alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Appeal Reinstated, Appeal Dismissed , and Memorandum Opinion filed March

5 , 2020
.

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 13

- 00523

- CV

MARK THUESEN , Appellant

V. CATHERINE E. SCHOOLAR, INDIVIDUALLY; CANDACE GARCIA, INDIVIDUALLY; AARON NEIL CARPENTER, INDIVIDUALLY AND CRAIG PHILLIP MALISOW, INDIVIDUALLY , Appellee s

On Appeal from the 151st District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2012

- 49262A

MEMORANDUM OPINION This is an appeal from a judgment sign ed April 24 , 2013. On November 10 , 201 4 , we abated this appeal because appellant Mark Thuesen petitioned for voluntary bankruptcy in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas, under cause number 13

- 37041

. See Tex. R. App. P. 8.2 . Through the Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) system, the court has2

learned that the bankruptcy case was closed April 4, 2019.
On January 23, 2020 , this court issued an order stating that the appeal would be reinstated and dismissed for want of prosecution unless on or before February 12, 2020, any party to the appeal filed a motion demonstrating good cause to retain this appeal on the court’s docket . No motion or other response was filed. Accordingly, we reinstate the appeal and dismiss it for want of prosecution

. PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Wise and Bourliot

.
#### McCOLGAN et al. v. LINEKER et al.

(Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

May 7, 1923.)

No. 3964.

Appeal and error ©=>76(1), 106—Order denying motion for designation of another judge not appealable.

An order denying a motion, made under Judicial Code, § 20 (Comp. St. § 987), for designation of another judge to try a case is not appeal-able to the Circuit Court of Appeals, since it is not an order made appealable, and it is not a final judgment.

Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Second Division of the Northern District of California; William C. Van Fleet, Judge. •

Suit in equity by Frederick V.-Lineker, individually and as administrator of the estate of Norvena Lineker, deceased, and others, against Adelaide McColgan, administratrix with will annexed of the estate of Daniel A. McColgan, deceased, and another. Defendants appeal from an order of the District Court.

Dismissed.

Alfred J. Harwood, of San Francisco, Cal., for appellants.

Wm. F. Rose, of San Francisco, Cal., and John L. Taugher, of New York City, for appellees.

Before GILBERT and RUDKIN, Circuit Judges, and DIETRICH, District Judge.

For other cases see same topic & KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests & Indexes

GILBERT, Circuit Judge.

On January 22, on the trial of a suit of the appellees against the appellants herein, the latter interposed a defensive plea of res judicata. Argument was had on the plea on January 24, 1922. At the close of the argument certain comments upon the case were made by the trial judge, which were made the basis of an affidavit of personal bias and prejudice against the judge, and a motion that another judge be designated to try the case under the provisions of section 20 of the Judicial Code (Comp. St. § 987). But the affidavit and motion were not filed until March 16, 1922, 13 days after, the decision of the court upon the plea. On August 21, 1922, an order was made denying the motion for designation of another •judge. From that order the present appeal is taken, the appellants assigning error to the denial of their motion. No statutory provision is made for appeal from such an order. Nor is the order a final judgment from which appeal may be taken, within the grant of appellate .jurisdiction to the Circuit Courts of Appeals. In Crooker v. Knudsen, 232 Fed. 857, 147 C. C. A. 52, this court said :

> "The Circuit Courts of Appeals are given no right to review other than final judgments, except injunction orders, and no judgment is final which does not terminate the litigation between the parties on the merits of the case, or on some severable phase thereof.”

In Ex parte Am. Steel Barrel Co., 230 U. S. 35, 45, 33 Sup. Ct. 1007, 57 L. Ed. 1379, Mr. Justice Lurton intimated that the order in *254such a case might be excepted to and assigned as error, and taken advantage of when the case finally should come under the reviewing power of an appellate tribunal.

