alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### McCASLAND et al. v. TEXAS & P. RY. CO.

(Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

December 1, 1913.)

No. 2508.

In Error to the District Court of the..United States for the Eastern District of Texas; Gordon Russell, Judge!' .Action at law by J. N. and Ortelle McCasland against the Texas & Pacific Railway Company. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiffs bring err ror.

Affirmed.

Thos. W. Davidson and P. O. Beard, both of Marshall, Tex., for plaintiffs in error.

W. T. Armistead, of Jefferson, Tex., and F. H. Pren*1006dergast, of Marshall, Tex., for defendant in error.

Before PARDEE and SHELBY, Circuit Judges, and CALL, District Judge.

PER CURIAM.

In this case the trial judge peremptorily directed a verdict for the defendant. On careful consideration of the pleadings and evidence, we fully concur in the ruling. Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 31.4

CERTIFICATION ACCOMPANYING PERIODIC REPORT

PURSUANT TO SECTION 302

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Steven C. Voorhees, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Administrative Officer, certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Rock-Tenn Company; and
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



/s/ Steven C. VoorheesSteven C. VoorheesExecutive Vice President,Chief Financial Officer and Chief Administrative Officer


Date: April 5, 2011

A signed original of this written statement required by
Section 302, 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 302, has been provided to Rock-Tenn
Company and will be retained by Rock-Tenn Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Case 1:07-cv-05305-AKH Document 33 Filed 07/09/2008 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05305-AKH Document 33 Filed 07/09/2008 Page 2 of 2
# EUR-Lex - 52004PC0148(02) - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 52004PC0148(02)

**Proposal for a Council Regulation adapting certain regulations and decisions in the field of free movement of goods, company law, agriculture, taxation, education and training, culture and audiovisual and external relations, by reason of the accession of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia /* COM/2004/0148 final */ **

*

*
Clear All

        15 December 2023    

                    Winners of NIWC Atlantic’s AI Prize Challenge Recognized at Eastern Defense Summit                 
                Naval Information Warfare Center (NIWC) Atlantic presented checks last week to Lauretta.io for $35,000 and Quartus Engineering Inc. for $15,000 for their 1st and 2nd place finishes in the Multilateral Autonomy Prize Challenge during the 2023 Eastern Defense Summit.            

#####  

##### 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
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-6823

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

TIMOTHY MAURICE BLANTON,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

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

Judge. (4:11-cr-02161-TLW-3)

Submitted: September 25, 2014 Decided: September 30, 2014

Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Timothy Maurice Blanton, Appellant Pro Se. Alfred William 

Walker Bethea, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, 

South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Timothy Maurice Blanton seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order denying relief on his self-styled Fed. R. Civ. P. 

60(d)(3) motion. Because Blanton’s motion was a successive and 

unauthorized 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion, see 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2255(h); In re Vial, 115 F.3d 1192, 1194 (4th Cir. 1997), the 

district court was obligated to dismiss the motion, see United 

States v. Winestock, 340 F.3d 200, 205 (4th Cir. 2003), and the 

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues 

a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2012); 

Reid v. Angelone, 369 F.3d 363, 369 (4th Cir. 2004). 

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 motion states a debatable 

claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. 

at 484-85. 
3

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude 

that Blanton 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 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Case 1:07-cv-04356-AKH Document 10 Filed 07/24/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-04356-AKH Document 10 Filed 07/24/2007 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 29 Filed 12/06/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 29 Filed 12/06/2007 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 99.1

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Tripath Technology Inc. (the "Company"), on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended
September 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Dr. Adya S. Tripathi, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), that to my 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 operations of the Company.

|/s/DR. ADYA S. TRIPATHIDr. Adya S. Tripathi
Chief Executive Officer |  | 
|------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 
|November 13, 2002                                                   |  | 

---

QuickLinks
Case 1:07-cv-05303-AKH Document 4 Filed 08/03/2007 Page 1 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-05303-AKH Document 4 Filed 08/03/2007 Page 2 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-05303-AKH Document 4 Filed 08/03/2007 Page 3 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-05303-AKH Document 4 Filed 08/03/2007 Page 4 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-05303-AKH Document 4 Filed 08/03/2007 Page 5 of 5
## Breadcrumb

-  about 
-  Congressional 

#           Official Statements      

-  About 
-  About Us 
-  Survey Manual 
-  Key Officials 
-  Organization 
-  Congressional     -  Briefing Series 
  -  Official Statements 
  -  Contacts 
-  Budget 
-  Careers and Employees 
-  Doing Business 
-  Emergency Management 
-  Documents 
-  Emergency Management Resources 

Official Congressional Statements are events presented at Congressional hearings by our key officials, scientists, and managers.

