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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-6189

JOSHUA PATERNOSTER-COZART,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

RONALDO MYERS, Superintendent of Hampton Roads Regional Jail,

Respondent - Appellee,

and

HAMPTON CITY CIRCUIT COURT; LINDA BACHELOR SMITH, Clerk; 

HAMPTON SHERIFF’S OFFICE; B. J. ROBERTS, Sheriff,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at 

Norfolk. Mark S. Davis, District Judge. (2:16-cv-00633-MSD-LRL)

Submitted: July 31, 2017 Decided: August 25, 2017

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joshua Paternoster-Cozart, Appellant Pro Se. 
2

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3

PER CURIAM:

Joshua Paternoster-Cozart seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief 

on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit 

justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (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 petition 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 the issue

Paternoster-Cozart sought to raise was litigated in a previous § 2254 petition, and he 

accordingly has not made the requisite showing. Thus, we grant the motion for party 

substitution and replace Bob McCabe with Ronaldo Myers, deny the motion to appoint 

counsel and expedite decision, deny the motion for a certificate of appealability, deny the 

motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with 

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
4

presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

DISMISSED
_______________________________________ __ _____________ _______________ _____________

________________ _______________ ___________ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

May 10, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver 129341(34) Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. IN RE PETITION BY TREASURER OF Stephen J. Markman, WAYNE COUNTY FOR FORECLOSURE Justices

WAYNE COUNTY TREASURER, Petitioner, and

MATTHEW TATARIAN and MICHAEL KELLY, Intervening Parties-Appellants, SC: 129341 v CoA: 261074 Wayne CC: 02-220192-PZ PERFECTING CHURCH, Respondent-Appellee.

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion by the Michigan Association of County Treasurers for l eave to file a brief amicus curiae in this case is GRANTED. The request for leave to participat e in oral argument is DENIED.

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

May 10, 2006

Clerk
105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1043

AN ACT

To designate the United States courthouse under construction at the corner of Las Vegas Boulevard and Clark

Avenue in Las Vegas, Nevada, as the ‘‘Lloyd D. George

United States Courthouse’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

S 1043 ES

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF LLOYD D. GEORGE UNITED

2 STATES COURTHOUSE.

3 The United States courthouse under construction at

4 the corner of Las Vegas Boulevard and Clark Avenue in

5 Las Vegas, Nevada, shall be known and designated as the

6 ‘‘Lloyd D. George United States Courthouse’’.

7 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

8 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

9 paper, or other record of the United States to the United

10 States courthouse referred to in section 1 shall be deemed

11 to be a reference to the ‘‘Lloyd D. George United States

12 Courthouse’’.

Passed the Senate July 25, 1997.

Attest:

Secretary.
105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1043

AN ACT

To designate the United States courthouse under

house’’.the ‘‘Lloyd D. George United States Courtvard and Clark Avenue in Las Vegas, Nevada, asconstruction at the corner of Las Vegas Boule-
<PAGE>   1



Exhibit 3.33

                            ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION

The undersigned desiring to form a corporation (hereinafter referred to as
"Corporation") pursuant to the provisions of Indiana Business Corporation Law.

                                   ARTICLE I.
                                      NAME

Name of Corporation - SHERWOOD HEALTHCARE CORP.

                                   ARTICLE II.
                           REGISTERED OFFICE AND AGENT

The street address of the corporation's initial registered office in Indiana and
the name of its initial registered agent at that office is:

         William Robert Lee
         1302 Sherwood Drive
         Greenfield, Indiana 46140

                                  ARTICLE III.
                                AUTHORIZED SHARES

Number of shares:  1,000 Shares of Common.

                                   ARTICLE IV.
                                  INCORPORATORS

The name(s) and address(es) of the incorporator(s) of the corporation:

         William Robert Lee
         1302 Sherwood Drive
         Greenfield, IN 46140

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned being all the incorporators of said
corporation execute these Articles of Incorporation and verify, subject to
penalties of perjury, that the statements contained herein are true, this 15th
day of February, 1991.

                                                       /s/ William Robert Lee
                                                       ----------------------
                                                           William Robert Lee

Instrument was prepared by:
William Robert Lee
<PAGE>   2
1302 Sherwood Drive
Greenfield, IN 46140

                           STATEMENT OF CONSENT TO ACT
                               AS REGISTERED AGENT

         CT Corporation System hereby accepts the appointment to serve as
registered agent in Indiana for SHERWOOD HEALTHCARE CORP.