The appeal is dismissed.
Case 1:07-cv-01509-AKH Document 18 Filed 10/19/2007 Page 1 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-01509-AKH Document 18 Filed 10/19/2007 Page 2 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-01509-AKH Document 18 Filed 10/19/2007 Page 3 of 3
Clear All

        24 June 2022    

                    USS Gravely Returns Home to Norfolk, Virginia                 
                The Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Gravely (DDG 107) returned to Naval Station Norfolk after a regularly scheduled deployment, June 24.            

        17 June 2022    

                    BALTOPS 22, the premier Baltic Sea maritime exercise, concludes in Kiel                 
                KIEL, Germany - Sixteen NATO Allied and partner nations concluded the 51st iteration of Baltic Operations 2022 (BALTOPS22) in Kiel, Germany, June 17, 2022.            

        05 June 2022    

                    USS Gravely (DDG 107) arrives in Gdynia, Poland                 
                The Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Gravely (DDG 107) arrived in Gdynia, Poland, June 5, 2022, for a scheduled port visit to enhance the United States-Polish partnership and facilitate a robust, united, and fruitful NATO alliance.            

#####  

##### Navy.mil  |  Navy.com  |  Navy FOIA  |  DoD Accessibility/Section 508  |  No Fear Act  |  Open Government  |  Plain Writing Act USA.gov  |  Veterans Crisis Line  |  VA Vet Center  |  FVAP  |   DoD Safe Helpline  |  Navy SAPR  |  NCIS Tips  |  Privacy Policy  |  Site Map  |  Contact US

###### Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command   |   1562 Mitscher Ave., Suite 250   |   Norfolk, Virginia 23551-2487

###### Official U.S. Navy Website
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-19-00377-CR

No. 04-19-00378-CR

Joshua PIEPER,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 186th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018CR2080 and Trial Court No. 2018CR2081

Honorable Jefferson Moore, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARION, JUSTICE MARTINEZ, AND JUSTICE RIOS

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is

AFFIRMED.

SIGNED September 23, 2020.

_____________________________

Irene Rios, Justice
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 88 (Monday, May 7, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 23000]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-11369]


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

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS


Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Pennsylvania Advisory 
Committee

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and 
regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, that a meeting of 
the Pennsylvania Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene at 
12 p.m. and adjourn at 5 p.m. on Wednesday, May 23, 2001, at 
Philadelphia Convention Center, Conference Room B, 12th and Arch 
Streets, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107. The purpose of the meeting 
is to have the Committee review and vote on its report, ``Barriers to 
Minority and Women Owned Businesses in Pennsylvania,'' and plan future 
activities.
    Persons desiring additional information, or planning a presentation 
to the Committee, should contact Ki-Taek Chun, Director of the Eastern 
Regional Office, 202-376-7533 (TDD 202-376-8116). Hearing-impaired 
persons who will attend the meeting and require the services of a sign 
language interpreter should contact the Regional Office at least ten 
(10) working days before the scheduled date of the meeting.
    The meeting will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the 
rules and regulations of the Commission.

    Dated at Washington, DC, May 1, 2001.
Edward A. Hailes, Jr.,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 01-11369 Filed 5-4-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
Case 1:07-cv-01515-AKH Document 19 Filed 04/01/2008 Page 1 of 3Case 1:07-cv-01515-AKH Document 19 Filed 04/01/2008 Page 2 of 3Case 1:07-cv-01515-AKH Document 19 Filed 04/01/2008 Page 3 of 3
Clear All

        11 July 2023    

                    USNS BURLINGTON HOSTS LAUNCH OF UNMANNED SURFACE VEHICLE                 
                U.S. Navy Sailors partnered with Military Sealift Command civilian mariners and civilian contractors in a collaborative effort to successfully launch a Wave Glider unmanned surface vehicle (USV) from expeditionary fast transport ship USNS Burlington (T-EPF 10), June 30, 2023.            

