alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-7048
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus MICHAEL ANTHONY GALLOWAY, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Chief District Judge. (CR-94-14-F, CA-97-40-7-F) Submitted: October 23, 1997 Decided: November 17, 1997 Before HAMILTON and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Anthony Galloway, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Edward Skiver, Assistant United S tates Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion andfind no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Galloway , Nos. CR-94-14-F; CA-97-40-7-F (E.D.N.C. June 3, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Exhibit 10.11


Exhibit 10.11
Kenya Miranda HILL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-3846

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed January 23, 2018 Rehearing Denied March 1, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
James MITCHELL, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D16-4362

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed November 22, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
##### 



Exhibit 31.1
 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
      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)
    
    designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal
control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation
of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles;c)
    
    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; andd)
    
    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
  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.
  /s/ Thomas R. VenablesThomas R. VenablesChief Executive Officer
Certification of the Chief Executive Officer
                       Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350


     Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. section 1350, I, the
undersigned Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Earth Search
Sciences, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended September
30, 2005 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company.




Date:  November 21, 2005                         /s/ Larry F Vance
                                                 -------------------------------
                                                 Larry F Vance
                                                 Chairman of the Board and
                                                 Chief Executive Officer
H.R.G., JR., Father of H.G., III, a Child, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-692

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Opinion filed April 24, 2018

Ryan Thomas Truskoski, of Ryan Thomas Truskoski, P.A, Orlando, for Appellant.

Kelley Schaeffer, of Children's Legal Services, Bradenton, for Appellee.

C. Andrew Roy, of Winderweedle, Haines, Ward & Woodman, P.A., Winter Park, for Guardian ad Litem.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the final judgment terminating Appellant's parental rights to the minor child on the two statutory grounds pleaded, but we remand to the trial court to strike its reference to section 39.806(1)(c), Florida Statutes (2017), in the final judgment as an additional reason for termination. This was clearly an inadvertent clerical error by the court, as the Department of Children and Families did not plead section 39.806(1)(c) as a ground for termination of Appellant's parental rights nor did it attempt to present evidence or argument at trial under this statute.

AFFIRMED, but REMANDED for correction of clerical error.

SAWAYA, PALMER and LAMBERT, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 73 (Friday, April 17, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 17863]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-8768]



[[Page 17863]]

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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisition of Shares of Bank or 
Bank Holding Companies

    The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank 
Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and Sec. [thinsp]225.41 of the Board's 
Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank holding company. 
The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth 
in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).
    The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal 
Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for 
inspection at the office of the Board of Governors. Interested persons 
may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for 
that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must 
be received not later than May 1, 2009.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (Glenda Wilson, Community 
Affairs Officer) P.O. Box 442, St. Louis, Missouri 63166-2034:
    1. Monte M. Doing, Springfield, Missouri, individually, and in 
concert with Glen Garrett, Purdy, Missouri; Ozark Heritage Financial 
Group, Inc., Springfield, Missouri; Rocky R. Levell, Naples, Florida; 
John E. Sherwood, Miromar Lakes, Florida; Jerry Scott Whisman, Monett, 
Missouri; Dennis K. Marlin, and Kenneth A. Schwab, both of Springfield, 
Missouri, to acquire voting shares of OakStar Bancshares, Inc., and 
thereby indirectly acquire voting shares of OakStar Bank, N.A., both of 
Springfield, Missouri.
    B. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas (E. Ann Worthy, Vice President) 
2200 North Pearl Street, Dallas, Texas 75201-2272:
    1. Patrick W. Hopper (as trustee of the PWH Trust UTD 3/2/94), 
Henderson, Nevada; to acquire additional voting shares of Professional 
Capital, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire additional voting shares 
of Professional Bank, National Association, both of Dallas, Texas.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, April 13, 
2009.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. E9-8768 Filed 4-16-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15**  **- 1342** 

In R e: BOBBY JAMES BROWN , Petitioner
.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus
. (1:00

- cr - 00100

- JFM

- 1)

Submitted : November 13, 2015 Decided: November 18, 2015

Before WILKINSON, KING, and SHEDD , Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by un published per curiam opinion
. Bobby James Brown, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: After the district court denied Bobby James Brown’s motion challenging his criminal convictions and sentence, Brown filed a petition for mandamus in this court, asking that we address the merits of the motion. We conclude that Brown is not entitled to the relief sought. Mandamus is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. U.S. Dist.
Court , 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976); United States v. Moussaoui , 333 F.3d 509, 516

- 17 (4th Cir. 2003). Further, mandamus relief is availa ble only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought, In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n , 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988), and may not be used as a substitute for appeal, In re Lockheed Martin Corp. , 502 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007). Acc ordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. 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.

