alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Calvin Lavan CLARK, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 13-6458.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 17, 2013.

Decided: April 30, 2013.

Calvin Lavan Clark, Appellant Pro Se. Jason Harris Cowley, Jennifer P. May-Parker, Thomas B. Murphy, Rudolf A. Renter, Jr., Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appel-lee.

Before MOTZ, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

*194Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Calvin Lavan Clark seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006). A certifícate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). 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, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies rehef 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, 120 S.Ct. 1595.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Clark 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.*
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Michael Purvis, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Garry, J.), rendered June 18, 1986, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (two counts), robbery in the second degree (two counts), burglary in the second degree (three counts), and grand larceny in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant was identified in a lineup by two brothers *757who witnessed a robbery at the bakery where they were employed. The defendant contends that the People failed to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt because the brothers were unable to make an in-court identification. However, a detective who was present during the lineups testified that the defendant was the person identified by the brothers. Such identification testimony is permissible under CPL 60.25 and constitutes evidence-in-chief *(see, People v Lagana,*36 NY2d 71, *cert denied*424 US 942; *People v Nival,*33 NY2d 391, *cert denied and appeal dismissed*417 US 903; *People v Parris,*109 AD2d 853; *People v Dure,*102 AD2d 873). Accordingly, we find that the evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution *(see, People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620), was legally sufficient to support the verdict finding the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The defendant’s contention that the testimony of the detective exceeded the permissible bounds of CPL 60.25 is not preserved for appellate review and, in any event, is without merit.

Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we find that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (CPL 470.15 [5]). Resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded to the identification testimony and to the testimony of the defendant’s alibi witnesses, are primarily questions to be determined by the jury and its determination should not be set aside unless clearly unsupported by the record *(see, People v Nieves,*143 AD2d 229, *lv denied*72 NY2d 1048; *People v Gaines,*142 AD2d 685). Bracken, J. P., Brown, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 15.1



               LETTER RE UNAUDITED INTERIM FINANCIAL INFORMATION

Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549

We are aware that our report dated October 19, 1999, on our review of interim
condensed consolidated financial information of Hypercom Corporation (the
"Company") for the three month period ended September 30, 1999 and 1998, and
included in the Company's quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarters then
ended, is incorporated by reference in the Company's registration statements on
Form S-8 (Registration Nos. 333-40457, 333-40459, 333-40461 and 333-40333).
Pursuant to Rule 436(c), under the Securities Act of 1933, this report should
not be considered part of the registration statements prepared or certified by
us within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act.


/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP


Phoenix, Arizona
November 8, 1999
## Breadcrumb

-  about 

#           Documents      

-  About 
-  About Us 
-  Survey Manual 
-  Key Officials 
-  Organization 
-  Congressional 
-  Budget 
-  Careers and Employees 
-  Doing Business 
-  Emergency Management 
-  Documents 
-  Emergency Management Resources 

This is a collection of supporting documents to include instructions, training materials, technical memos, flowcharts, analytical references, and more. 

Official USGS Publications

**File icon

March 10, 1993

####   TM93-05 Establishment of one analytical range for silica method

**File icon

February 18, 1993

####   MOU - Landsat 7 Data Processing, Archiving and Distribution System

**File icon

October 5, 1992

####   TM93-01 Identification of Low Levels of Sodium Contamination in Nitric Acid Samples

**File icon

October 5, 1992

####   TM93-02 Review process for samples analyzed at the National Water Quality Laboratory (NWQL)

**File icon

August 28, 1992

####   MOU between USGS, the ARS, FS, and SCS

**File icon

August 12, 1992

####   TM92-03 Mercuric Chloride Preservation of S-34/S-32, O-18/O-16, and H-2/1-1-1 Samples

**File icon

August 12, 1992

####   TM92-04 Bottles for Tritium Analyses

**File icon

August 12, 1992

####   TM92-05 New Nitrogen-15/Nitrogen-14 Lab Codes

**File icon

August 12, 1992

####   TM92-07 Change of Sample Type Requirement for Ion Chromatography Analysis

**File icon

May 29, 1992

####   TM92-02 Reimbursement for Deleted Lab Requests

**File icon

May 4, 1992

####   MOU between USGS and the U.S. Forest Service - cartographic products

**File icon

April 9, 1992

####   MOU between USGS and Bureau of Reclamation - coordinating committee

#### Pagination

-  First page« First 
-  Previous page‹‹ 
- ...
-                Page            487 
-                Page            488 
-                Page            489 
-                Page            490 
-                Page            491 
-                Current page            492 
-                Page            493 
-                Page            494 
-                Page            495 
-  Next page›› 
-  Last pageLast »
# C_2004306EN.01002101.xml

| 10.12.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 306/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.12.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 306/21

---

Imposition by France of public service obligations in respect of scheduled air services within France

(2004/C 306/05)

| 1. | France has decided to impose public service obligations on scheduled air services between Angers (Marcé) and Lyon (Saint-Exupéry) and between Tours (Val de Loire) and Lyon (Saint-Exupéry) pursuant to Article 4(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92 of 23 July 1992 on access for Community air carriers to intra-Community air routes. These obligations replace those published in Official Journal of the European Communities C 72 of 6 March 2001. |
| --- | --- |

1.