        03 February 2023    

                    Navy and Industry Partners Complete Production Mk 18 Unmanned Underwater Vehicle Systems                 
                WASHINGTON – The Navy announced today a significant milestone in the delivery of unmanned undersea warfighting capability to the fleet.  Production of the MK 18 Mod 2 Unmanned Underwater Vehicle (UUV) program of record has completed.Managed by the Expeditionary Missions program office under the            

        17 June 2022    

                    BALTOPS 22, the premier Baltic Sea maritime exercise, concludes in Kiel                 
                KIEL, Germany - Sixteen NATO Allied and partner nations concluded the 51st iteration of Baltic Operations 2022 (BALTOPS22) in Kiel, Germany, June 17, 2022.            

        15 June 2022    

                    Lasting Mine Countermeasures partnerships built during BALTOPS 22                 
                Service members from 11 nations participated in the exercise Baltic Operations (BALTOPS 22) at the Swedish Naval Warfare Centre in Ravlunda, Sweden, June 5-17.            

        12 June 2022    

                    BALTOPS 22: A perfect opportunity for research and testing new technology                 
                Exercise Baltic Operations (BALTOPS) 22, the premier maritime-focused exercise in the Baltic region, began June 5, 2022, in the Baltic Sea. With a significant focus of BALTOPS every year being the demonstration of NATO mine hunting capabilities, the U.S. Navy continues to use the exercise as an            

        19 April 2022    

                    Sailors celebrate Navy Week New Orleans 2022                 
                NEW ORLEANS - Several military vessels arrived to the Julia Street Cruise Terminal to kick off Navy Week New Orleans New Orleans April 18.            

#####  

##### Navy.mil  |  Navy.com  |  Navy FOIA  |  DoD Accessibility/Section 508  |  No Fear Act  |  Open Government  |  Plain Writing Act USA.gov  |  Veterans Crisis Line  |  VA Vet Center  |  FVAP  |   DoD Safe Helpline  |  Navy SAPR  |  NCIS Tips  |  Privacy Policy  |  Site Map  |  Contact US

###### Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command   |   1562 Mitscher Ave., Suite 250   |   Norfolk, Virginia 23551-2487

###### Official U.S. Navy Website
Clear All

        19 April 2022    

                    USS Gunston Hall (LSD 44) Arrives in Narvik, Norway                 
                The Whidbey Island-class amphibious dock landing ship USS Gunston Hall (LSD 44), assigned to the Kearsarge Amphibious Ready Group (ARG) and 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU), arrived in Narvik, Norway for a scheduled port visit to enhance U.S.-Norway relations and build NATO Alliance cohesion,            

        12 April 2022    

                    USS Kearsarge (LHD 3) Arrives in Tromsø, Norway                 
                TROMSØ, Norway — The Wasp-class amphibious assault ship USS Kearsarge (LHD 3), flagship of the Kearsarge Amphibious Ready Group (ARG) and 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU), arrived in Tromsø, Norway for a scheduled port visit, April 11, 2022.            

Previous                              - 1
                              - 2
 Next 

#####  

##### Navy.mil  |  Navy.com  |  Navy FOIA  |  DoD Accessibility/Section 508  |  No Fear Act  |  Open Government  |  Plain Writing Act USA.gov  |  Veterans Crisis Line  |  VA Vet Center  |  FVAP  |   DoD Safe Helpline  |  Navy SAPR  |  NCIS Tips  |  Privacy Policy  |  Site Map  |  Contact US

###### Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command   |   1562 Mitscher Ave., Suite 250   |   Norfolk, Virginia 23551-2487

###### Official U.S. Navy Website
Exhibit (10)(a)

    

    

    

    

    

    

    Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

    

    

    

    

    We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in
      Post-Effective Amendment No. 16 to the 1933 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 333-175888) and Amendment No. 530 to the 1940 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 811-05721), and to the use therein of our reports dated (a) March 13, 2019, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of The
      Lincoln National Life Insurance Company and (b) April 16, 2019, with respect to the financial statements of Lincoln National Variable Annuity Account H for
      the registration of interests in a separate account under individual flexible payment deferred variable annuity contracts.

