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

No. 18
- 7437

JAMES GREGORY ARMISTEAD , Petitioner

- Appellant ,

v. SUPERINTENDENT MILLIS , Respondent

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh

. Terrence W. Boyle , Chief District Judge. ( 5:18

- hc

- 02063

- BO )

Submitted : March 8, 2019 Decided: March 14, 2019

Before NIEMEYER and HARRIS , Circuit Judges , and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. James G. Armistead, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: James Gregory Armistead seeks to appe al the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition without prejudice as successive . The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012). A c ertificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating tha t reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies r elief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Armistead has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately present ed in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
EXHIBIT 32.01








CERTIFICATION OF PRESIDENT 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 Morgan Stanley Smith Barney Charter Campbell L.P. (the “Partnership”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Walter Davis, President of Demeter Management LLC, the general partner of the Partnership, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:




(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 Partnership.































By:
/s/Walter DavisName:
Walter DavisTitle:
President ofDemeter Management LLC,General Partner of the registrantDate:
May 13, 2010
**Exhibit 34.1**

 

**Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

 

To the Board of Directors and Shareowner of

Protective Life Insurance Company:

 

We have examined management’s assertion, included in the accompanying “Management’s Assertion on Compliance with Regulation AB Criteria”, that Protective Life Insurance Company (the “Company”) complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (“SEC”) Regulation AB for the Protective Life Secured Trust Notes (the “Platform”), as of December 31, 2014 and for the year then ended, excluding (i) the criteria which the Company has determined are not applicable to the servicing activities performed by them with respect to the Platform and (ii) the servicing activities that are applicable to the Platform but are excluded from the scope of management’s assertion and are not reported on herein, as indicated in Appendix A of Management’s Assertion on Compliance with Regulation AB Criteria.  Appendix B to Management’s Assertion on Compliance with Regulation AB  Criteria identifies the individual asset-backed transactions and securities defined by management as constituting the Platform.  Management is responsible for the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management’s assertion based on our examination.

 

Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company’s compliance with the applicable servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances.  Our examination included testing of selected asset-backed transactions and securities that comprise the Platform, testing of selected servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether the Company processed those selected transactions and performed those selected activities in compliance with the applicable servicing criteria.  Our procedures were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report.  Our procedures were not designed to detect noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this report.  We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.  Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria.

 

In our opinion, management’s assertion that Protective Life Insurance Company complied with the aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2014 for the Platform is fairly stated, in all material respects.

 

 

/s/PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP

 

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Birmingham, Alabama

March 20, 2015

 

----
EXHIBIT 99.2



                       CITIBANK CREDIT CARD MASTER TRUST I

                          SERVICING OFFICER CERTIFICATE

The undersigned, a duly authorized representative of Citibank (South Dakota),
National Association, as Servicer (the "Bank"), pursuant to a Pooling and
Servicing Agreement dated as of May 29, 1991, as Amended and Restated as of
October 5, 2001 (as amended and supplemented, the "Agreement"), among the Bank,
as Seller and Servicer, Citibank (Nevada), National Association, as Seller, and
Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas (formerly Bankers Trust Company), as
Trustee (the "Trustee"), does hereby certify that:

                  1. The Bank is, as of the date hereof, the Servicer under the
Agreement. Capitalized terms used in this Certificate have their respective
meanings as set forth in the Agreement.

                  2. The undersigned is a Servicing Officer who is duly
authorized pursuant to the Agreement to execute and deliver this Certificate to
the Trustee.

                  3. A review of the activities of the Servicer during the
calendar year ended December 31, 2003 and of its performance under the Agreement
was conducted under my supervision.

                  4. Based on such review, the Servicer has, to the best of my
knowledge, performed in all material respects its obligations under the
Agreement throughout such year and no default in the performance of such
obligations has occurred or is continuing except as set forth in paragraph 5
below.

                  5. The following is a description of each default in the
performance of the Servicer's obligations under the provisions of the Agreement
known to me to have been made by the Servicer during the year ended December 31,
2003, which description sets forth in detail (i) the nature of each such
default, (ii) the action taken, if any, by the Servicer to remedy each such
default and (iii) the current status of each such default:

                                            None.


                  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this
certificate this 15th day of March, 2004.


                             /s/ Susan J. Sexton
                                 ---------------
                                 Susan J. Sexton
                                 Servicing Officer
REGISTRATION

85678-8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37

*Manufacturing process information may be entitled to confidential treatment*
38

*Manufacturing process information may be entitled to confidential treatment*
39
40
41
42

*Manufacturing process information may be entitled to confidential treatment*
43
44
45

*Manufacturing process information may be entitled to confidential treatment*
46

*Manufacturing process information may be entitled to confidential treatment*
47

*Manufacturing process information may be entitled to confidential treatment*
48

*Manufacturing process information may be entitled to confidential treatment*
49

*Manufacturing process information may be entitled to confidential treatment*
50

*Manufacturing process information may be entitled to confidential treatment*
51

*Manufacturing process information may be entitled to confidential treatment*
52

*Manufacturing process information may be entitled to confidential treatment*
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
 

______________________________________________________________ 

Page is not included in this copy. 

