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

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Earth

Filters

              - science_education(1)
              - (-)science_science(2)
              - products_publications(6)
              - multimedia_audio(1)
              - multimedia_audio-141766(1)
              - multimedia_video(1)
              - multimedia_video-149194(1)
              - news_news-149245(1)
              - news_news-149246(1)
              - news_news-149249(1)
              - news_other_news(1)
              - connect_staff_profiles(2)
              - other_basic-37(1)
              - other_basic-42(1)

## By Location

              - alabama(3)
              - alaska(20)
              - arizona(22)
              - arkansas(1)
              - california(27)
              - colorado(20)
              - delaware(3)
              - district of columbia(3)
              - florida(8)
              - georgia(3)
              - guam(2)
              - hawaii(5)
              - idaho(3)
              - illinois(1)
              - kentucky(1)
              - louisiana(4)
              - maryland(4)
              - massachusetts(1)
              - (-)michigan(2)
              - minnesota(2)
              - mississippi(2)
              - missouri(4)
              - montana(5)
              - nebraska(3)
              - nevada(7)
              - new jersey(2)
              - new mexico(6)
              - new york(5)
              - north carolina(4)
              - oregon(2)
              - puerto rico(2)
              - south carolina(4)
              - south dakota(23)
              - tennessee(2)
              - texas(2)
              - u.s. virgin islands(1)
              - utah(5)
              - virginia(10)
              - washington(7)
              - wyoming(9)

## By Year

Project        August 23, 2021        Geophysics of Precambrian Terranes, Upper Midwest and Rocky Mountains

Project        February 28, 2017        USGS Data at Risk: Expanding Legacy Data Inventory and Preservation Strategies
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-6201

JIMMIE CRAIG DANIELS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

MANDY MICHELLE BEASLEY DANIELS,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Florence. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge. 

(4:10-cv-01692-TLW-SVH)

Submitted: March 15, 2012 Decided: March 20, 2012

Before DUNCAN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jimmie Craig Daniels, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Jimmy Craig Daniels appeals the district court’s order 

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 

dismissing his civil action for lack of jurisdiction. We have 

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, 

we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. 

Daniels v. Daniels, No. 4:10-cv-01692-TLW-SVH (D.S.C. Dec. 7, 

2011). 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.

AFFIRMED
Opinion issued January 28 , 2020

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01
- 18
- 00376
- CR

—————————

— — OSCAR AXCEL DURON , Appella nt

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appell e e
On Appeal from the 176th District Court

Harris County, Tex a s Trial Court Ca se No. 1507865

MEMORANDU M OPINION A ppellan t, Oscar Axcel Duron, was found guilty of the felony offense of
aggra v ated robbery with a deadly wea pon . T EX
. P ENAL C ODE § § 29

. 03 (a), (b ). Appellant was convict ed and sent enced by a jury to 15 y ea rs ’ confinement in the Texas Depar tment of Criminal Jus tice. Appellant timely filed a notice of appeal

.2

A ppellant’s appointed c o u nsel on appeal has fi led a motion to wit hdraw, along with a brief stating that the record presents no reversible erro r and t h e appeal is without merit and is frivolous. See Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Counsel’s b r ief meet s the Anders requ i rements by presenting a profession al

eva luation of the record and supplying us with references to the record and lega l autho r it y. See id. ; see also High v. Stat e , 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex . Crim. App. 1978). Co unsel indi c ates that s he has thoroughly rev i e wed the record and is unable to a dv ance any grounds of error that warrant reversal. See Anders , 386 U.S

. at 744 ; Mitc hell v

. S tate , 193 S.W.3d 153, 155 (Tex. Ap p.