France has decided to impose public service obligations on scheduled air services between Angers (Marcé) and Lyon (Saint-Exupéry) and between Tours (Val de Loire) and Lyon (Saint-Exupéry) pursuant to Article 4(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92 of 23 July 1992 on access for Community air carriers to intra-Community air routes. These obligations replace those published in Official Journal of the European Communities C 72 of 6 March 2001.

Official Journal of the European Communities

| 2. | The public service obligations in respect of scheduled air services between Angers (Marcé) and Lyon (Saint-Exupéry) and between Tours (Val de Loire) and Lyon (Saint-Exupéry) are as follows: |
| --- | --- |

2.

The public service obligations in respect of scheduled air services between Angers (Marcé) and Lyon (Saint-Exupéry) and between Tours (Val de Loire) and Lyon (Saint-Exupéry) are as follows:

Minimum frequency

The minimum level of service provided must be two return trips a day, morning and evening, excluding public holidays, from Monday to Friday, 220 days a year.

The route must be as follows: Angers (Marcé) — Tours (Val de Loire) — Lyon (Saint-Exupéry) and vice versa.

Type of aircraft used

The services must be operated with a pressurised aircraft having a seating capacity of at least 37.

Timetables

Timetables must be such as to enable passengers on business trips during the working week to make the round trip within the day and to spend at least six hours at their destination, whether Angers (Marcé), Tours (Val de Loire) or Lyon (Saint-Exupéry).

Timetables must be such as to allow transit passengers to take national and/or international connecting flights at Lyon (Saint Exupéry).

Flight bookings

Seats on these flights must be marketed by at least one computerised booking system.

Continuity of service:

Except in cases of force majeure, the number of flights cancelled for reasons directly attributable to the carrier must not exceed 3 % of the number of flights scheduled in any year. The carrier must give six months'notice before discontinuing the services.

force majeure

Community carriers are hereby informed that the operation of air services without regard to the abovementioned public service obligations may result in administrative and/or criminal penalties.

---
* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of

law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. This court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

## F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### JUL 24 1997 

### PATRICK FISHER Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT
DARRELL LEE FRECH, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v. INCORPORATED CASE, Defendant-Appellee. No. 97-6032 (D.C. No. 96-CV-1399) (Western District of Oklahoma)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before SEYMOUR , Chief Judge, PORFILIO and MURPHY , Circuit Judges.

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. **See** Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. “Darrell Lee., Frech” appeals from an order of the district court dismissing his pro se “9th Amendment Petition for De jure Grand Jury.” That document is a conglomeration- 2 -

of legalese and gibberish of unintelligible content purporting to demand the impaneling of a grand jury to investigate unidentified offenses. The petition was dismissed for failure to prosecute, and the petitioner has appealed. The brief in this court is no more intelligible than the papers filed in the district court. Petitioner cites only generalized legal theory relating to the grand jury system without identifying any cognizable legal theory upon which the district court had jurisdiction to grant him relief. Clearly, no such authority exists. Hence, the results of this case are obvious, the petitioner’s “arguments” are patently unmeritorious, and this action is frivolous. Braley v. Campbell , 832 F. 2d 1504, 1510 (10th Cir. 1987). AFFIRMED.
ENTERED FOR THE COURT
John C. Porfilio Circuit Judge
Case 1:07-cr-00554-WHP Document 17-2 Filed 10/30/2007 Page 1 of 3
Case 1:07-cr-00554-WHP Document 17-2 Filed 10/30/2007 Page 2 of 3
Case 1:07-cr-00554-WHP Document 17-2 Filed 10/30/2007 Page 3 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-05399-AKH Document 10 Filed 09/12/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05399-AKH Document 10 Filed 09/12/2007 Page 2 of 2
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 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 ImageMax, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Mark P. Glassman,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,
as adopted pursuant to ss. 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, as amended; and

         (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company as of September 30, 2003 (the last date of the period covered by the
Report).

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to ImageMax, Inc. and will be retained by ImageMax, Inc. and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.