    

    

               /s/ Ernst & Young, LLP

    

    

    

    

    Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

    December 20, 2019
# CE2010224EN.01004101.xml

| 19.8.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 224/41 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.8.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 224/41

---

Monday 14 September 2009Approval of the appointment of Karel De Gucht as a member of the Commission

P7_TA(2009)0005

European Parliament decision of 14 September 2009 approving the appointment of Mr Karel De Gucht as a Member of the Commission

2010/C 224 E/14

The European Parliament,

The European Parliament

having regard to Article 214(2), third subparagraph, and Article 215 of the EC Treaty,

having regard to point 4 of the Framework Agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the Commission (1),

1

having regard to the resignation of Louis Michel as a Member of the Commission, tendered on 5 July 2009,

having regard to the nomination by the Government of Belgium of Karel De Gucht for appointment as a Member of the Commission,

having regard to Council Decision 2009/552/EC, Euratom of 16 July 2009 appointing a new Member of the Commission of the European Communities (2),

2

having regard to the decision of the Conference of Presidents of 9 July 2009 concerning the procedure to be applied for the replacement of Commissioners,

having regard to the exchange of views between the Commissioner-designate and its committee responsible held on 1 September 2009,

having regard to Rule 106 and Annex XVII, point 2, second paragraph, of its Rules of Procedure,

| 1. | Approves the appointment of Karel De Gucht as a Member of the Commission for the remainder of the Commission's term of office, until 31 October 2009; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Approves the appointment of Karel De Gucht as a Member of the Commission for the remainder of the Commission's term of office, until 31 October 2009;

| 2. | Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council, the Commission and the governments of the Member States. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council, the Commission and the governments of the Member States.

---

(1)  OJ C 117 E, 18.5.2006, p. 123.

1

(2)  OJ L 185, 17.7.2009, p. 23.

2

---
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-6724
CLIFTON POLK, Petitioner - Appellant, versus MICHAEL MOORE, Commissioner; COLIE L. RUSHTON, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (CA-96-2830-6) Submitted: July 24, 1997 Decided: August 7, 1997 Before HAMILTON, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Clifton Polk, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant filed an untimely notice of appeal. We dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. The time periods for filing notices of appeal are governed by Fed. R. App. P. 4. These periods are "mandatory and jurisdictional." Browder v. Director, Dep't of Corrections , 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson , 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). Parties to civil actions have thirty days withinwhich to file in the district court notices of appeal from judgments or final orders. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1). The only exceptions to the appeal period are when the district court extends the time to appeal under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5) or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). The district court entered its order on November 12, 1996; Appellant's notice of appeal was filed on May 16, 1997, which is beyond the thirty-day appeal period. Appellant's failure to note a timely appeal or obtain an extension of the appeal period leavesthis court without jurisdiction to consider the merits of Appellant's appeal. We therefore deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Hubbard Hafner, Appellant.

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree, defendant’s sole contention is that LSD was improperly seized from his apartment because the search warrant was based on information obtained from an improperly authorized wiretap on the telephone of Jessie Sanders. Defendant claims that the Sanders eavesdropping warrant was invalid because there was an insufficient showing that normal investigative techniques had been and would be un*962availing. In order to obtain an eavesdropping warrant, police must show that "normal investigative procedures have been tried and have failed, or reasonably appear to be unlikely to succeed if tried, or to be too dangerous to employ” (CPL 700.15 [4]; 700.20 [2] [d]). Eavesdropping warrants may not be used routinely as a first step in the investigation *(People v Baris,*116 AD2d 174, 187, *Iv denied*67 NY2d 1050; *People v Gallina,*95 AD2d 336, 339); on the other hand, police need not exhaust "all possible steps” *(People v Baris, supra,*at 187) or "every other imaginable method of investigation” *(People v Carson,*99 AD2d 664, 665) before applying for an eavesdropping warrant. The police must illustrate the difficulties inherent in the use of normal law enforcement methods *(People v Carson, supra)*sufficient to insure that eavesdropping is more than just a " 'useful tool’ ” *(People v Baris, supra,*at 187). The People’s showing must be tested in a practical and commonsense fashion in the context of the objectives of the investigation *(People v Campaigni,*151 AD2d 1010; *People v Baris, supra; People v Gallina, supra,*at 340).