PETITION DENIED
Page 1 of 3

Disposition Comments

Docket No: FAA-2012-1127 These comments are in

Directorate ID: 2010-SW-035-AD response to an SNPRM

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

Next Step: FRAN SNPRM

 No Comments/Only Supportive Comments Received – If this box is checked, no signatures are 

required.

No Has the referenced service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? If yes, 

list latest revision and attach a copy. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously 

published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance.

Instructions: Summarize all comments by issue (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of 

each issue. All comments relating to the same issue should be discussed together. Do not list all of the issues 

from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and 

describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA-IR-M-8040.1C Chapter 9.

ISSUE 1: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD: 

If NO, we don’t agree because 

ISSUE 2: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD:
Page 2 of 3

If NO, we don’t agree because 

For additional issues, double-click here
Page 3 of 3

Signature Section

Signature indicates concurrence with this action.

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

ASE Printed Name: Date

Branch Manager Date
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 95-40707 

Conference Calendar

__________________

CALVIN WAYNE COPELAND,

 Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

DEWITT COUNTY,

 Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. V-95-37

- - - - - - - - - -

April 16, 1996

Before DUHÉ, DeMOSS, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Calvin Wayne Copeland appeals the district court's dismissal

as frivolous of his pro se and in forma pauperis (IFP) civil

rights complaint. Copeland argues that his civil rights were

violated because his state-court negligence suit was

unsuccessful. 

 Copeland "may not seek a reversal in federal court of the

state court judgment simply by recasting his complaint in the 

form of a civil rights action." Reed v. Terrell, 759 F.2d 472,

473 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 946 (1985). 
No. 95-40707

-2-

This appeal is without arguable merit and thus frivolous. 

Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Because

the appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. 5th Cir. R. 42.2. 

Copeland is warned that any future frivolous filing will invite

the imposition of sanctions. To avoid sanctions, Copeland should

review any pending appeals to ensure that they do not raise

arguments that are frivolous.

 APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED
David A. ZIMMERMAN, Appellant, v. Lori A. ZIMMERMAN, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-1332

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

January 3, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
### Regular Totals (Operators)

Airport = JFK Season = S Operator = 0001(Exclude) Status Date = 07/01/2011 (Current & Future) 11/16/2011 01:35:23



### Query Parameters:

### 11/16/2011 01:35:23

Carrier 

### Regular Totals (Operators) Excludes FAA Held Slots Held less than 5 days are Excluded JFK Season = SUMMER PF7 Status Date = 07/01/2011 (Current & Future)

JFK

136 AAL AMERICAN AIRLINES 2 AAR ASIANA AIRLINES 1 ABX ABX AIR 2 AEA AIR EUROPA 2 AEW AEROSVIT AIRLINES 4 AFL AEROFLOT 10 AFR AIR FRANCE 2 AIC AIR INDIA 5 AJM AIR JAMAICA 7 AMX AEROMEXICO 2 ANA ALL NIPPON AIRWAYS 2 AUA AUSTRIAN 4 AVA AVIANCA 1 AVI L'AVION/OPENSKIES 6 AZA ALITALIA 18 BAW BRITISH AIRWAYS 2 BER AIR BERLIN 5 BWA CARIBBEAN AIRLINES 7 CAA ATLANTIC SOUTHEAST AIRLINES (code 2 CAO AIR CHINA CARGO 2 CAY CAYMAN AIRWAYS 2 CCA AIR CHINA 2 CES CHINA EASTERN AIRLINES 17 CHQ CHAUTAUQUA 1 CMP COPA AIRLINES 23 COM COMAIR AIRLINES 6 CPA CATHAY PACIFIC 181 DAL DELTA AIR LINES 6 DLH DEUTSCHE LUFTHANSA 77 EGF AMR EAGLE HOLDING COPR. (FORMERLY 1 EIA EVERGREEN 4 EIN AER LINGUS 5 ELY EL AL ISRAEL AIRLINES 2 ETD ETIHAD 4 FDX FED EX 2 FIN FINNAIR 77 FLG PINNACLE AIRLINES (dba NORTHWEST 4 IBE IBERIA AIRWAYS 4 ICE ICELANDAIR 2 JAI JET AIRWAYS 2 JAL JAPAN AIR LINES 324 JBU JETBLUE AIRWAYS CORP. 3 KAL KOREAN AIR 4 KLM KLM ROYAL DUTCH 6 LAN LAN AIRLINES 2 LNE LAN ECUADOR 61 MES MESABA AVIATION 2 MSR EGYPT AIR 3 MXA MEXICANA DE AVIACION 2 QFA QANTAS AIRLINES 3 QTR QATAR AIRWAYS

