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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-7254

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

ANTON MALAJ,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior

District Judge. (CR-92-170-A, CA-95-744-AM)

Submitted: January 23, 1996 Decided: February 16, 1996

Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Cheryl Johns Sturm, West Chester, Pennsylvania, for Appellant.

John Kuchta, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria,

Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 his

28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1988) motion. Our review of the record and the

district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without

merit. Accordingly, we affirm substantially on the reasoning of the

district court. United States v. Malaj, Nos. CR-92-170-A; CA-95-

744-AM (E.D. Va. June 19, 1995). In addition, Appellant's claim

that the sentencing court violated Fed. R. Crim. P. 32 was waived

by Appellant's failure to pursue an appeal and raise this nonconstitutional issue in that proceeding. See United States v. Emanuel,

869 F.2d 795, 796 (4th Cir. 1989). Finally, Appellant's claim that

his counsel was ineffective for dismissing his appeal without Appellant's knowledge is meritless. We find that Appellant's failure

to apply for reinstatement of his appeal, when given the opportunity to do so by this court, prevents him from showing that he was

prejudiced by his counsel's performance as required by Strickland

v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 693-697 (1984). 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
STATE of North Carolina v. Ernie Donnell PINNIX, II

No. 27P19

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 27, 2019

Margaret A. Force, Assistant Attorney General, James R. O'Neill, District Attorney, For State of North Carolina

Andrew J. DeSimone, Assistant Appellate Defender, Glenn Gerding, Appellate Defender, For Pinnix, Ernie Donnell (II)

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 18th of January 2019 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 27th of March 2019."
No. 09-10250 (09A972).

#### Darryl Durr, Petitioner v. Ted Strickland, Governor of Ohio, et al.

559 U.S. 1087, 130 S. Ct. 2147,

176 L. Ed. 2d 757,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3476.

April 19, 2010.

Application for stay of execution of sentence of death, presented to Justice Stevens, and by him referred to the Court, denied. Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 602 F.3d 789.
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER ON M OTION

November 7, 2008 Revision Cause number: 01

- 1 5

- 0 110 1

- C R

Style: Quentin Lionel Laws v. The State of Texas

Date motion filed * : March 30

, 201 6

Type of motion: Secon d Motion f o r Ex tension of Time to File Pro Se Anders Re s po ns e

Party filing motion: Pro se a ppellant

Document to be filed: Anders Response

Is appeal accelerated? No

.

If motion to extend time:

Original due date: March 15 , 201 6

Number of extensions granted: 1 Current d ue d ate: April 1 5 , 201 6

Date r equested: N/A (30 days from granting of motion )

Ordered that motions are :

 Granted

If document is to be filed, document due: May 5 , 2016.

 No further extensions of time will be granted absent extraordinary

circumstances

.  Denied

 Dismissed ( e.g. , want of jurisdiction, moot)

 Other: _____________________________________

Appellant’s second motion for an extension of time to file his pro se Anders response

is granted because the trial clerk filed confirmation of delivery of the records to the

pro se appellant on March 2, 2016. However, appellant is warned that no further

extensions will be granted absent extraordinary circumstances , and if his response

is not filed by May 5, 2016, the Clerk of this Court may mark this case ready for

submission without appellant’s pro se Anders response.

Judge’ s signature: /s/ Evelyn V. Keyes

 Court

Date: April 5, 2016
No. 09-8096.

#### In re James Edward Walls, Petitioner.

559 U.S. 1059, 130 S. Ct. 2369,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3008.

176 L. Ed. 2d 579,

April 5, 2010.

Petition for rehearing denied.

Former decision, 558 U.S. 1146, 130 S. Ct. 1165, 175 L. Ed. 2d 992, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 646.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5024 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5024

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 26, 2006

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, 
                           and Urban Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
    To require annual oral testimony before the Financial Services 
 Committee of the Chairperson or a designee of the Chairperson of the 
Securities and Exchange Commission, the Financial Accounting Standards 
 Board, and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, relating to 
     their efforts to promote transparency in financial reporting.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Promoting Transparency in Financial 
Reporting Act of 2006''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

    Congress finds the following:
            (1) Transparent and clear financial reporting is integral 
        to the continued growth and strength of our capital markets and 
        the confidence of investors.
            (2) The increasing detail and volume of accounting, 
        auditing, and reporting guidance pose a major challenge.
            (3) The complexity of accounting and auditing standards in 
        the United States has added to the costs and effort involved in 
        financial reporting.