Applying those standards, we conclude that the Sanders’ eavesdropping warrant was properly issued and that defendant’s motion to suppress was properly denied. The affidavits and attached exhibits submitted to the issuing court established the wariness and evasiveness of the targets of the investigation, including Sanders. Police demonstrated that surveillance of Sanders’ apartment would be unavailing and would have been virtually useless because the suspects conducted their dealings over the phone. Additionally, it was shown that wiretapping would be more effective than surveillance or attempting an undercover buy because wiretapping would reveal the location of drugs, the scope of the conspiracy, and the identity of its participants. (Appeal from judgment of Monroe County Court, Egan, J. — criminal possession of controlled substance, second degree.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Denman, Green and Pine, JJ.
Case 1:07-cv-04415-AKH Document 8 Filed 05/28/2008 Page 1 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-04415-AKH Document 8 Filed 05/28/2008 Page 2 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-04415-AKH Document 8 Filed 05/28/2008 Page 3 of 3
EXHIBIT 10.26
[GRAPHIC OMITTED] PIKE  STREET

                                 INSERTION ORDER
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Date:  May 12, 2003

Company  Name:     Pike  Street  Industries,  Inc.

URL:               yellow.com,  whiteyellowpages.com,  isleuth.com

Address:           11101  NE  8th  St.,  Suite  206

                   Bellevue,  WA  98004

Contact  Name:     Edward  Yim                    Email: Edward@pikestreet.com

Phone  Number:     425-450-0555                   Fax  Number: 425-696-0333

ADVERTISER  NAME:  YP.NET,  INC.

Address:           840  E.  Jasmine  Street

                   Suite  105

                   Mesa,  AZ  85205

Contact  Name:     Joseph  Johnson                Email: jjohnson@yp.net

Phone  Number:     (480)  325-4301                Fax  Number:

CAMPAIGN  INFORMATION

Campaign  Name:             YP.net

Projected  Start  Date:     March  27th, 2003     Projected  End  Date:  none

[ ]  Until  budget  is  exhausted     [X]  Open  Order

DESCRIPTION  OF  INVENTORY  TO  BE  ADVERTISED:

YP.net provides online yellow pages listings for business in the US. YP.net will
be  added  to  the  list of online yellow pages on Pike Street Industries, Inc's
websites  allowing  Pike  Street's  visitors  to  search on YP.net's yellow page
listings.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


<PAGE>
PAYMENT  INFORMATION

Payments  should  be  made  to:

Pike  Street  Industries,  Inc.
11101  NE  8th  St.
Suite  206
Bellevue,  WA  98004

Budget     $20,000.00  per  month     Clicks:  400,000     Net  CPCV:     $.05

Terms:     Due  before  advertising  beings.  All  payments  made in US dollars.

Conditions:     Either  Party can terminate this agreement with thirty (30) days
written  notice  for  any  reason.



REPORTING  INFORMATION

Report  to,  if  Different  from  Above:

Report  Frequency:  [ ]  monthly     [ ]  bi-weekly     [X]  weekly



AUTHORIZATION:

Pike  Industries,  Inc.              YP.net,  Inc.

BY:                                  BY:

/s/  Edward  Yim                     /s/  Joseph  Johnson
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Name:  Edward  Yim                   Name:  Joseph  Johnson
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Title:  President                    Title:  Agent
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:  May  12,  2003                Date:  May  12,  2003
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


<PAGE>
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED September 8, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-40310 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ALBERTO CORDERO-GARCIA, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:05-CR-1951-ALL

-------------------- Before KING, GARWOOD, and JOLLY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Alberto CorderoGarcia raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.