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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-7693

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

ERNEST LEE ROGERS, JR.,

 Defendant – Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Margaret B. Seymour, District 

Judge. (7:02-cr-00325-MBS-2; 7:04-cv-00254-MBS)

Submitted: July 28, 2011 Decided: August 1, 2011

Before SHEDD, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ernest Lee Rogers, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Alan Lance Crick, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, 

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Ernest Lee Rogers, Jr., seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order denying motions he filed on September 28, 2010, in

his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2011) proceedings seeking to 

dismiss the indictment, or inspect the list of grand juror names 

and to dismiss for selective prosecution or, in the alternative,

convene a federal grand jury and disclose grand jury 

transcripts. The order is not appealable unless a circuit 

justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006). 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) (2006). 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 Rogers has not made the requisite showing. 

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss 
3

the appeal. 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.

DISMISSED
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3336 

To authorize the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to carry out a major medical 

facility project lease for a Department of Veterans Affairs outpatient 

clinic at Ewa Plain, Oahu, Hawaii, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 21, 2012 

Mr. INOUYE (for himself and Mrs. MURRAY) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To authorize the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to carry out 

a major medical facility project lease for a Department 

of Veterans Affairs outpatient clinic at Ewa Plain, Oahu, 

Hawaii, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF DANIEL KAHIKINA AKAKA 

4 DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS CLIN5 IC. 

6 (a) AUTHORIZATION OF FISCAL YEAR 2013 MAJOR

7 MEDICAL FACILITY LEASE.—The Secretary of Veterans 

8 Affairs may carry out a major medical facility lease for 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3336 IS

1 a Department of Veterans Affairs outpatient clinic at Ewa 

2 Plain, Oahu, Hawaii, in an amount not to exceed 

3 $16,453,300. 

4 (b) DESIGNATION.—The outpatient clinic described 

5 in subsection (a) shall after the date of the enactment of 

6 this Act be known and designated as the ‘‘Daniel Kahikina 

7 Akaka Department of Veterans Affairs Clinic’’. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 31.1

PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICERS CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, C. Lee Jones, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Essential Group, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not
contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all
material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the
registrant and have:

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed
under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our
conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal
quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.



|                     |  |                                                   
|-------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------
|Date: March 28, 2006 |  | /s/ C. Lee Jones                                  
|                     |  | C. Lee Jones President and Chief Executive
Officer
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Articles 

#           Landscape models of brook trout abundance and distribution in lotic habitat with field validation      

      January 1, 2011    

Brook trout Salvelinus fontinalis are native fish in decline owing to environmental changes. Predictions of their potential distribution and a better understanding of their relationship to habitat conditions would enhance the management and conservation of this valuable species. We used over 7,800 brook trout observations throughout New York State and georeferenced, multiscale landscape condition data to develop four regionally specific artificial neural network models to predict brook trout abundance in rivers and streams. Land cover data provided a general signature of human activity, but other habitat variables were resistant to anthropogenic changes (i.e., changing on a geological time scale). The resulting models predict the potential for any stream to support brook trout. The models were validated by holding 20% of the data out as a test set and by comparison with additional field collections from a variety of habitat types. The models performed well, explaining more than 90% of data variability. Errors were often associated with small spatial displacements of predicted values. When compared with the additional field collections (39 sites), 92% of the predictions were off by only a single class from the field-observed abundances. Among “least-disturbed” field collection sites, all predictions were correct or off by a single abundance class, except for one where brown trout Salmo trutta were present. Other degrading factors were evident at most sites where brook trout were absent or less abundant than predicted. The most important habitat variables included landscape slope, stream and drainage network sizes, water temperature, and extent of forest cover. Predicted brook trout abundances were applied to all New York streams, providing a synoptic map of the distribution of brook trout habitat potential. These fish models set benchmarks of best potential for streams to support brook trout under broad-scale human influences and can assist with planning and identification of protection or rehabilitation sites.

