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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-7308

LONNIE LEE CARR,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

RON ANGELONE; MARK EARLEY,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior

District Judge. (CA-98-951)

Submitted: October 27, 1998 Decided: November 10, 1998

Before LUTTIG and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lonnie Lee Carr, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 relief on

his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp.

1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion

and find no reversible error. The district court properly concluded

that Appellant’s petition was time-barred because it was filed more

than one year after Appellant’s conviction became final. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Carr v. Angelone, No.

CA-98-951 (E.D. Va. July 16, 1998). We deny Appellant’s motion for

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
NO. 07-07-0039-CV

	IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

	FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	AT AMARILLO

	PANEL D

	OCTOBER 15, 2008

	______________________________

	JOHNNY RODRIGUEZ, JR., 

									Appellant

	v.

	ICON BENEFIT ADMINISTRATORS, INC., 

									Appellee

	_________________________________

	FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 3 OF LUBBOCK COUNTY;

	NO. 2006-598,648; HON. PAULA LANEHART, PRESIDING

	_______________________________

	Opinion

	_______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PIRTLE, JJ.

	Johnny Rodriguez, Jr., appeals from a final summary judgment favoring Icon Benefit Administrators, Inc.  His two issues involve the application of res judicata and due process.  Since our resolution of the former disposes of the appeal, we turn to that issue and affirm the judgment.  

	This appeal is the second involving these parties and the underlying dispute.  The first involved the trial court’s judgment enforcing a mediation agreement and dismissing Rodriguez’ claims against Icon “with prejudice.”  Though Rodriguez appealed, he did not contest the inclusion of the phrase “with prejudice” in the decree.  Furthermore, we affirmed the order.  Thereafter, he filed the suit from which this appeal arose.  The claims included causes of action previously alleged as well as new ones.  In response, Icon moved for summary judgment on the affirmative defense of res judicata.  That motion was granted.

	As previously mentioned, the trial court dismissed the first suit between the parties “with prejudice.”  Moreover, no one asked either the trial or appellate court to redact the latter phrase from the decree.  Thus, the determination became final for purposes of applying the doctrine of res judicata.  Labrie v. Kenney, 95 S.W.3d 722, 728-29 (Tex. App.–Amarillo 2003, no pet.).  This is true even though the trial court should not have dismissed the cause “with prejudice.”  Id.; Sommers v. Concepcion, 20 S.W.3d 27, 40 (Tex. App.–Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, pet denied).1  Consequently, the trial court did not err in granting summary judgment on Icon’s affirmative defense.

	There are opinions suggesting that the verbiage used in the judgment (i.e. with prejudice) is irrelevant if it nonetheless appears that the cause was truly not an adjudication of the merits.  E.g., Stubbs v. Patterson Dental Laboratories, 573 S.W.2d 274 (Tex. Civ. App.–Eastland 1978, no writ) and Haliburton v. Riley, 589 S.W.2d 821 (Tex. Civ. App.–Waco 1979, no writ).  However, those opinions have been seldom cited by other courts.  They also conflict with Labrie, Sommers, and the Supreme Court authority on which the latter relied.

	Accordingly, the summary judgment is affirmed.

							Per Curiam
Letter to Blackwater Capital Management LLC




			
	June 1, 2011	 	Exhibit 10.8 (b)

 Blackwater Capital Management, LLC 
 36 Cattano Avenue 
 Suite 601 
 Morristown, N.J. 07960 
 Attention: Mr. Andy Silwanowicz 

Re:    Management Agreement Renewals 
 Dear Mr. Silwanowicz: 
 We are writing with respect to your management agreements concerning
the commodity pools to which reference is made below (the “Management Agreements”). We are extending the term of the Management Agreements through June 30, 2012 and all other provisions of the Management Agreements will remain
unchanged. 
  

	 	•	 	 CTA Capital LLC 


  

	 	•	 	 Emerging CTA Portfolio L.P. 


  

	 	•	 	 Global Diversified Futures Fund L.P. 


  

	 	•	 	 Blackwater Master Fund L.P. 



Please acknowledge receipt of this modification by signing one copy of this letter and returning it to the attention of Ms. Jennifer Magro at the
address above or fax to 212-296-6868. If you have any questions I can be reached at 212-296-1302. 
  

