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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-7079

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

RUBEN CEJA-RANGEL, a/k/a Ruben Ceja,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at 

Orangeburg. J. Michelle Childs, District Judge. (5:14-cr-00556-JMC-2; 5:18-cv-01235-

JMC)

Submitted: December 17, 2019 Decided: December 20, 2019

Before KING, FLOYD, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ruben Ceja-Rangel, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Ruben Ceja-Rangel seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 

28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or 

judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). 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) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, 

a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that 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 relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must 

demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion 

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 Ceja-Rangel 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 presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

DISMISSED
APPENDIX “B4”

 User Manual: MikroKopter Joker 800
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 12 (Thursday, January 18, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2725-2726]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-00733]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service


Open Meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel's Notices and 
Correspondence Project Committee

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Treasury.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: An open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel's Notices and 
Correspondence Project Committee will be conducted. The Taxpayer 
Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas, and suggestions on 
improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service.

DATES: The meeting will be held Monday, February 12, 2018 and Tuesday, 
February 13, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Otis Simpson at 1-888-912-1227 or 202-
317-3332.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 
10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) 
that a meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Notices and 
Correspondence Project Committee will be held Monday, February 12, 
2018, from 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time and Tuesday, February 
13, 2018, from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time at the IRS 
Office, Jacksonville, Florida. The public is invited to make oral 
comments or submit written statements for consideration. Due to

[[Page 2726]]

limited time and structure of meeting, notification of intent to 
participate must be made with Otis Simpson. For more information please 
contact Otis Simpson at 1-888-912-1227 or 202-317-3332, or write TAP 
Office, 1111 Constitution Ave. NW, Room 1509, Washington, DC 20224 or 
contact us at the website: http://www.improveirs.org. The agenda will 
include various IRS issues.

    Dated: January 10, 2018.
Antoinette Ross,
Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.
[FR Doc. 2018-00733 Filed 1-17-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-21-00221-CV

IN RE RHONDA LEE COUGOT

Original Proceeding

______________

From the County Court at Law

Walker County, Texas

Trial Court No. 9276PR

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator’s Petition for Writ of Mandamus is denied. Relator’s Motion for 

Emergency Stay is dismissed as moot.

MATT JOHNSON

Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,*

Justice Johnson, and

Justice Smith

Petition denied; motion dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed September 15, 2021

[OT06]
In re Rhonda Lee Cougot Page 2

*(Chief Justice Gray dissents. A separate opinion will not issue. Chief Justice Gray 

notes, however that he would grant the emergency motion seeking a stay of the trial court 

proceedings, particularly the impending trial, and request a response with a view to 

granting the requested writ. If the testimony of the scrivener of the will as to 

communications with the deceased about the testator’s intent is improperly protected 

from disclosure, the result of the trial on the meaning of that will is virtually guaranteed 

to be the result of harmful error if the Relator is otherwise unsuccessful in that trial. It 

would be hard to find any evidence that was more important or persuasive than the 

testimony of the decedent’s attorney, other than possibly a video recording of the 

decedent. Therefore, for jurisprudential reasons, the time to address this question is 

before trial via mandamus, rather than in a direct appeal after the trial has been 

concluded. See In re Prudential Ins. Co. of America, 148 S.W.3d 124, 136 (Tex. 2004) (orig. 

proceeding)).
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1331 

To ensure that borrowers who have performed qualifying public service are 

eligible for Public Service Loan Forgiveness. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 27, 2023 

Mr. MENENDEZ (for himself and Mr. BRAUN) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To ensure that borrowers who have performed qualifying 

public service are eligible for Public Service Loan Forgiveness. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Public Service Loan 

5 Forgiveness Payment Completion Fairness Act’’ or the 

6 ‘‘PSLF Payment Completion Fairness Act’’. 

7 SEC. 2. PUBLIC SERVICE LOAN FORGIVENESS. 

8 Section 455(m)(1)(B) of the Higher Education Act 

9 of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1087e(m)(1)(B)) is amended by strikVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:40 May 04, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S1331.IS S1331

kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1331 IS

1 ing ‘‘(i) is employed’’ and all that follows through ‘‘(ii) 

2 has been’’ and inserting ‘‘has been’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
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.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [Disaster Declaration #11698]

# AGENCY:

U.S. Small Business Administration.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This is a notice of an Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) declaration for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, dated 03/31/2009.

*Incident:*                         Peterborough Street Fire.                    

*Incident Period:*                         01/06/2009.                    

*Effective Date:*                         03/31/2009.                    

*EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         12/31/2009.                    

# ADDRESSES:

Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Notice is hereby given that as a result of the Administrator's EIDL declaration, applications for economic injury disaster loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally announced locations.

The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster:

*Primary Counties:*

Suffolk.

*Contiguous Counties:*                     Massachusetts:                

Essex, Middlesex, Norfolk.