Page 2

### 11/16/2011 01:35:23

Carrier 

### Regular Totals (Operators) Excludes FAA Held Slots Held less than 5 days are Excluded JFK Season = SUMMER PF7 Status Date = 07/01/2011 (Current & Future)

JFK

4 RAM ROYAL AIR MAROC 2 RJA ROYAL JORDANIAN 2 SAA SOUTH AFRICAN AIRWAYS 4 SCX SUN COUNTRY AIRLINES, INC. 2 SIA SINGAPORE AIRLINES LIMITED 2 SVA SAUDI ARABIAN AIRLINES 6 SWR SWISS INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES (SWISSAIR 2 TAI TACA AIRLINES 6 TAM TAM BRAZILIAN AIRLINES 4 THY TURKISH AIRLINES, INC. 4 UAE EMIRATES 24 UAL UNITED AIRLINES 1 UPS UNITED PARCEL SERVICE 10 USA US AIRWAYS 6 VIR VIRGIN ATLANTIC AIR 19 VRD VIRGIN AMERICA

Page 3
CONSENT OF G. BELIK

I hereby consent to the use of my name in connection with the following report and documents, which are being filed as exhibits to and incorporated by reference into the registration statement on Form 40-F of Cardero Resource Corp. (the Company) being filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission:

1.

The technical report dated January 5, 2007 entitled Diamond Drill Report on the Picale Property, Baja California Norte IOCG Project (Alisitos Project), Baja California Norte, Mexico (the Picale Report); and

2.

The annual information form of the Company dated January 26, 2007, which includes reference to my name in connection with information relating to the Picale Report, and the properties described therein.







DATED  January 29, 2007



/s/ G. Belik



G. Belik
EXHIBIT 13.2




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



                                       -1-

<PAGE>


                                  EXHIBIT 13.2




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




In  connection  with the  Annual  Report  of Amera  Resources  Corporation  (the
"Company") on Form 20-F for the year ending December 31, 2005, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Arthur
Lang, Chief Financial Officer and Director of the Company,  certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:

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

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

A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company and
will be  retained  by the  Company  and  furnished  to the SEC or its staff upon
request.




/s/  Arthur Lang
------------------------------------
Arthur Lang,
Chief Financial Officer and Director

                                       -2-

<PAGE>
# C_2019206EN.01002802.xml

| 17.6.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 206/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.6.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 206/28

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal da Relação de Guimarães (Portugal) lodged on 26 March 2019 — MH, NI v OJ, Novo Banco SA

(Case C-253/19)

(2019/C 206/33)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal da Relação de Guimarães

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants at first instance and appellants on appeal: MH, NI

Defendants at first instance and respondents on appeal: OJ, Novo Banco SA

Question referred

Under Regulation (EU) 2015/848 (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council, do the courts of a Member State have jurisdiction to open main insolvency proceedings in respect of a citizen whose sole immovable asset is located in that State, while he, along with his family unit, is habitually resident in another Member State where he is in paid employment?

---

(1)  Regulation (EU) 2015/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on insolvency proceedings (OJ 2015 L 141, p. 192).

---
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

December 8, 2022

No. 04-22-00810-CR

Laura C. BUSTAMANTE,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 437th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2022CR1184

Honorable Melisa C. Skinner, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Appellant Laura Bustamante entered into a plea bargain with the State, pursuant to which 

she pleaded guilty to the charged offense. The trial court imposed a sentence on October 13, 

2022 in accordance with the agreement and signed a certificate stating this “is a plea-bargain 

case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). The clerk’s 

record includes the written plea bargain agreement. See id. 25.2(d). This court must dismiss an 

appeal “if a certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part 

of the record.” Id. The record establishes the punishment assessed by the court does not exceed 

the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by the defendant. See id.

25.2(a)(2). The record also appears to support the trial court’s certification that Appellant does 

not have a right to appeal. See Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (holding 

court of appeals should review clerk’s record to determine whether trial court’s certification is 

accurate). 

We therefore order appellant to file a response, by December 28, 2022, establishing an 

amended certification showing she has the right to appeal has been made part of the appellate 

record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d), 37.1. If a supplemental clerk’s record is required to show 

appellant has the right to appeal, appellant must request a supplemental record from the trial 

court clerk and file a copy of the request with this court. If appellant fails to satisfactorily 

respond to this order within the time provided, the appeal will be dismissed. 

We order all appellate deadlines suspended until further order of the court. We further 

order the clerk of this court to serve copies of this order on the attorneys of record and the court 

reporter.

FILE COPY
_________________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 8th day of December, 2022.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court

FILE COPY
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned officer of Genesis Electronics Group, Inc. (the
"Company"), hereby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that the
Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2009 (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.

                                 /s/Nelson Stark
                                 ----------------------
                                 Nelson Stark
                                 Chief Financial Officer

April 15, 2010