			
	Very truly yours,
	
	CERES MANAGED FUTURES LLC
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Jennifer Magro

		 	Jennifer Magro
		 	Chief Financial Officer & Director

  

			
	BLACKWATER CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LLC
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Andy Silwanowicz



			
		
	Print Name:	 	Andy Silwanowicz
		
	JM/sr
********************************** 

*MONOGRAPH NO: MCW/LRP 27 

 ********************************* 

ITEM: Oatmeal, Instant, Strawberry/Cream (OSC) 

 (Cereal, Rolled Oats) 

NSN: 8920-01-265-0044 ITEM SPECIFICATION: A-A 20090 

APPROXIMATE CALORIC VALUE PER SERVING: 485/125 Grams 

CHARACTERISTICS OF ITEM: 

APPEARANCE: Tan cereal, pink/reddish fruit pieces. 

ODOR: Sweet, fruity, strawberry, typical oatmeal. 

FLAVOR: Sweet, fruity, strawberry oatmeal. 

TEXTURE: Thick, slightly pasty, slightly chewy fruit pieces. 

ESTIMATED SHELF-LIFE AT 70 DEGREES F: 36 months. 

 80 DEGREES F: 24 months 

 90 DEGREES F: 12 months 

 100 DEGREES F: 6 months 

EXPECTED DETERIORATIVE CHANGES: 

APPEARANCE: Browning, thicker when rehydrated, dark brown fruit. 

ODOR: Caramelized, burnt strawberry, scorched. 

FLAVOR: Burnt cooked oatmeal, strawberry jam. 

TEXTURE: Thick, firm and dry fruit. 

UNIQUE EXAMINATION/TEST PROCEDURES: Initial examination should be in the dehydrated 

state. Final examination and evaluation should be performed after reconstitution in a minimum eight 

ounces of hot water per 125 gram package. Product should be completely rehydrated. 
SPECIAL NOTES: Product is packed in a flexible package. Package is designed to yield 3/4 cup of 

product (340 grams) when rehydrated. A one to two year shelf- life is anticipated at 100 degree F 

storage.
Exhibit 10.3 Termination Agreement


Exhibit 10.3




TERMINATION AGREEMENT







AGREEMENT dated this 23rd day of January 2012, by and between B-MAVEN, INC. (hereinafter “BMI”), a Nevada corporation, with offices located at 3272 Reynard Way, San Diego, California 92103, Anna C. Jones, President of BMI and Gary B. Wolff, P.C., counsel to BMI, with offices located at 488 Madison Avenue, Suite 1100, New York, New York 10022.




WHEREAS, BMI entered into an agreement on June 27th, 2011 with Gary B. Wolff, P.C. to assist with the filing of BMI’s prospectus and legal representation of BMI; and




WHEREAS, BMI and Gary B. Wolff, P.C. have agreed to terminate the agreement entered in on June 27th, 2011 and legal representation and settle all outstanding professional services by Gary B. Wolff, P.C. with a payable due to Gary B. Wolff, P.C. by BMI in the amount of $20,000.00.




IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Termination Agreement to be executed as of the 23rd day of January 2012.  




BMI, INC.










By: /s/ ANNA C. JONES       

Anna C. Jones, President










GARY B. WOLFF, P.C.










By: /s/ GARY B. WOLFF      

Gary B. Wolff, President
No. 11-5382.

#### William Vance Turner, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 1159, 132 S. Ct. 1090,

181 L. Ed. 2d 982,

2012 U.S. LEXIS 903.

January 17, 2012.

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

Same case below, 427 Fed. Appx. 604.
Exhibit 10.27

 

FORM OF

AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO PROMISSORY NOTE DATED [          ]

EXECUTED BY ERICKSON AIR-CRANE INCORPORATED

AND PAYABLE TO [          ]

 

This Amendment (this “Amendment”) amends that certain Promissory Note, dated [          ] (the “Issue Date”), in the original principal amount of [          ] Dollars ($[          ]) (the “Existing Note”) payable to [          ] (the “Payee”) by Erickson Air-Crane Incorporated, a Delaware corporation (the “Maker”). All capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein have the meanings ascribed to them as set forth in the Existing Note.

 

WHEREAS, the Maker has filed a registration statement on Form S-1 under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, with the Securities and Exchange Commission for the purpose of offering shares of the Company’s common stock in an initial public offering (the “Offering”);

 

WHEREAS, in connection with the Offering, the Maker and the Payee agree that it is in their mutual best interest to reduce the interest rate applicable to the principal balance of the Existing Note from twenty percent (20%) to ten percent (10%) as of and following completion of the Offering; and

 

WHEREAS, Maker and Payee do not intend to amend any terms or conditions of the Existing Note other than the applicable interest rate as expressly stated herein.