Key Officials

link

March 6, 2003

####                 Statement of William M. Alley              

"High Plains Aquifer Hydrogeologic Characterization, Mapping, Modeling, and Monitoring Act"

link

January 1, 2002

####                 Congressional Testimony: 2001-2002 (PDF)              

Compiled list of Congressional Testimony for the years 2001-2002 (Download PDF)

Communications and Publishing

link

January 1, 2000

####                 Congressional Testimony: 1997 - 2000              

Compiled list of Congressional Testimony from 1997 to 2000. (Download PDF)

Communications and Publishing

#### Pagination

-  First page« First 
-  Previous page‹ Previous 
- ...
-                Page            8 
-                Page            9 
-                Page            10 
-                Page            11 
-                Page            12 
-                Page            13 
-                Page            14 
-                Page            15 
-                Current page            16
#### In the Matter of Troy Vaval, Petitioner, v Elizabeth Holtzman et al., Respondents.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to prohibit the respondents from further prosecuting the petitioner under Kings County indictment No. 13364/88 on the ground of double jeopardy.

Adjudged that the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements, and the provision of the order to show cause of Justice Sullivan of this court, dated June 12, 1989, staying the respondents from further prosecuting the petitioner under Kings County indictment No. 13364/88, is vacated forthwith.

We have reviewed the petitioner’s contentions and find them to be without merit. Contrary to the petitioner’s position, the retrial of the subject indictment would not violate the prohibition against double jeopardy since the mistrial was granted on the petitioner’s own motion. The fact that the petitioner’s motion was first denied and subsequently granted by the trial court is of no consequence because the denial occurred at the conclusion of court proceedings on May 2, 1989, and the motion was granted immediately upon the commencement of the proceedings the following day, before any additional proceedings occurred *(see, United States v Pappas,*445 F2d 1194, *cert denied sub nom. Mischlich v United States,*404 US 984; *cf., People v Catten,*69 NY2d 547). In addition, there is no evidence of a bad-faith intention on the part of the prosecution to provoke a mistrial motion. Accordingly, the petition for a judgment in the nature of a writ of prohibition is denied. Mollen, P. J., Mangano, Lawrence and Rubin, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 90 (Wednesday, May 9, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 23610]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-11712]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD01-01-059]


Drawbridge Operation Regulations: Kennebec River, ME

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Commander, First Coast Guard District, has issued a 
temporary deviation from the drawbridge operation regulations for the 
Carlton Bridge, at mile 14.0, across the Kennebec River between Bath 
and Woolwich, Maine. This deviation from the regulations authorizes the 
bridge owner to keep the bridge in the closed position from 7 a.m. on 
May 24, 2001 through 7 p.m. on June 7, 2001. This deviation is 
necessary in order to facilitate necessary repairs at the bridge.

DATES: This deviation is effective from May 24, 2001, through June 7, 
2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John McDonald, Project Officer, First 
Coast Guard District, at (617) 223-8364.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Carlton Bridge, at mile 14.0, across the 
Kennebec River has a vertical clearance in the closed position of 10 
feet at mean high water and 16 feet at mean low water. The existing 
drawbridge operating regulations are listed at 33 CFR 117.525.
    The owner of the bridge, the Maine Department of Transportation, 
requested a temporary deviation from the drawbridge operation 
regulations to facilitate the installation of an alternate diesel 
powered operating system at the bridge. The bridge will be out of 
service during the construction necessary to install the back-up diesel 
operating system.
    This deviation to the operating regulations authorizes the owner of 
the Carlton Bridge to keep the bridge in the closed position from 7 
a.m. on May 24, 2001 through 7 p.m. on June 7, 2001.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(c), this work will be performed 
with all due speed in order to return the bridge to normal operation as 
soon as possible. This deviation from the operating regulations is 
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: April 30, 2001.
G.N. Naccara,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 01-11712 Filed 5-8-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-U
Case 1:07-cv-05760-RMB Document 7-2 Filed 09/27/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05760-RMB Document 7-2 Filed 09/27/2007 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                           6,293
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   38,394
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (892)
<INVENTORY>                                     32,553
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                77,636
<PP&E>                                          33,102
<DEPRECIATION>                                (20,821)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 123,201
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           73,251
<BONDS>                                          2,855
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           274
<OTHER-SE>                                     179,466
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   123,201
<SALES>                                        128,230
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               128,230
<CGS>                                           71,526
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   71,526
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,959
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (9,258)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (9,258)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.38)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.38)


</TABLE>
#### In re MARK SHOE CO.

(District Court, D. Massachusetts.

May 3, 1923.)

No. 27315.

Bankruptcy <@=>474—Mortgagee held not chargeable with expense of continuing business for benefit of estate.

Where the business of a bankrupt is continued by the trustee for the benefit of the estate, a mortgagee of the property cannot be charged with any part of the expenses of such continuance.