Pages 63 through 64 are not included in this copy. 

_________________________________________________________________ 

The material not included contains the following type of 

information: 

_____ Identity of product inert ingredients. 

__ __ Identity of product impurities. 

__ __ Description of the product manufacturing process. 

__ __ Description of quality control procedures. 

__ __ Identity of the source of product ingredients. 

_____ Sales or other commercial/financial information. 

_____ A draft product label. 

__X__ The product confidential statement of formula. 

_____ Information about a pending registration action. 

__ __ FIFRA registration data. 

__ __ The document is a duplicate of page(s) _ . 

_____ The document is not responsive to the request. 

__ __ Internal deliberative information. 

__ __ Privileged attorney-client communication. 

__ __ Claimed Confidential by submitter upon submission to the 

 Agency.
**EXHIBIT 23.2****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements Nos. 33-30602, 33-30603,33-36161, 33-41924, 33-41926, 33-95724, 33-95726, 333-37027, 333-37029, 333-37031, 333-92637,333-70372 and 333-70362 on Form S-8 and in Registration Statements Nos. 333-29757 and 333-64877 onForm S-3 of our report dated March 12, 2004, relating to the 2003consolidated financial statements of Bay View Capital Corporation and Subsidiaries (whichreport expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatoryparagraph relating to the changein the basis of accounting on October 1, 2003), appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Bay View Capital Corporation forthe year ended December 31, 2005./s/ Deloitte & Touche LLPSan Francisco, California
STATE of North Carolina v. Michael Caldwell ANGRAM

No. COA18-993

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: April 16, 2019

NO ERROR IN PART. DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE IN PART.
---

Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Takedown Entertainment
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending July 31, 2010 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Peter Wudy, acting Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

| | (3) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of
      section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
  and                                  
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |     |                                                                                                                                                                
| | (4) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents,
      in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations
      of the Company.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this
certification as of October 20, 2010.

/s/Peter Wudy Peter Wudy, Chief
Financial Officer

---
# Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas

January 13, 2021

No. 04

- 20

- 00445

- CV

Jimmy and Cherly WILLIAMS,

Appellants

v.

GUADALUPE

- BLANCO RIVER AUTHORITY and its Officers and Directors, Appellee

From the 25th Judicial District Court

, Guadalupe County, Texas

Trial Court No. 19

- 2054

- CV The Honorable Stephen B. Ables , Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Appellee s ’ brief i s due on January 15, 2021

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.6(b). Before the due date, Appellee s filed an opposed motion to extend the brief due date to February 4, 2021

. Appellee s ’ motion is GRANTED. Appellees’ brief is due on February 4 , 2021

. Appellants’ reply brief will be due twenty days after Appellees’ brief is filed. See id. R. 38.6(c).

_________________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 13th day of January, 2021

.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ

, Clerk of Court
Matthew H. Mead, Governor 

March 29, 2016 

Kevin Leone 

Air Program 

Department of Environmental Quality 

To protect, conserve and enhance the quality of Wyoming's 

environment for the benefit of current and future generations. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

EPA Region 8 

Mail Code 8P-AR 

Attention Docket ID No. EPA-ROS-OAR-2016-0014 

1595 Wynkoop Street 

Denver, CO 80202-1 129 

Submitted electronically via www.regulations.gov 

RE: State of Wyoming, Department of Environmental Quality- Air Quality Division 

Comments on the Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Wyoming; 

Revisions to the Air Quality Standards and Regulations 

Todd Parfitt, Director 

The State of Wyoming, Department of Environmental Quality - Air Quality Division (AQD) appreciates 

the opportunity to comment on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) March I, 2016 

proposal to approve changes to the Wyoming State Implementation Plan (SIP). The AQD supports the 

EPA 's proposal to approve the revisions to Wyoming Air Quality Standards and Regulations (W AQSR) 

Chapter 6, Section 13 , and Chapter 6, Section 14, into the Wyoming SIP. 

The AQD is very appreciative of the time and resources committed by the EPA in reviewing and 

promulgating this proposal. As always, the AQD is available to discuss any of the concerns outlined in 

this letter. Please feel free to contact the AQD at 307-777-7391. 