March 11, 1994                                    C T CORPORATION SYSTEM

                                                  By: /s/Daniel R. Glatz
                                                      -----------------------
                                                         Daniel R. Glatz,
                                                         Asst. Vice President
#### Winder Lumber Company *v.*Mary Leila Cotton Mills *et al.*

Hill, J.

The Washington Brick Company brought suit against the Winder Lumber Company, of Jackson 'county, and the Mary Leila Cotton Mills, of Greene county, for the purpose of obtaining a judgment against the Winder Lumber Company for brick sold to it and used by it, as contractor, in building the cotton mills, and for the establishment of a special materialman’s lien by such judgment on the property of the Mary Leila Cotton Mills. The last-named corporation filed its answer, averring that it was unable to say whether the Winder Lumber Company owed the Washington Brick Company, but that the latter had no debt against the responding defendant, and that this defendant did not owe the Winder Lumber Company any debt, but that company owed the defendant Mary Leila Cotton Mills. The court, on motion, struck the Mary Leila Cotton Mills as a party defendant in so far as any controversy between it and the Winder Lumber Company was concerned, and left, as the sole issue to be tried against the Mary Leila Cotton Mills, the one question whether the Washington Brick Company might obtain judgment against the Mary Leila Cotton Mills, establishing and foreclosing a lien for the amount for which the Washington Brick Company might obtain judgment against the finder Lumber Company. To this judgment the Winder Lumber Company excepted. *Held,*that a motion to dismiss the writ of error will be sustained, for-the reason that the ease with respect to foreclosure of lien against the Mary Leila Cotton *278Mills is still pending in the court below, and the writ of error to this court is prematurely brought.

March 10, 1915.

Lien foreclosure; from Jackson. Motion to dismiss.

*Lewis G. Russell,*for plaintiff in error.

*John J. & Roy M. Strickland*and *Noel*P. *Park,*contra.

*Writ of error dismissed.*

*All the Justices concur, except Fish, O. J.,*absent.
#### Syful MILON, Petitioner v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 10-60959

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Oct. 14, 2011.

Benjamin S. Lee, Gell & Gell, New York, NY, for Petitioner.

Imran Raza Zaidi, Tangerlia Cox, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before BARKSDALE, STEWART, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Syful Milon, a native and citizen of Bangladesh, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) denial of his motion to reopen removal proceedings and for reconsideration.

*811Milon does not challenge the BIA’s decision insofar as it denied his motion for reconsideration. Therefore, he has abandoned any issues related to that denial. *See, e.g., Zhu v. Gonzales,*493 F.3d 588, 593 n. 10 (5th Cir.2007).

Milon contends the affidavit submitted with his motion satisfied the requirements for reopening based on ineffective assistance of counsel (IAC). Motions to reopen removal proceedings are disfavored, and the moving party bears a heavy burden. *Altamirano-Lopez v. Gonzales,*435 F.3d 547, 549 (5th Cir.2006) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). In reviewing the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen, this court generally applies a “highly deferential abuse-of-discretion standard” and will affirm the BIA’s decision “so long as it is not capricious, racially invidious, utterly without foundation in the evidence, or otherwise so irrational that it is arbitrary rather than the result of any perceptible rational approach”. *Zhao v. Gonzales,*404 F.3d 295, 303-04 (5th Cir.2005) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).

IAC can warrant reopening removal proceedings if petitioner satisfies the requirements set forth in *Matter of Lozada,*19 I. & N. Dec. 637 (BIA 1988). To support an IAC claim, an alien must: (1) provide an affidavit attesting the relevant facts, including the terms of the attorney-client agreement; (2) before he presents the claim to the BIA, inform counsel of the allegations and allow counsel an opportunity to respond; and (3) file or explain why a grievance has not been filed against counsel. *Lara v. Trominski,*216 F.3d 487, 496 (5th Cir.2000); *Lozada,*19 I. *&*N. Dec. at 639. “Where essential information is lacking, it is impossible to evaluate the substance of [an IAC] claim.” *Lozada,*19 I. & N. Dec. at 639.

Milon did not, at any point in this proceeding, provide the BIA proof of his letter to former counsel or a filed grievance. “[T]he general application of the *Lozada*rules is not an abuse of discretion”. *Lara,*216 F.3d at 498.

DENIED.