/s/ Mark P. Glassman
---------------------------
Mark P. Glassman
Chief Executive Officer
November 14, 2003
Case 1:07-cv-04521-AKH Document 7 Filed 08/08/2007 Page 1 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-04521-AKH Document 7 Filed 08/08/2007 Page 2 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-04521-AKH Document 7 Filed 08/08/2007 Page 3 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-01543-AKH Document 7-3 Filed 08/08/2007 Page 1 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-01543-AKH Document 7-3 Filed 08/08/2007 Page 2 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-01543-AKH Document 7-3 Filed 08/08/2007 Page 3 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-01543-AKH Document 7-3 Filed 08/08/2007 Page 4 of 4
<PAGE>   1

                  EXHIBIT 21 -- SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                               --------------------------------
                                                        BANCINSURANCE
                                                         CORPORATION
                                               --------------------------------

 -----------------------   ----------------------------------  -----------------------------------  --------------------------------
          100%                            100%                                 100%                              100%
<S>                          <C>                               <C>                                   <C>
 OHIO INDEMNITY COMPANY      AMERICAN LEGAL PUBLISHING CORP.     PAUL BOARDWAY & ASSOCIATES, INC.        BIC MANAGEMENT, INC.
 (An Insurance Company)          (A Publishing Company)             (An Insurance Agency)           (A Cost Containment Provider)
  Incorporated in Ohio            Incorporated in Ohio             Incorporated in New York            Incorporated in Nevada
 -----------------------   ----------------------------------  -----------------------------------  --------------------------------
</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1

Baylake Corp

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
List of Subsidiaries                            Jurisdiction of Organization
--------------------                            ----------------------------
<S>                                            <C>
Kewaunee County Banc-Shares, Inc.               Wisconsin
  Baylake Bank                                  Wisconsin
    Bank of Sturgeon Bay Building Corp.         Wisconsin
    Baylake Insurance Agency, Inc.              Wisconsin
    Baylake Investments, Inc.                   Nevada
    Cornerstone Financial, Inc.                 Wisconsin
    Arborview LLC *                             Wisconsin
Baylake Capital Trust I **                      Delaware
</TABLE>

* Arborview LLC was organized and capitalized on January 24, 2002.

** Baylake Capital Trust I was organized on October 25, 2000 and capitalized on
February 16, 2001.


                                       44
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

October 31, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

131629 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 131629 

 COA: 259700 

Alger CC: 03-001558-FH 

CLIFFORD EDWARD BRITTON, 

 Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 18, 2006 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

l1023 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

October 31, 2006 

 Clerk
Exhibit 15.2

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firms

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements on Form F-3 (No. 333-199023-02) of Unilever PLC and on Form F-3 (No. 333-199023) of Unilever N.V. of our report dated
3 March 2015, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Unilever Group (Unilever N.V. and Unilever PLC, together with their subsidiaries) as of 31 December 2014, and the related consolidated income statement, consolidated
statement of comprehensive income, consolidated changes in equity, and consolidated cash flows for the year ended 31 December 2014, and all related financial statement schedules, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial
reporting as of 31 December 2014, which report appears in the 31 December 2014 annual report on Form 20-F of Unilever PLC.



|                       |  |  |  |                       
|---------------------- |  |  |  | ----------------------
|KPMG LLP               |  |  |  | KPMG Accountants N.V. 
|London, United Kingdom |  |  |  | Amsterdam, Netherlands
|                       |  | 
|6 March 2015           |  |  |  |
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET OF UBICS, INC. AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND THE STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
OF UBICS, INC. FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1998, INCLUDED IN THE
QUARTERLY REPORT OF UBICS, INC. FOR THE QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                          11,436
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,796
<ALLOWANCES>                                       275
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                19,863
<PP&E>                                           1,279
<DEPRECIATION>                                    (82)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  21,060
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,989
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            65
<OTHER-SE>                                      17,006
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    21,060
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                21,627
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   14,899
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,128
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 474
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,074
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,240
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,834
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,834
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.28
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.28
        

</TABLE>
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1253 

CAF 14-01687 

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, AND VALENTINO, JJ. 

 

IN THE MATTER OF CRYSTIANA M. 

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

ERIE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, ORDER

PETITIONER-RESPONDENT; 

 

CRYSTAL M., RESPONDENT-APPELLANT. 

ALAN BIRNHOLZ, EAST AMHERST, FOR RESPONDENT-APPELLANT. 

JOSEPH T. JARZEMBEK, BUFFALO, FOR PETITIONER-RESPONDENT.

JESSICA L. VESPER, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILD, BUFFALO. 

 

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Erie County (Margaret

O. Szczur, J.), entered August 1, 2014 in a proceeding pursuant to

Family Court Act article 10. The order, among other things, placed

the subject child in the custody of Tammy A.

It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed

without costs (see Matter of Francis S. [Wendy H.], 67 AD3d 1442, lv

denied 14 NY3d 702).

Entered: November 13, 2015 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
Case 1:07-cv-05486-KMW Document 6 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 1 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-05486-KMW Document 6 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 2 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-05486-KMW Document 6 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 3 of 3