Nancy E. V hr 

AQD Administrator 

Cc: Todd Parfitt, DEQ Director 

Colin McKee, Wyoming Governor's Office Policy Advisor 

Carl Daly, EPA Region 8 

200 West 17th Street · Cheyenne, WY 82002 · http://deq.wyoming.gov · Fax (307)635-1784 

ADMIN/OUTREACH ABANDONED MINES AIR QUALITY INDUSTRIAL SITING LAND QUALITY SOLID & HAZ. WASTE WATER QUALITY
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2009-5046

JUDITH LOUISE CRONIN,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims

in 06-CV-633, Senior Judge Eric G. Bruggink.

ON MOTION

Before MAYER, Circuit Judge.

ORDER

Judith Louise Cronin moves for a four month extension of time, until November

23, 2009, to file her opening brief.

Cronin's appeal was docketed on March 3, 2009, making her informal brief due

on March 24, 2009. On March 24, Cronin moved for a 120-day extension of time, until

July 22, 2009, to file her brief. The court granted the motion but informed Cronin that no

further extensions would be granted. Cronin now moves for an additional four month

extension of time to file her brief.

The court rarely grants lengthy extensions of time such as that previously

granted to Cronin, and did so only due to the extraordinary circumstances presented by

Cronin in her previous motion. In her current motion, Cronin states that because of her

mother's illness she cannot return home at this time. However, Cronin does not show
why she needs an additional four months to file her informal brief. The informal brief

form is short and intended to simplify the task of filing a brief. The court sua sponte

waives the requirement that Cronin attach a copy of the decision of the United States

Court of Federal Claims to her brief and requests that the United States attach the

decision to its brief.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

The motion is granted in part and denied in part. Cronin's brief is due within 30

days of the date of filing of this order. No further extensions will be granted.

FOR THE COURT

JUL 0 8 2009

/s/ Jan Horbaly

Date	Jan Horbaly

Clerk

cc:	Judith Louise Cronin (informal brief form enclosed)

Roger A. Hipp, Esq.

s17

U.stmel VIEPff eeunfOR

JUL 0 8 2009

JAN HORIJALY

CLERK
Exhibit 32.2

Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Michael A. Gerlich,
Chief Financial Officer of Gastar Exploration, Ltd. (the Company), hereby certify that the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-Q for the six months ended June 30, 2006 (the Report), filed by the Company with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 fully complies with the requirements of that section.

I further certify that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.

Date: August 14, 2006



/s/ MICHAEL A. GERLICHMichael A. GerlichChief Financial Officer
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 

          - [F-40202; AK-964-1410-KC-P] 

# AGENCY:

Bureau of Land Management, Interior. 

# ACTION:

Notice of decision approving lands for conveyance. 

# SUMMARY:

As required by 43 CFR 2650.7(d), notice is hereby given that an appealable decision approving the surface and subsurface estates in certain lands for conveyance pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act will be issued to Doyon, Limited. The lands are in the vicinity of Wiseman, Alaska, and are located in: 

## Fairbanks Meridian, Alaska 

T. 29 N., R. 13 W., 

Secs. 1, 2, and 3; 

Secs. 10 to 15, inclusive. 

Containing approximately 5,760 acres. 

Notice of the decision will also be published four times in the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner. 

# DATES:

The time limits for filing an appeal are: 

1. Any party claiming a property interest which is adversely affected by the decision shall have until April 15, 2009 to file an appeal. 

2. Parties receiving service of the decision by certified mail shall have 30 days from the date of receipt to file an appeal. 

Parties who do not file an appeal in accordance with the requirements of 43 CFR part 4, subpart E, shall be deemed to have waived their rights. 

# ADDRESSES:

A copy of the decision may be obtained from:  Bureau of Land Management, Alaska State Office, 222 West Seventh Avenue, #13,  Anchorage, Alaska 99513-7504. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        The Bureau of Land Management by phone at 907-271-5960, or by e-mail at                         *ak.blm.conveyance@ak.blm.gov*. Persons who use a telecommunication device (TTD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8330, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, to contact the Bureau of Land Management.                     

Hillary Woods, 

Land Law Examiner, Land Transfer Adjudication I.

 [FR Doc. E9-5617 Filed 3-13-09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310-JA-P
#### In the Matter of American Medical and Life Insurance, Appellant, v International Healthcare Management, Ltd., Respondent.

[718 NYS2d 871]

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to stay arbitration of an agreement dated April 30, 1998, and a cross petition, *inter alia,*to compel arbitration, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Dunne, J.), dated November 1, 1999, which denied the petition and granted the cross petition.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The parties’ agreements do not expressly state that compliance with certain procedures are conditions precedent to arbitration. Accordingly, the question of whether the respondent complied with such procedures is not a ground to stay arbitration *(see, Matter of Westchester County Correction Officers Benevolent Assn. v County of Westchester,*251 AD2d 338).

The appellant’s remaining contentions are without merit *(see, Matter of County of Rockland [Primiano Constr. Co.],*51 NY2d 1, 8). Altman, J. P., Goldstein, McGinity and Schmidt, JJ., concur.