*The Interest Rate is:*                     4.000.                

The number assigned to this disaster for economic injury is 116980.

The State which received an EIDL Declaration # is Massachusetts.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59002)

Dated: March 31, 2009.

Darryl K. Hairston,

Acting Administrator.

[FR Doc. E9-8156 Filed 4-9-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
Earnest BYRD, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D17-2801

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[February 15, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
**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**In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB (the “Report”) of Global Clean Energy, Inc.(the “Company”) for the quarter ended September 30, 2007, John Grob, the President of the Company,hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of the undersigned’s knowledge and belief: (1) theReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934; and (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.        Date: December 5, 2007 /s/John Grob   John Grob, President
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 68 (Friday, April 10, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 16357]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-8220]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

    The Department of Commerce will submit to the Office of Management 
and Budget (OMB) for clearance the following proposal for collection of 
information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 
U.S.C. Chapter 35).
    Agency: Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), Department of 
Commerce.
    Title: Statement by Ultimate Consignee and Purchaser.
    OMB Control Number: 0694-0021.
    Form Number(s): BIS-711.
    Type of Request: Regular submission.
    Burden Hours: 76.
    Number of Respondents: 286.
    Average Hours per Response: 16 minutes.
    Needs and Uses: This collection is required by section 748.11 of 
the Export Administration Regulations (EAR). In order to effectively 
control commodities, BIS must have sufficient information regarding the 
end-use and end-user of the U.S. origin commodities to be exported. The 
use of Form BIS-711 or letter puts the importer on notice of the 
special nature of the goods proposed for export and conveys a 
commitment against illegal disposition. The information will assist the 
licensing officer in making the proper decision on whether to approve 
or reject the application for the license.
    Affected Public: Businesses and other for-profit organizations.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain benefits.
    OMB Desk Officer: Jasmeet Seehra, (202) 395-3123.
    Copies of the above information collection proposal can be obtained 
by calling or writing Diana Hynek, Departmental Paperwork Clearance 
Officer, (202) 482-0266, Department of Commerce, Room 7845, 14th and 
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#503418293e353b10343f337e373f26"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f195b9889f949ab1959e92df969e87">[email protected]</span></a>).
    Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information 
collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice 
to Jasmeet Seehra, OMB Desk Officer, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#feb49f8d939b9b8aa1b5d0a1ad9b9b968c9fbe91939cd09b918ed0999188"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="abe1cad8c6cecedff4e085f4f8cecec3d9caebc4c6c985cec4db85ccc4dd">[email protected]</span></a>, 
or fax number (202) 395-5167.

    Dated: April 7, 2009.
Gwellnar Banks,
Management Analyst, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. E9-8220 Filed 4-9-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-33-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 68 (Friday, April 10, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 16429]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-8286]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-65,329]


General Motors/Toledo Powertrain, Toledo, OH; Notice of 
Termination of Investigation

    Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an 
investigation was initiated on February 23, 2009 in response to a 
worker petition filed by a company official and the United Auto Workers 
Local 14 on behalf of workers at General Motors/Toledo Poewertrain, 
Toledo, Ohio.
    The petitioners have requested that the petition be withdrawn. 
Consequently, the investigation has been terminated.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 20th day of March 2009.
Richard Church,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9-8286 Filed 4-9-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
DLD-149 NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________ No. 16-1296

___________ IN RE: CHRISTI AN DIOR WOMACK, Petitioner

___________________ _________________ On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the United States District Court for th e Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Related to E.D. Pa. Cr im. No. 2:13-cr-00206-001)

___________________ _________________ Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P. February 19, 2016 Before: CHAGARES, GREEN AWAY, JR. and SLOVITER 1 , Circuit Judges
(Opinion filed: May 5, 2016)

_________ OPINION *

_________ PER CURIAM Christian Dior Womack, a.k.a. Gucci Prad a, presents another petition for a writ of

1 The Honorable Dolores K. Sloviter participat ed in the decision in this case. Judge Sloviter assumed inactive status on April 4, 2016 after the submission date, but before the filing of the opinion. This opinion is file d by a quorum of the panel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 46(d) and Third Circuit I.O.P. Chapter 12.

* This disposition is not an opinion of the full court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent.2 mandamus relating to criminal proceedings that culminated in his gu ilty plea to charges of sex trafficking of a minor and sex trafficking by force. 2 In his current petition (and supplement thereto) he objects to what he describes as a “coercive appointment of counsel” in May 2014 when he rescinded his waiver of counsel and his standby counsel became counsel of record. Womack argues that it is as if he had no counsel at a critical stage of the proceedings b ecause the District Court did not make “an effective appointment of counsel.” He al so claims a later violation of his right to counsel when the District Court terminated th e appointment after Womack pa id to privately retain his counsel. Womack asserts that the District Court should ha ve first made a finding about Womack’s ability to pay for counsel, and by not doing so, violated the Fifth and Sixth Amendments and the Criminal Justice Act. He claims th at the perceived violations render his sentence a nullity, and, as relief, he asks us to vacate his conviction and
sentence. Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy. See Kerr v. U.S. Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976). Mandamus is not a substitu te for appeal. See Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Court, 542 U.S. 367, 380-81 (2 004); Madden v. Myers, 102 F.3d 74, 79 (3d Cir. 1996). A petitioner must ordinarily have no other means to obtain th e desired relief, and he must show a clear and indisputable right to issuance of the writ. In re School Asbestos Litig., 977 F.2d 764, 772 (3d Cir. 1992).

