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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-7195

CLAYTON E. YOUNG,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

KATHLEEN GREEN, Warden; M. DEAN, Case Manager;

JOHN A. ROWLEY, Commissioner of Corrections;

STATE OF MARYLAND,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, District Judge. (8:07-cv00371-RWT)

Submitted: October 11, 2007 Decided: October 18, 2007

Before MICHAEL and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Clayton E. Young, Appellant Pro Se. Rex Schultz Gordon, OFFICE OF

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Clayton E. Young seeks to appeal the district court’s

orders denying reconsideration of the denial of his motion for

appointment of counsel and denying his motion for discovery. This

court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C.

§ 1291 (2000), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28

U.S.C. § 1292 (2000); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial

Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The orders Young seeks to

appeal are neither final orders nor appealable interlocutory or

collateral orders. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of

jurisdiction. 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
Exhibit 31                  Rule 13a-14(d) Certification

                                  CERTIFICATION

     I, Michael L. Parker, a President and Director of Washington Mutual
Mortgage Securities Corp., certify that:

     1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K, and all reports on Form
8-K  containing  distribution  or servicing  reports filed in respect of periods
included in the year covered by this annual  report,  of  WASHINGTON  MUTUAL MSC
MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2001-AR1;

     2. Based on my knowledge,  the  information  in these  reports,  taken as a
whole, 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 as of the
last day of the period covered by this annual report;

     3.  Based  on my  knowledge,  the  distribution  or  servicing  information
required to be provided  to the  trustee by the  servicer  under the pooling and
servicing, or similar,  agreement, for inclusion in these reports is included in
these reports;

     4. I am responsible for reviewing the activities  performed by the servicer
under the  pooling  and  servicing,  or  similar,  agreement  and based  upon my
knowledge and the annual  compliance  review required under that agreement,  and
except as disclosed in the reports,  the servicer has fulfilled its  obligations
under that agreement; and

     5. The  reports  disclose  all  significant  deficiencies  relating  to the
servicer's compliance with the minimum servicing standards based upon the report
provided by an  independent  public  accountant,  after  conducting  a review in
compliance with the Uniform Single  Attestation  Program for Mortgage Bankers or
similar  procedure,  as set forth in the  pooling  and  servicing,  or  similar,
agreement, that is included in these reports.

     In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information
provided to me by the following  unaffiliated  third parties acting as servicers
and sub-servicers:

     Washington Mutual


Dated: March 15, 2004
                                     /s/ Michael L. Parker
                                         Michael L. Parker,
                                         President and Director
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 Desert Health Products, Inc., (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2003, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (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 to the best of his 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 operation
            of the Company.

By: /s/ Johnny Shannon
   -------------------------
Johnny Shannon                     Date: August 14, 2003
Chief Financial Officer

Exhibit 32.2 - Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Crops

Filters

              - science_education(5)
              - science_science(96)
              - products_data(87)
              - products_maps(20)
              - products_publications(704)
              - (-)products_software(3)
              - products_web_tools(2)
              - multimedia_audio(64)
              - multimedia_audio-141766(59)
              - multimedia_audio-141767(5)
              - multimedia_before_after(3)
              - multimedia_image(132)
              - multimedia_image-141771(119)
              - multimedia_image-141772(3)
              - multimedia_image-141775(4)
              - multimedia_image-141776(4)
              - multimedia_image-204460(2)
              - multimedia_slideshow(1)
              - multimedia_video(107)
              - multimedia_video-149194(40)
              - multimedia_video-149195(32)
              - multimedia_video-149196(2)
              - multimedia_video-149197(5)
              - multimedia_video-149198(7)
              - documents_file(12)
              - documents_file-149204(1)
              - documents_file-149216(3)
              - documents_file-149224(8)
              - news_news-149245(1)
              - news_news-149248(1)
              - news_news-149249(3)
              - news_news-149250(3)
              - news_other_news(7)
              - connect_staff_profiles(5)
              - other_basic-42(8)

## By Location

## By Year

Software Release        October 23, 2023        CalPUR-LUE

Software Release        February 7, 2024        Aquaculture and Irrigation Water Use Model 2.0 Software

Software Release        September 24, 2020        WaveLab
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL,

Petitioner

v.

TANCREDI WILLIAM CALABRESE

,

Respondent :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 2 706 Disciplinary Docket No 3

File No. C 4

- 20

- 165

Attorney Registration No. 315687

( Fayette County )

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 26th d ay of March , 2 0 20

, in the absence of a response to this

Court’s Rule to Show Cause why Respondent should not be placed on temporary

suspension, the Rule is made absolute, and it is provided that:

1. Respondent is placed on temporary suspension until further definitive act ion by

this Court;

2. Respondent shall comply with the provisions of Pa.R.D.E. 217;

3. The President Judge of the Court of Common Pleas of Fayette County shall

enter such orders as may be necessary to protect the rights of Respondent’s clients or

fiduc iary entities with which he is involved, see Pa.R.D.E. 217(g); and

4. All financial institutions in which Respondent holds fiduciary funds shall freeze

such accounts pending further action.