— Housto n [1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.). Appellant filed a motion to access the appella t e record but did not fi le a pro se response. We have independently reviewed the entire record in this appeal, and we conclude that n o reversible error exists in the recor d, there are no argu able grounds for review, and the appeal is frivolous. Se e Anders , 386 U

. S. at 744 (emphas iz ing
t hat review i ng co urt

— and not counsel

— determines, after full examination of proceedings, whether appea l i s wholly frivolou s); Garner v. State , 300 S.W.3d 763, 76 7 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (reviewing court must determine whether arguabl e grounds for revi ew exi s t); Bledso e v. S tate , 178 S.W.3d 824, 826

– 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (same); Mitchell , 193 S.W. 3d at 1 55 (reviewing court determines whether arguable grounds ex ist by reviewing entire record). We note3

that an appella nt may challeng e a holding that t he re a r e no argua b le grounds for appeal by filing a petition for discretionary review in th e Texas Co urt of Cr iminal Appeals. See Bledsoe , 178 S.W.3d at 827 & n.6. W e affirm the judgment of the trial court and grant couns el’s motion to

w ithdraw. 1 Attorn ey Abbie Russell must immediately send appellant th e required notice and file a copy of the notice with t he C le rk of this Court. See T EX
. R. A P P
. P. 6.5(c). We dismiss any pending motions as moot. PE R CURIAM Panel co n sists of Justic es Ke y es, Go odman , and Co untiss

. Do not publis h. T EX
. R. A PP
. P . 47.2(b).

1 Appointed coun sel still has a duty to inform appella n t o f the result of this appeal and that h e may, on his ow n, pursue di s cretionary review in t he Texas Court of Criminal Appeal s . See Ex Parte Wilson , 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997)

.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

1

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-50938

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ANTOINE GUICE, also known as G Money,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

(97-CR-12-ALL)

- - - - - - - - - -

February 25, 1999

Before JOLLY, SMITH, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Defendant-Appellant Antoine Guice appeals his guilty-plea

conviction and sentence for use of a communication device to

facilitate the commission of a felony, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§

841(a)(1) and 843(b). 

Guice first complains that the Government violated 18 U.S.C.

§ 201(c)(2) by offering Robert White leniency in exchange for his

trial testimony and that such violation justifies the withdrawal of
2

Guice’s subsequent guilty plea. His argument is foreclosed by our

precedent. See United States v. Webster, 162 F.3d 308, 357-58 (5th

Cir. 1998); United States v. Haese, 162 F.3d 359, 366 (5th Cir.

1998).

Guice also argues that the district court erred in denying his

motion to withdraw his guilty plea and that the district court’s

drug-quantity calculation was erroneous. We require that issues be

briefed on appeal and do not consider issues that appellants fail

to brief. See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 225 (5th Cir. 1993);

United States v. Wilkes, 20 F.3d 651, 653 (5th Cir. 1994); FED. R.

APP. P. 28(a)(9). Guice has abandoned these issues by failing to

brief them. Yohey, 985 F.2d 224-25 

AFFIRMED.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 1009 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering Special Emphasis Panel; BEITA at HBCU RFA-EB-23-006 Review.                    

*Date:*                         February 11, 2025.                    

*Time:*                         11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, NIBIB, Democracy II, Suite 200, 6707 Democracy Blvd., Bethesda, MD 20817.                    

*Meeting Format:*                         Virtual Meeting.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Tianhong Wang, MD, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, National Institutes of Health, 6707 Democracy Blvd., Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 451-1189,                         *wangt3@mail.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.866, National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, National Institutes of Health.)

Dated: December 11, 2024.

Victoria E. Townsend,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2024-29546 Filed 12-13-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Earth

Filters

              - (-)science_science(3)
              - products_maps(2)
              - products_publications(10)
              - multimedia_before_after(1)
              - multimedia_image(2)
              - multimedia_image-204460(2)
              - multimedia_video(4)
              - multimedia_video-149195(4)
              - other_basic-42(1)

## By Location

              - alabama(3)
              - alaska(20)
              - arizona(22)
              - arkansas(1)
              - california(27)
              - colorado(20)
              - delaware(3)
              - district of columbia(3)
              - florida(8)
              - (-)georgia(3)
              - guam(2)
              - hawaii(5)
              - idaho(3)
              - illinois(1)
              - kentucky(1)
              - louisiana(4)
              - maryland(4)
              - massachusetts(1)
              - michigan(2)
              - minnesota(2)
              - mississippi(2)
              - missouri(4)
              - montana(5)
              - nebraska(3)
              - nevada(7)
              - new jersey(2)
              - new mexico(6)
              - new york(5)
              - north carolina(4)
              - oregon(2)
              - puerto rico(2)
              - south carolina(4)
              - south dakota(23)
              - tennessee(2)
              - texas(2)
              - u.s. virgin islands(1)
              - utah(5)
              - virginia(10)
              - washington(7)
              - wyoming(9)

## By Year

Project        September 30, 2015        Geophysical and Geochemical Approaches to Evaluating Rare Earth Element (REE) Potential in the Southeastern U.S.

