002, as filed with the  Securities  and
Exchange  Commission  on  the  date  hereof  (the  "Report"),  Mark  Faerber,  a
consultant  performing  certain services for the Company commonly performed by a
Chief  Financial  Officer  certifies,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section  1350,  as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

(2)      The  information  contained  in  the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
         material respects,  the financial condition and result of operations of
         the Company.


Date: March 30, 2006


/s/ Mark Faerber
------------------------------------------
Mark Faerber
Consultant performing certain services for the Company
commonly performed by a Chief Financial Officer



















--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. 10-128.

#### Daniel Ray Unger, Petitioner v. Greg Taylor, Sheriff, Anderson County, Texas, et al.

562 U.S. 894, 131 S. Ct. 305,

178 L. Ed. 2d 144,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6158.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 368 Fed. Appx. 526.
No. 10-5091.

#### Yusuf Howard, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 903, 131 S. Ct. 239,

178 L. Ed. 2d 160,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6012.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.

Same case below, 369 Fed. Appx. 354.