Respondent’s rights to petition for dissolution or amendment of this order and to

request accelerated disposition of charges underlying this order pursuant to Pa.R.D.E.

208(f)(6), are specifically preserved.This Order constitutes an imposition of public discipline pertaining to

confidentiality. See Pa.R.D.E. 402.
Stephen MIZNER, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-2007

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

September 20, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Stephen Linehan, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form
10-K of Capital One Multi-asset Execution Trust (the Exchange Act periodic reports);

2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange
Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do 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, all of the distribution, servicing and other
information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

4. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statements required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations
under the servicing agreement in all material respects; and

5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for
asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act
Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: The Bank of New York,
Regulus Group, LLC, First Data Resources, Inc. and REMITCO, LLC.

Date: March 30th, 2009



By:

/s/ Stephen LinehanName:

Stephen Linehan *Title:

President Capital One Funding,
LLC




|* | Stephen Linehan is the senior officer in charge of securitization of Capital One Funding, LLC.
|- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
# C_2020361EN.01000501.xml

| 27.10.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 361/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.10.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 361/5

---

Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries

(2020/C 361/05)

In accordance with Article 35(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Union control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), a decision has been taken to close the fishery as set down in the following table:

| Date and time of closure | 1.10.2020 |
| --- | --- |
| Duration | 1.10.2020 – 31.12.2020 |
| Member State | Belgium |
| Stock or Group of stocks | WHG/08. |
| Species | Whiting (Merlangius merlangus) |
| Zone | 8 |
| Type(s) of fishing vessels | --- |
| Reference number | 27/TQ123 |

Date and time of closure

1.10.2020

Duration

1.10.2020 – 31.12.2020

Member State

Belgium

Stock or Group of stocks

WHG/08.

Species

Whiting (Merlangius merlangus)

Zone

8

Type(s) of fishing vessels

---

Reference number

27/TQ123

---

(1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.

---
Theodore ROLLO, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-306

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed July 6, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Miguel GUTIERREZ, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-64

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed June 20, 2018.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 239 (Thursday, December 12, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 100557]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-29190]

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

POSTAL SERVICE

Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and USPS 
Ground Advantage[supreg] Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: December 12, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
November 27, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 812 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-520, K2025-518.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-29190 Filed 12-11-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5420 

To authorize the American Battle Monuments Commission to acquire, operate, 

and maintain the Lafayette Escadrille Memorial in Marne-la-Coquette, 

France. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 9, 2016 

Mr. MILLER of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

A BILL 

To authorize the American Battle Monuments Commission 

to acquire, operate, and maintain the Lafayette Escadrille Memorial in Marne-la-Coquette, France. 

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

3 SECTION 1. LAFAYETTE ESCADRILLE MEMORIAL IN 

4 MARNE-LA-COQUETTE, FRANCE. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subsection (b), the 

6 American Battle Monuments Commission (hereinafter re7 ferred to as ‘‘the Commission’’) may acquire, operate, and 

8 maintain the Lafayette Escadrille Memorial in Marne-la9 Coquette, France. 


smartinez on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5420 IH

1 (b) AGREEMENT REQUIRED.—The Commission may 

2 carry out subsection (a) only pursuant to an agreement— 

3 (1) between the Commission and the Lafayette 

4 Escadrille Memorial Foundation; and 

5 (2) subject to the consent of the Government of 

6 France. 

7 (c) PAYMENT OF EXPENSES.—The Commission may 

8 employ such personnel as are necessary to carry out this 

9 Act. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Declination

Filters

              - science_education(5)
              - science_faqs(5)
              - science_science(341)
              - products_data(70)
              - products_maps(16)
              - products_publications(2978)
              - products_software(4)
              - products_web_tools(7)
              - multimedia_audio(53)
              - multimedia_audio-141766(47)
              - multimedia_audio-141767(6)
              - multimedia_before_after(3)
              - multimedia_image(130)
              - multimedia_image-141769(1)
              - multimedia_image-141770(2)
              - multimedia_image-141771(106)
              - (-)multimedia_image-141772(1)
              - multimedia_image-141774(3)
              - multimedia_image-141775(10)
              - multimedia_image-141776(7)
              - multimedia_slideshow(3)
              - multimedia_video(146)
              - multimedia_video-149194(74)
              - multimedia_video-149195(32)
              - multimedia_video-149196(5)
              - multimedia_video-149197(2)
              - multimedia_video-149198(6)
              - multimedia_video-149225(6)
              - documents_file(2)
              - documents_file-149206(1)
              - documents_file-149220(1)
              - news_news-149245(21)
              - news_news-149246(4)
              - news_news-149248(27)
              - news_news-149249(4)
              - news_news-149250(2)
              - news_newsletters(3)
              - news_other_news(31)
              - connect_staff_profiles(6)
              - (-)other_basic-42(8)