*

 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.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 7
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                            17,129
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                          83
<MORTGAGE>                                         204
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                  21,236
<CASH>                                              90
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                                 473
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                           4,287
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 144,250
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                  6,382
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                                 50
<POLICY-OTHER>                                  15,667
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                          116,543
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                    650
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              250<F1>
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                       2,464
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   144,250
<PREMIUMS>                                       1,064
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                                382
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                                   0
<OTHER-INCOME>                                       0
<BENEFITS>                                         729
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                        172
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                               297
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    220
<INCOME-TAX>                                        70
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                150
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       150
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.07
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                       0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                  0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                    0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                   0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                     0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                      0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0
<FN>
<F1>REPRESENTS COMPANY OBLIGATED MANDATORILY REDEEMABLE PREFERRED SECURITIES OF
SUBSIDIARY TRUST HOLDING SOLELY PARENT JUNIOR SUBORDINATED DEBENTURES
</FN>


</TABLE>
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16
- 2445

IRMA IVONNE LANWGLOIS

- RO LDAN , Petitioner ,

v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General , Respondent

.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

.

Submitted : August 28, 2017 Decided: September 21, 2017

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER , and DUNCAN , Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by un published per curiam opinion

.
Anna M. Gallagher, MAGGIO & KATTAR, P.C., Washington, DC, for Petitioner. Chad A. Readler, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Dawn S. Conra d, Senior Litigation Counsel, Re mi Da Rocha

- Afodu, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Irma Ivonne Lanwglois

- Roldan, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) denying her untimely motion to reopen. We have thoroughly reviewed the record, inc luding Lanwglois

Roldan’s supporting evidence and conclude that the record evidence does not compel a ruling contrary to any of the administrative factual findings, see 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B) (2012), and that substantial evidence supports the Board’s dec ision. See INS v. Elias

– Zacarias , 502 U.S. 478, 481 (1992). Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board.
In re Lanwglois

- Roldan (B.I.A. Dec. 9, 2016). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal content ions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
No. 76-46.

No. 76-56.

#### American Tobacco Co. et al. *v.*Patterson et al.; and Tobacco Workers' International Union et al. *v.*Patterson et al.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
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

The undersigned,  Curtis B. McWilliams, the Chief Executive Officer of Trustreet
Properties,  Inc. (the "Company"), has executed this certification in connection
with the filing with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  of the Company's
Quarterly  Report  on Form  10-Q for the  quarter  ended  March  31,  2005  (the
"Report"). The undersigned hereby certifies 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.

DATED this 9th day of May 2005.




                                     /s/ Curtis B. McWilliams
                                     --------------------------------------
                                     Curtis B. McWilliams
                                     Chief Executive Officer


                                     A signed original 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.
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Meat Safety and Quality: Clay Center, NE
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    USMARC Home
                    USMARC Research Units
                        Genetics and Animal Breeding
                                    Livestock Bio Systems
                                    Nutrition, Growth and Physiology
                                    Animal Health GenomicsSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Plains Area Clay Center, Nebraska U.S. Meat Animal Research Center Meat Safety and Quality People & Locations







Casey  Trambly
                        Meat Safety and Quality

                        




                        
                        Biological Science Lab Technician
                        Phone: (402) 762-4255
                        
                        
                        Fax: (Employee information on this page comes from the REE Directory. Please contact your front office staff to update the REE Directory.)


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1349 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        S.1349

                       One Hundred Fifth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
the twenty-seventh day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-
                                  eight

                                 An Act

 
 To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a certificate of 
    documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the 
   coastwise trade for the vessel PRINCE NOVA, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. DOCUMENTATION OF THE VESSEL PRINCE NOVA.

    (a) Documentation Authorized.--Notwithstanding section 27 of the 
Merchant Marine Act, 1920 (46 U.S.C. App. 883), section 8 of the Act of 
June 19, 1886 (24 Stat. 81, chapter 421; 46 U.S.C. App. 289), and 
section 12106 of title 46, United States Code, the Secretary of 
Transportation may issue a certificate of documentation with 
appropriate endorsement for employment in the coastwise trade for the 
vessel PRINCE NOVA (Canadian registration number 320804).
    (b) Expiration of Certificate.--A certificate of documentation 
issued for the vessel under subsection (a) shall expire unless--
        (1) the vessel undergoes conversion, reconstruction, repair, 
    rebuilding, or retrofitting in a shipyard located in the United 
    States;
        (2) the cost of that conversion, reconstruction, repair, 
    rebuilding, or retrofitting is not less than the greater of--
            (A) 3 times the purchase value of the vessel before the 
        conversion, reconstruction, repair, rebuilding, or 
        retrofitting; or
            (B) $4,200,000; and
        (3) not less than an average of $1,000,000 is spent annually in 
    a shipyard located in the United States for conversion, 
    reconstruction, repair, rebuilding, or retrofitting of the vessel 
    until the total amount of the cost required under paragraph (2) is 
    spent.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```