Project        April 2, 2018        Heavy-Mineral Sand Resources in the Southeastern U.S.

Project        June 26, 2019        Critical Mineral Resources in Heavy Mineral Sands of the U.S. Atlantic Coastal Plain
---

Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of
Turinco, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended March 31, 2006 (the
Quarterly Report), Michael Jervis, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
does hereby certify pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(18 U.S.C. Section 1350) that, to his knowledge:

| | (1) | the Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly
      presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.

| | By:    | /s/ Michael Jervis     
| | ------ | -----------------------
| | Name:  | Michael Jervis         
| | Title: | Chief Executive Officer
| | Date:  | May 15, 2006           

This written statement is being furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to the Companys Quarterly Report on Form
10-QSB. A signed original of this statement has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.

---
Kyle P. MCCLAIN, as Beneficiary, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Tye WEISENFLUH, as Personal Representative, et al., Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-4454

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

October 12, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Granted. Dismissed.
Sharon Ashley GLASS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-2057

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed October 2, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6279

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus MICHAEL LEE DOUGLAS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr., Chief District Judge. (1:01-cr-00387-1; 1:06-cv-00885-JAB) Submitted: May 18, 2007 Decided: May 31, 2007 Before WILKINSON and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Lee Douglas, Appellant Pro Se. Angela Hewlett Miller, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Michael Lee Douglas seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). 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) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Douglas 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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
# Official Journal L 234I/2022

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 234I |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 659 September 2022 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 234I

English edition

Legislation

Volume 659 September 2022

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | DECISIONS |
| | * | Council Decision (EU) 2022/1500 of 9 September 2022 on the suspension in whole of the application of the Agreement between the European Community and the Russian Federation on the facilitation of the issuance of visas to the citizens of the European Union and the Russian Federation | 1 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

DECISIONS

*

Council Decision (EU) 2022/1500 of 9 September 2022 on the suspension in whole of the application of the Agreement between the European Community and the Russian Federation on the facilitation of the issuance of visas to the citizens of the European Union and the Russian Federation

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
Henry Maxwell KING, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D18-807

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[October 18, 2018]

Henry Maxwell King, Punta Gorda, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

Per Curiam.

*Affirmed.*

May, Conner and Kuntz, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32.1

                   CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. (xi)1350

     This certification is being filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. This
certification is included solely for the purpose of complying with the
provisions of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and is not to be used for
any other purpose. In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form
10-QSB of Savoy Resources Corp. for the quarter ended March 31, 2005, I, Arthur
Johnson, hereby certify in my capacity as an officer of Savoy Resources Corp.
that to my knowledge:


     1. The Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Savoy Resources Corp. for the
quarter ended March 31, 2005, 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of
Savoy Resources Corp. for the quarter ended March 31, 2005, fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
Savoy Resources Corp.


Date:  May 30, 2005               By: /s/ Arthur Johnson
                                      ------------------
                                      Arthur Johnson, President,
                                      Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial
                                      Officer and Principal Accounting Officer
Exhibit No. 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 CEO Channel.com, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10- QSB for the  period  ending  September  30,  2002 as filed  with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Larry
Creeger,  Chief  Executive and Chief Financial  Officer 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.




April 1, 2005                      By: /s/ Larry Creeger
                                       ---------------------------
                                       Larry Creeger
                                       Chief Executive Officer,
                                       Chief Financial Officer





--------------------------------------
This  certification  accompanies  the  Report  pursuant  to  Section  906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 and  shall not be deemed  filed by the  Company  for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of this written  statement
required by Section 906,  has been  provided to the Company and will be retained
by the Company and furnished to the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission or its
staff upon request.d  furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.