 

NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto, intending to be legally bound, agree as follows:

 

1.               Interest Rate Adjustment.  Clause 1 of the Existing Note is amended by replacing the words “twenty percent (20%)” with the words “ten percent (10%).”

 

2.               Effectiveness.  This Amendment shall become effective upon the closing of the Offering (the “Effective Date”). It is hereby agreed that the amended interest rate of ten percent (10%) will apply to the outstanding principal balance of the Existing Note from the Effective Date through the Maturity Date. It is hereby acknowledged that the original twenty percent (20%) interest rate was the appropriate applicable interest rate for the period commencing on the Issue Date and ending on the Effective Date hereof.

 

3.               Effect of Amendment.  All terms and conditions of the Existing Note not expressly modified in this Amendment remain in full force and effect, and are hereby ratified by the parties.

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the duly authorized representatives of the parties have executed this Amendment on the dates set forth below.

 

 

	
[          ]
    	
 
    	
Erickson Air-Crane Incorporated
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
By:   
    	
 
    	
 
    	
By:   
    	
 
    
	
Name:   
    	
 
    	
 
    	
Name:   
    	
 
    
	
Title:   
    	
 
    	
 
    	
Title:   
    	
 
    
	
Date:   
    	
 
    	
 
    	
Date:
##### 



Exhibit 32.2 CERTIFICATE OF
CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
OF
AMERICAN CELLULAR CORPORATION I, Bruce R. Knooihuizen, Chief Financial Officer of American Cellular
Corporation (the Company), hereby certify that to the best of my knowledge,
the quarterly report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the three months ended
March 31, 2004, (the Report):  a.
    
    complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and thatb.
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition of the Company at March 31,
2004, and the results of the Companys operations for the three months
ended March 31, 2004. May 14, 2004 /S/ Bruce R. KnooihuizenBruce R. KnooihuizenExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
3 August 2010 ******************************* 

NSN: 8940 01 588 7957 * MONOGRAPH NO: M2B25

 *******************************

Item: Mexican Style Chicken Stew (CSMS)

Document: PCR-M-016, Mexican Style Chicken Stew, Packaged in a Flexible Pouch, Shelf 

Stable

Approximate Caloric Value Per Serving: 160 Component Classification: Primary

Estimated Shelf Life: 36 months at 80°F

Item Characteristics

Appearance:

Uniform mixture of whole muscle diced chicken, diced tomatoes, corn kernels, onion 

pieces, and green chili pieces in a tomato based sauce flavored with Mexican style 

seasonings.

Chicken: Dices with a cooked chicken color.

Vegetables: Mixture of red tomato dices, yellow corn kernels, white onion pieces and 

green chili pieces with a cooked appearance and cooked color.

Sauce: Glossy, semi-translucent and moderately thick with a medium to golden 

reddish-brown color with visible flecks of herbs and spices. 

Odor: Cooked chicken, cooked tomatoes, cooked corn, onion and mild green chili in a tomato 

based sauce with Mexican style seasonings.

Flavor: Cooked chicken, cooked tomatoes, cooked corn, onion and mild green chili in a tomato 

based sauce with Mexican style seasonings.

Texture:

Chicken: Moist and tender with a cooked whole muscle meat texture.

Tomatoes, white onions and green chilies: Soft and tender.

Corn: Slightly firm and tender.

Sauce: Smooth and moderately thick.

Possible Deteriorative Changes 

Appearance: Excessive darkening of chicken and sauce.

Odor: Scorched chicken, stale, rancid, excessive metallic.

Flavor: Scorched chicken, stale, rancid, excessive metallic.

Texture: Chicken stringy or chewy, excessively thick or thin sauce.

Unique Examination/Test Procedures

N/A

Special Notes

NA
April 11, 2013 

United States of America 

Department of Transportation 

Office ofthe Secretary 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

Samuel V. Weidner, Sr. 

1585 Hanover Road 

Lewistown, Montana 59457 

sweidner@mt.net 

Re: Order to Show Cause Proposing Termination of Essential Air Service Eligibility at 

Lewistown Montana 

To Whom It May Concern, 

I am a retired businessman, who presently serves on two of the most important boards in Lewistown, 

Montana -the Lewistown Municipal Airport Board and the Fergus County Port Authority Board. Both of 

these Boards deal with two issues critical to Lewistown's future. The first being economic 

development/business preservation. The second issue is to maintain public transportation critical to our 

Community's needs in rural Montana. 