SEC. 3. ANNUAL TESTIMONY ON REDUCING COMPLEXITY IN FINANCIAL REPORTING.

    The Securities and Exchange Commission, the Financial Accounting 
Standards Board, and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board 
shall annually provide oral testimony by their respective Chairpersons 
or a designee of the Chairperson, beginning in 2007, and for 5 years 
thereafter, to the Committee on Financial Services of the House of 
Representatives on their efforts to reduce the complexity in financial 
reporting to provide more accurate and clear financial information to 
investors, including--
            (1) reassessing complex and outdated accounting standards;
            (2) improving the understandability, consistency, and 
        overall usability of the existing accounting and auditing 
        literature;
            (3) developing principles-based accounting standards;
            (4) encouraging the use and acceptance of interactive data; 
        and
            (5) promoting disclosures in ``plain English''.

            Passed the House of Representatives July 25, 2006.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
No. 09-9694.

#### Ruben Reyes-Echevarria, Petitioner v. United States.

559 U.S. 1083, 130 S. Ct. 2131,

176 L. Ed. 2d 751,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3219.

April 19, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied.
No. 09-9555.

#### Raymond Mentor, Petitioner v. New York State Division of Parole, et al.

559 U.S. 1098, 130 S. Ct. 2385,

176 L. Ed. 2d 778,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3625.

April 26, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the Appellate Division, Supreme Court of New York, Third Judicial Department, denied.

Same case below, 67 App. Div. 3d 1108, 886 N.Y.S.2d 920.
No. 09-9753.

#### Darryl Dewayne Edwards, aka David Devon Wilson, Petitioner v. United States.

559 U.S. 1085, 130 S. Ct. 2135,

176 L. Ed. 2d 753,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3189.

April 19, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 356 Fed. Appx. 773.
**Exhibit 31.2**

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO**

**SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT RULES 13a-15(e), AS ADOPTED PURSUANT**

**TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, Brett White, certify that: 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Meru Networks, Inc.; 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary 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 allmaterial 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 andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 

a) Designed suchdisclosure 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 usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

b) Evaluated theeffectiveness 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 onsuch evaluation; and 

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial 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, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officerand 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 equivalentfunctions): 

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial 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 theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Dated: May 11, 2010
Exhibit 99.1

                            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 Quarterly Report of Full Circle Promotions, Inc. a Nevada
corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2003,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), Sean Connelly, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certifies to
the best of his knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant
to ss. 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.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Full Circle Promotions, Inc., and will be retained by Full Circle
Promotions, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.


/s/ Sean Connelly
--------------------------
Sean Connelly
Chief Executive Officer
May 19, 2003
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Interior

###### Bureau of Land Management 

          - [LLUT922000 L13100000 FI000 257A] 

# AGENCY:

Bureau of Land Management, Interior 

# ACTION:

Notice of proposed reinstatement of terminated oil and gas lease, Utah. 

# SUMMARY:

In accordance with Title IV of the Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Management Act (Pub. L. 97-451), Whiting Oil and Gas Corporation timely filed a petition for reinstatement of oil and gas leases UTU76054 for lands in San Juan County, Utah, and it was accompanied by all required rentals and royalties accruing from September 1, 2008, the date of termination. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kent Hoffman, Deputy State Director, Division of Lands and Minerals at (801) 539-4080, or Becky Hammond, Chief, Branch of Fluid Minerals at (801) 539-4039. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The Lessee has agreed to new lease terms for rentals and royalties at rates of $5 per acre and 16                    2/3                     percent, respectively. The $500 administrative fee for the leases has been paid and the lessee has reimbursed the Bureau of Land Management for the cost of publishing this notice.                 

Having met all the requirements for reinstatement of the leases as set out in Section 31(d) and (e) of the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 (30 U.S.C. 188), the Bureau of Land Management is proposing to reinstate the lease, effective September 1, 2008, subject to the original terms and conditions of the leases and the increased rental and royalty rates cited above. 