## By Location

## By Year

General        May 1, 2019        Adjustable Declination Compasses

General        May 1, 2019        Magnetic Declination Varies Considerably Across The United States

General        May 1, 2019        Method #1

General        May 1, 2019        Method #2

General        September 10, 2020        Will the Antelope Still Roam? Pronghorn at Risk in the Southwest

General        April 18, 2019        Desert Tortoise Diseases

General        December 20, 2019        Vulnerability Assessment of Coral Reefs

General        September 10, 2020        Warmer Waters Could Impact Sport Fishing in Wisconsin

Infographics        March 2, 2022        Discover Ecosystems
A99A2455.

#### RENDER v. THE STATE.

(525 SE2d 368)

Blackburn, Presiding Judge.

Adrian Render appeals his conviction, following a jury trial, for selling cocaine in violation of the Georgia Controlled Substances Act, OCGA § 16-13-30 (b), contending that his conviction must be reversed because the State failed to prove venue. Render raised this issue during trial by making a motion for a directed verdict and, later, during his motion for a new trial. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm.

> Our Georgia Constitution requires that venue in all criminal cases must be laid in the county where the crime is alleged to have been committed. Venue is a jurisdictional fact that must be proved by the prosecution beyond a reasonable doubt. Only when the evidence is not conflicting and when no challenge to venue is raised at trial will slight evidence be sufficient to prove venue. When there is insufficient evidence of venue, the verdict rendered is contrary to law and without sufficient evidence to support it.

(Footnotes omitted.) *Graves v. State,*269 Ga. 772, 773 (1) (504 SE2d 679) (1998). “Further, circumstantial as well as direct evidence may be used to establish venue. Venue is a question to be decided by the jury[,] and its decision will not be set aside as long as there is any evidence to support it.” (Citation omitted.) *Jones v. State,*245 Ga. 592, 596 (2) (266 SE2d 201) (1980).

Because Render challenged venue during his trial, the slight evidence rule is not applicable in this case. The evidence adduced at trial, however, is enough to establish venue beyond a reasonable doubt. Viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, the record shows that Render was found guilty for selling cocaine to undercover officers on February 9, 1998, in Meriwether County. Agent Donnie Winfield, a member of the Haralson County Drug Task Force, testified that he was assigned to work in Meriwether County on February 3, 1998. Winfield further testified that, on that date, he traveled to a residence off Highway 85 where Render participated in a sale of iocaine to him. There were several houses on the same piece of prop*798erty where the sale took place, including a gray house and a tan house. On cross-examination, Render’s attorney asked Winfield where in Meriwether County he had seen Render, and Winfield replied that he had seen him at the tan house where the drug sales took place. This testimony supports the jury’s determination that venue was appropriate in Meriwether County beyond a reasonable doubt, and, as such, the trial court appropriately denied both Render’s motion for directed verdict and motion for new trial on this issue.

Decided November 15, 1999.

*Joseph W. Jones, Jr.,*for appellant.

*Peter J. Skandalakis, District Attorney, Rudjard M. Hayes, Assistant District Attorney,*for appellee.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Eldridge and Barnes, JJ, concur.*
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Declination

Filters

              - science_science(2)
              - products_maps(1)
              - products_publications(35)
              - (-)multimedia_video(1)
              - multimedia_video-149196(1)
              - documents_file(1)
              - documents_file-149220(1)
              - news_news-149245(1)
              - news_news-149248(2)
              - news_news-149249(1)

## By Location

              - alaska(8)
              - arizona(6)
              - arkansas(1)
              - california(26)
              - florida(7)
              - hawaii(11)
              - idaho(2)
              - indiana(1)
              - iowa(1)
              - kansas(1)
              - maine(1)
              - maryland(3)
              - massachusetts(1)
              - michigan(1)
              - minnesota(1)
              - mississippi(2)
              - montana(1)
              - (-)nebraska(1)
              - nevada(2)
              - new mexico(1)
              - north carolina(1)
              - north dakota(1)
              - oklahoma(1)
              - oregon(4)
              - puerto rico(2)
              - south dakota(3)
              - texas(1)
              - utah(2)
              - virginia(3)
              - washington(3)
              - wisconsin(4)
              - wyoming(3)

## By Year

Science Animations        August 27, 2013        Water-level Change in the High Plains Aquifer System