## Citation Information

## Related Content

                  -              Connect           

#### James H Johnson, PhD

##### Scientist Emeritus

Great Lakes Science Center

jhjohnson@usgs.gov

607-753-9391

## Related Content

#### James H Johnson, PhD

##### Scientist Emeritus

Great Lakes Science Center

jhjohnson@usgs.gov

607-753-9391

### Study Area

### Contact

####               Great Lakes Science Center          

1451 Green RoadAnn Arbor, MI48105United States

734-994-3331

734-994-8780

### Explore Search

                  - United States
                  - New York

View All **
# L_2005101DE.01002001.xml

| 21.4.2005 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 101/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.4.2005

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 101/20

---

Berichtigung der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 394/2005 der Kommission vom 8. März 2005 zur Änderung der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 795/2004 mit Durchführungsbestimmungen zur Betriebsprämienregelung gemäß der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1782/2003 des Rates mit gemeinsamen Regeln für Direktzahlungen im Rahmen der gemeinsamen Agrarpolitik und mit bestimmten Stützungsregelungen für Inhaber landwirtschaftlicher Betriebe und zur Abweichung von der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1782/2003

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 63 vom 10. März 2005
  )

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 63 vom 10. März 2005

Seite 18, Artikel 1 Punkt 1 erster Unterabsatz:

anstatt:

| „ „c) | ‚Dauerkulturen‘: nicht in die Fruchtfolge einbezogene Kulturen außer Dauergrünland, die für die Dauer von mindestens fünf Jahren auf den Flächen verbleiben und wiederkehrende Erträge liefern, einschließlich Baumschulen gemäß Anhang I Buchstabe G Ziffer 5 der Entscheidung 2000/115/EG der Kommission (*), mit Ausnahme der nachstehend aufgeführten mehrjährigen landwirtschaftlichen Kulturen und Reb- und Baumschulen solcher mehrjährigen landwirtschaftlichen Kulturen.“ |
| --- | --- |

„ „c)

‚Dauerkulturen‘: nicht in die Fruchtfolge einbezogene Kulturen außer Dauergrünland, die für die Dauer von mindestens fünf Jahren auf den Flächen verbleiben und wiederkehrende Erträge liefern, einschließlich Baumschulen gemäß Anhang I Buchstabe G Ziffer 5 der Entscheidung 2000/115/EG der Kommission (*), mit Ausnahme der nachstehend aufgeführten mehrjährigen landwirtschaftlichen Kulturen und Reb- und Baumschulen solcher mehrjährigen landwirtschaftlichen Kulturen.“

muss es heißen:

| „ „c) | ‚Dauerkulturen‘: nicht in die Fruchtfolge einbezogene Kulturen außer Dauergrünland, die für die Dauer von mindestens fünf Jahren auf den Flächen verbleiben und wiederkehrende Erträge liefern, einschließlich Reb- und Baumschulen gemäß Anhang I Buchstabe G Ziffer 5 der Entscheidung 2000/115/EG der Kommission (*), mit Ausnahme der nachstehend aufgeführten mehrjährigen landwirtschaftlichen Kulturen und Baumschulen solcher mehrjährigen landwirtschaftlichen Kulturen.“ |
| --- | --- |

„ „c)

‚Dauerkulturen‘: nicht in die Fruchtfolge einbezogene Kulturen außer Dauergrünland, die für die Dauer von mindestens fünf Jahren auf den Flächen verbleiben und wiederkehrende Erträge liefern, einschließlich Reb- und Baumschulen gemäß Anhang I Buchstabe G Ziffer 5 der Entscheidung 2000/115/EG der Kommission (*), mit Ausnahme der nachstehend aufgeführten mehrjährigen landwirtschaftlichen Kulturen und Baumschulen solcher mehrjährigen landwirtschaftlichen Kulturen.“

---
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3492 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3492

     To provide for exemptions from municipal advisor registration 
                             requirements.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             August 2, 2012

  Mr. Toomey (for himself, Mr. Carper, Mr. Moran, and Mrs. McCaskill) 
introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 
            Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To provide for exemptions from municipal advisor registration 
                             requirements.

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

SECTION 1. BANK EXEMPTION FROM MUNICIPAL ADVISOR REGISTRATION.