It was previously understood that EAS required the same carrier for all Montana EAS cities. Our 

Community is now being told that there may be an option for Lewistown to have service to a different 

destination than other Montana EAS cities. Based upon the history of Lewistown air travel, this should 

make it possible for Lewistown to maintain its EAS eligibility if Lewistown can change its destination city 

to Denver. 

Specifically, when our EAS air provider flew to Denver in 2009 and 2010, the passenger numbers were 

approximately double the numbers, compared with years (such as presently), when Denver is not a 

destination from Lewistown. Our Community needs service to a major hub, such as Denver, which is 

clearly shown in the numbers provided above. 

We are hopeful that the DOT will consider allowing Montana EA$ cities to have separate bid proposals, 

and permit Lewistown to go through a trial period to reestablish its EAS eligibility. 

:?ti7JU ~ samuel v. Weidner, s~
No. 11-7748.

#### Amy Joyell Hicks, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 1169, 132 S. Ct. 1120,

181 L. Ed. 2d 999,

2012 U.S. LEXIS 704.

January 17, 2012.

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

Same case below, 448 Fed. Appx. 334.
No. 11-6842.

#### Christopher Kazas, Petitioner v. Matthew Cate, Secretary, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

565 U.S. 1069, 132 S. Ct. 782,

181 L. Ed. 2d 501,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8564.

November 28, 2011.

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

Same case below, 436 Fed. Appx. 813.
Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record

Plant ID 05647

Removed 

from Public 

(Non-CBI) 

Docket1

Copyright 

Flag2

File Name Description

x 05647\05647_Checklist.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

05647\05647_Completeness_Checklist.xlsx EPA Completeness Review Checklist

05647\05647_HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted

x 05647\05647_PartA.xls Plant submitted survey file

05647\Certification Statement Plant ID_05647.pdf Plant certification statement

x 05647\Supporting Documentation\05647_Part E.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 05647\Supporting Documentation\05647_Part H.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 05647\Supporting Documentation\05647_Part I.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 05647\Supporting Documentation\05647_PartA.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

1

 Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database . 

2

 Copyright documents are available from the docket.
No. 11-6292.

#### David Rodriguez, Petitioner v. Vernon L. Lewis, et al.

565 U.S. 968, 132 S. Ct. 466,

181 L. Ed. 2d 304,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 7577.

October 17, 2011.

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

Same case below, 427 Fed. Appx. 352.
Exhibit 31.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302
 CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER CERTIFICATION
 
 
 I, David B. Golub, Chief Executive Officer, certify that:
 
 1) I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Golub Capital BDC 3, Inc.;
 
 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;
 
 3) Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
 
 4) The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15 (e)) for the registrant and have:
 
 a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
 
 b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
 
 c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
 
 5) The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 
 a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
 
 b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
 
 
 
 Date: December 5, 2019
 
 
 /s/ David B. Golub
 David B. Golub
 Chief Executive Officer
 (Principal Executive Officer)
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 150 (Wednesday, August 5, 1998)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 41718]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-20809]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Institute of Standards and Technology

15 CFR Part 280

[Docket Number: 980623159-8159-01]
RIN 0693-AB47


Implementation of the Fastener Quality Act

AGENCY: National Institute of Standards and Technology, United States 
Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: In the June 30, 1998, Federal Register notice announcing the 
final rule and extension of implementation date for the Fastener 
Quality Act, important information was inadvertently omitted from one 
of the amendments, which has created ambiguity in the final rule. 
Accordingly, the Director of the National Institute of Standards and 
Technology (NIST) is publishing this notice to correct that amendment.

DATES: Effective June 30, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Subhas G. Malghan, FQA Program 
Manager, Technology Services, National Institute of Standards and 
Technology, Building 820, Room 306, Gaithersburg, MD 20899, telephone 
number (301) 975-5120.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register notice published on 
June 30, 1998, the letter (A) was inadvertently omitted from 
instruction number 4. Due to this omission, it was ambiguous whether 
subsections (B), (C), (D), and (E) were deleted from 
Sec. 280.810(c)(3)(i). Since the items listed in these subsections 
still are required, NIST is publishing this correction to the final 
rule to eliminate the ambiquity.
    In the final rule published in the Federal Register on June 30, 
1998 (63 FR 35507), on page 35508 in the first column, amendatory 
instruction number 4 is corrected to read as follows:
    4. Section 280.810(c)(3)(i)(A) is revised to read as follows:

    Dated: July 29, 1998.
Robert E. Hebner,
Acting Deputy Director, National Institute of Standards and Technology.
[FR Doc. 98-20809 Filed 8-4-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-13-M