In Bankruptcy. In the matter of the Mark Shoe Company, bankrupt. On review of order of referee.

Affirmed.

Joseph W. Keith, of Brockton, Mass., for Home Nat. Bank.

Mark M. Horblit, of Boston, Mass., for trustee.

<®^For other cases see same topic & KEY-NUMBER In all Key-Numbered Digests & Indexes

BREWSTER, District Judge.

The trustee in bankruptcy, and prior to his appointment an assignee for, the benefit of creditors, occupied premises of one Stone and continued thereon the business in which the -bankrupt had been engaged until the merchandise and fixtures were sold by the trustee under order of the referee. The property sold was subject to a chattel mortgage for $4,200 held by the Home National Bank. The referee found the mortgage to be valid to the extent of $570.95. The sale was made free from all liens, and lien of the mortgagee was transferred to the proceeds. These proceeds amounted to $1,015, and'the amount now in the hands of the trustee is $634.12. A claim for rent amounting to $715 is presented by an assignee of the lessor. While the amount due on the mortgage and the amount of the rent have been matters of dispute, no question is now raised regarding either of these amounts. The lessor’s assignee contends that the rent should be borne in part by the mortgagee, on the ground that it was *75an expense incurred in preserving the assets of the estate. It has been held that the reasonable cost appropriate to foreclosing and selling incumbered property may he assessed on the lienholder in case the proceeds are insufficient to satisfy the lien, but that expenses incurred in the general administration of the estate will not be charged to the lienholder (Gugel v. New Orleans Nat. Bank, 39 Am. Bankr. R. 160, 239 Fed. 676, 152 C. C. A. 510), and in some cases the lienholder has been required to contribute to expenses of preserving the assets, when obviously the expenses were incurred for the benefit of the lien-holder. The Bethulia, 37 Am. Bankr. R. 227, 200 Fed. 879. But in the instant case the referee has found as a fact that the expenses for rent were incurred, not for the benefit of the mortgagee, but for the benefit of the creditors of the bankrupt, whose representative, as trustee in bankruptcy, elected to continue the business on the premises for the sole purpose of enabling him to sell the property more advantageously as a going concern.

In view of this finding of the referee T do not think the cases cited by the trustee warrant a reversal of the order of the referee directing the trustee to pay over to the Home National Bank the sum of $570.95, and this order is affirmed.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

                  CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


     I, Neil M. Ebner, Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer of
UBICS, Inc. do hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that:

     (1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of UBICS, Inc. for the quarterly
         period ended September 30, 2002 (the "Periodic Report") which this
         statement accompanies fully complies with the requirements of Section
         13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
         78m),


          and

     (2) the information contained in the Periodic Report fairly represents, in
         all material respects, the financial condition and results of
         operations of UBICS, Inc.


Dated: January 8, 2003


                             By: /s/ Neil M. Ebner
                             ---------------------------------------------------
                             Neil M. Ebner
                             Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13

- 10227 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
CANDACE CLARK , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 5:11

- CR

- 31

- 2

Before REAVLEY, OWEN, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Candace Clark has
moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Clark h a s not filed a response. We ha ve reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for

* 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 February 2 1 , 2014 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 13-10227 Document: 00512539814 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/21/2014No. 13

- 10227

appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is
GRANTED , counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the
APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2.

2 Case: 13-10227 Document: 00512539814 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/21/2014
Exhibit 23(a) Consent of Independent Auditors










We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement (Form S-8 No. 33-27838) pertaining to the Equitable of Iowa
Companies (1982) Stock Incentive Plan, in the Registration Statement
(Form S-8 No. 33-57492), pertaining to the Equitable of Iowa Companies
Restated and Amended 1992 Stock Incentive Plan, in the Registration
Statement (Form S-8 No. 33-57484), pertaining to the Equitable of Iowa
Companies Deferred Profit Sharing and Retirement Savings Plan and
Trust, in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 33-51091)
pertaining to the Equitable of Iowa Companies Employee Stock Purchase
Plan, in the Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 33-55045) pertaining
to the Equitable of Iowa Companies Dividend Reinvestment and Stock
Purchase Plan, in the Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 33-57343)
pertaining to the registration of debt securities, and in the
Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-1909) pertaining to the
universal shelf registration of Equitable of Iowa Companies and
Equitable of Iowa Companies Capital Trust, and the respective related
Prospectuses, of our report dated February 11, 1997, with respect to
the consolidated financial statements and schedules of Equitable of
Iowa Companies and subsidiaries included in the Annual Report (Form 10-
K) for the year ended December 31, 1996.

                                                s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Des Moines, Iowa
March 6, 1997
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 20
- 0596 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. JOSEPH JOHN MCNAMARA,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including June 30 , 2021 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brie f on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

May 25 2021

05/25/2021

Case Number: DA 20-0596