2 Womack also has appealed from th e judgment entered in his case.3 Essentially, Wom ack seeks to challenge the ju dgment against him through his claims of alleged improper actions by the Dist rict Judge relating to the appointment of counsel and the termination of a counsel appointment once Womack paid to retain counsel. Mandamus relief is not available becau se these are claims that he can raise in his direct appeal. See In re Briscoe, 448 F.3d 201, 212 -13 (3d Cir. 2006). Accordingly, we will deny Womack’s mandamus petition.
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

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 MHI Hospitality Corporation (the Corporation) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31,
2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Andrew M. Sims, Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation, 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 result of operations of the Corporation.

Date: March 22, 2007



By:

/s/    ANDREW M.
SIMSName:

Andrew M. SimsTitle:

President and Chief Executive Officer
James Henry POLEN, IV, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-1584

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed February 6, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 32.1

WRITTEN STATEMENT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350

Solely for the purpose of
complying with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, we, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Veri-Tek International, Corp. (the Company), hereby
certify that, to the best of our knowledge, Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2005 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                   |  |                                     
|------------------ |  | ------------------------------------
|                   | 
|By:                |  | /s/    DAVID J. LANGEVIN            
|Name:              |  | David J. Langevin                   
|Title:             |  | Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
|                   |  | (Principal Executive Officer        
|                   |  | of Veri-Tek International, Corp.)   
|                  
|Date: May 16, 2007



|                   |  |                                            
|------------------ |  | -------------------------------------------
|                   | 
|By:                |  | /s/    DAVID H. GRANSEE                    
|Name:              |  | David H. Gransee                           
|Title:             |  | Vice President, Chief Financial Officer    
|                   |  | (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer
|                   |  | of Veri-Tek International, Corp.)          
|                  
|Date: May 16, 2007
p. 1 of 1 

From: Bruntz, Samuel H. [mailto:Samuel.Bruntz@alcoa.com] 

Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 3:40 PM 

To: Putney, David 

Cc: Palazzolo, Michael A. 

Subject: TF data from primary aluminum facilities 

David, 

You will find attached an excel spreadsheet that summarizes TF emissions for each potline at Alcoa Inc. – 

Warrick Operations for the time period March 1 – August 31, 2013. 

You will note that the primary control device emissions for potlines 3 and 4 are higher than for the other 3 

potlines. Potlines 3 and 4 exhaust to a common alumina injection gas treatment center (GTC). The GTC differs 

from the A-398 fluidized bed technology utililzed for the other 3 potlines. Each of the other 3 potlines exhaust 

through individual A-398 systems. 

Let me know if you have any questions. 

Thanks, 

Sam Bruntz 

Sr. Staff Environmental Engineer 

Alcoa Inc. – Warrick Operations 

(812) 853-1519
Walter ERNST, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-835

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed November 22, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

ROBERT C. TOWNSEND, JR., Appellant, vs. ALLIED HOME MORTGAGE CAPITAL CORPORATION; ABN AMR° MORTGAGE GROUP, INC.; FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION; CITIMORTGAGE, INC.; NORTHWEST TRUSTEE SERVICES, INC.; RCO LEGAL, P.S.; BRETT RYAN; JOSEPH E. BLEEKER; AUGUSTA INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT LLC; HUTCHISON & STEFFEN, LTD.; RICHARD DOXEY; GLADE L. HALL; AND MITCHELL SPROCK, Respondents. 

# FILED APR 0 1 2016

TRACIE K. LtNDEMAN cLeRK OF SUPF7SME-COURT

\

, SY



### ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE This is a pro se appeal from a district court order granting a writ of restitution. Second Judicial District Court, Washoe County; Elliott A. Sattler, Judge.

Having considered the record, we perceive no reversible error in the district court's decision to grant a writ of restitution. We therefore

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.

cr-46-

- )- P arr a guirre 

## 01241.)

Cherry

SUPREMECOURT OF NEVADA -10 

### 2RScc: Hon. Elliott A. Sattler, District Judge Robert C. Townsend, Jr. Akerman LLP/Las Vegas RCO Legal, P.S. Hutchison & Steffen, LLC Richard G. Hill, Ltd. Washoe District Court Clerk

2