    Section 15B(e)(4) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 
78o-4(e)(4)) is amended--
            (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``entity)'' and 
        inserting ``entity, or a person appointed to or volunteering on 
        a board, commission, committee, or similar function of a 
        municipal entity)''; and
            (2) in subparagraph (C), by inserting after ``include'' the 
        following: ``a bank (as defined in section (3)(a)(6)) or an 
        agency or branch of a foreign bank (as defined in paragraphs 
        (1) and (3), respectively, of section 1(b) of the International 
        Banking Act of 1978 (12 U.S.C. 3101)),''.
                                 <all>
```
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Articles 

#           Marine magnetic anomalies      

      April 24, 1979    

Marine magnetic data have been available for many years from all of the world's oceans, and their contribution to marine geophysics and geology is profound. These data, for example, have allowed charting the age of the ocean floor, reconstruction of the geologic history of the major ocean basins, development of a Cenozoic and Mesozoic timescale of geomagnetic reversals, and speculation on the processes of sea‐floor spreading. Research on these and similar problems actively continued during this quadrennial, but here we discuss only a few topics in which we believe the most significant advances have been made during the last four years: the source of marine magnetic anomalies, the geomagnetic time‐scale, high‐amplitude anomalies, and studies of back‐arc basins.

Source of Anomalies

Studies of magnetic surveys over continental areas can often be constrained by the magnetic properties of samples collected from below the survey. Until recently, model studies of marine magnetic anomalies have enjoyed the luxury of an inaccessible source. Except for samples scraped from the ocean floor by dredging [e.g., Irving, 1970] and inferences drawn from magnetic studies of ophiolite sequences [e.g., Vine and Moores, 1972], very little information was available for constraining studies of marine magnetic anomalies.

## Citation Information

## Related Content

                  -              Connect           

#### Richard Blakely

##### Scientist Emeritus

Geology, Minerals, Energy, and Geophysics Science Center

blakely@usgs.gov

650-439-2316

## Related Content

#### Richard Blakely

##### Scientist Emeritus

Geology, Minerals, Energy, and Geophysics Science Center

blakely@usgs.gov

650-439-2316

### Contact

####               Geology, Minerals, Energy, and Geophysics Science Center          

Building 19, 350 N. Akron Rd.P.O. Box 158Moffett Field, CA94035United States
John CURRY, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-1740

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 14, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,162
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 2,247
<PP&E>                                             776
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   3,067
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,442
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            38
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,431
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     3,067
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 9,226
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    4,948
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,277
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  50
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (76)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (76)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (76)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.02)


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)



Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of Payment Data Systems, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:



The Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 (the Form 10-K) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



Dated: March 31, 2009

| |  |                                                          | 
| |  | -------------------------------------------------------- | 
| |  | /s/ Michael R. Long                                      | 
| |  | Michael R. Long                                          | 
| |  | Chief Executive Officer,                                 | 
| |  | Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer |
# EUR-Lex - 32004M3646 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 32004M3646

**Commission Decision of 17/12/2004 declaring a concentration to be compatible with the common market (Case No IV/M.3646 - MABSA / BELGIAN STATE / BIAC / JV) according to Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 (Only the English text is authentic) **

*

*

| |Brussels, 17/12/2004

SG-Greffe(2004) D/205934

To the notifying parties

Dear Madam(s) and/or Sir(s),

Subject : Case No. COMP/M.3646 – MABSA/Belgian State/BIAC/JV Notification of 18.11.2004 pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No. 139/2004 [1] Publication in the Official Journal of the European Union No. C 292, 30.11.2004

1. On 18.11.2004, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (“ECMR”) by which the Luxembourg based undertaking Macquarie Airports Brussels S.A. (“MABSA”), which belongs to the Australian Macquarie Group, acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation joint control of Brussels International Airport Company N.V./S.A. (“BIAC”), together with the Belgian State, by way of purchase of shares.

2. The business activities of the undertakings concerned are :

- for MABSA : purchase vehicle corporation,

- for Macquarie Group: banking, mostly in Australia, and

- for BIAC : owner and operator of Brussels National Airport, located in Zaventem.

3. After examination of the notification, the Commission has concluded that the notified operation falls within the scope of Council Regulation (EC) No. 139/2004 and of paragraph 5, subparagraph b, of the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No139/2004[2].

4. For the reasons set out in the Notice on a simplified procedure, the Commission has decided not to oppose the notified operation and to declare it compatible with the common market and with the EEA Agreement. This decision is adopted in application of Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No. 139/2004.

For the Commission

Neelie KROESMember of the Commission signed

[1] OJ L 24, 29.1.2004 p. 1

[2] Available on DG COMP website: http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/legislation/consultation/simplified_tru.pdf.

MERGER PROCEDURE

ARTICLE 6(1)(b) DECISION

SIMPLIFIED PROCEDURE

PUBLIC VERSION
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 of  Saratoga  Resources,  Inc.  (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended  September 30, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"),  each of the undersigned,
in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies 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  operation of the
Company.


Dated:  July 8, 2005                          /s/ Thomas Cooke
                                              ______________________________
                                              Name: Thomas Cooke
                                              Title: Chief Executive Officer

Dated:  July 8, 2005                          /s/ Thomas Cooke
                                              ______________________________
                                              Name: Thomas Cooke
                                              Title: Chief Financial Officer