Dated: February 20, 2009. 

Selma Sierra, 

State Director.

 [FR Doc. E9-5076 Filed 3-9-09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310-DQ-P
<PAGE>

Exhibit 99.1


                        CERTIFICATION OF CEO 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 Quarterly Report of Oxford Ventures, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Robert
Harrison, as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certifies,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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) of the
         Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


By:  /s/ Robert Harrison
---------------------------
Robert Harrison
President, CEO
November 11, 2003
**Exhibit 32.1**

** **

WRITTEN STATEMENT

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

 

The undersigned, James V. Mazzo and Richard A. Meier,the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer, respectively, ofAdvanced Medical Optics, Inc. (the “Company”), pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. §1350, hereby certify to the best oftheir knowledge that:

 

(i) the QuarterlyReport on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended March 31,2006 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 780(d));and

 

(ii) theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 

Dated:May 9, 2006

 
|   | /s/ JAMES V. MAZZO                                         |   |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | James V. Mazzo,                                            |
|   | President and Chief Executive Officer                      |
|   |                                                       |
|   |                                                       |
|   | /s/ RICHARD A. MEIER                                       |   |
|   | Richard A. Meier,                                          |
|   | Executive Vice President, Operations, President, Eye  Care |
|   | Business, and Chief Financial Officer                      |

 

**A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 hasbeen provided to Advanced Medical Optics, Inc. and will be retained by AdvancedMedical Optics, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission orits staff upon request.**

 

----
No. 09-986 (R46-013).

#### Guerry Green, et al., Petitioners v. W. Russell Campbell, et al.

559 U.S. 1059, 130 S. Ct. 2088,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3113.

176 L. Ed. 2d 580,

April 12, 2010.

The petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of South Carolina in the above-entitled case was dismissed today pursuant to Rule 46 of the Rules of this Court.

Same case below, 385 S.C. 428, 685 S.E.2d 163.
No. 09-9630.

#### Charles Christopher Lancaster, Petitioner v. Texas.

560 U.S. 910, 130 S. Ct. 3288,

176 L. Ed. 2d 1194,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 4018,

May 17, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the Court of Appeals of Texas, Third District, denied.
No. 09-8470.

#### Candelario Sanchez, Petitioner v. Pennsylvania.

559 U.S. 1010, 130 S. Ct. 1886,

176 L. Ed. 2d 371,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2673.

March 22, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania, Harrisburg Office, denied.

Same case below, 972 A.2d 561.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The Company does not file a classified balance sheet, therefore these not
provided. 5-02(9), 5-02(21)
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
<CURRENCY> DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          35,715
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,831
<ALLOWANCES>                                       231
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                         613,093
<DEPRECIATION>                                  82,478
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 584,666
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                        203,044
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           236
<OTHER-SE>                                     363,899
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   584,666
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               104,072
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   43,431
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                29,188
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    50
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              18,701
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 12,702
<INCOME-TAX>                                       815
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             11,887
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  1,386
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    10,501
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.54
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.54
        

</TABLE>
# C_2017343EN.01000202.xml

| 13.10.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 343/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.10.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 343/2

---

Withdrawal of notification of a concentration

(Case M.8522 — Avantor/VWR)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2017/C 343/04)

(Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004)

On 15 September 2017, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration between Avantor, INC. and VWR Corporation. On 9 October 2017, the notifying party/ies informed the Commission that it/they withdrew its/their notification.

---
No. 09-9223.

#### Curtiss Breeding, Petitioner v. J. David Donahue, Warden.

559 U.S. 1042, 130 S. Ct. 2076,

176 L. Ed. 2d 425,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2848.

March 29, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Kentucky denied.
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





The undersigned, Richard Kern, President, Chief Executive Officer, Secretary, and Treasurer of American Goldfields Inc. (the “Company”), certifies, under the standards set forth and solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended July 31, 2010 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in that Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and  results  of operations of the Company.








Date: September 13, 2010





/s/ Richard Kern

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

Richard Kern

President, Chief Executive Officer,

Secretary, and Treasurer

(Principal Executive Officer,

Principal Financial Officer, and Principal Accounting Officer)








This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 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 Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.