alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6095
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,
v. MELVIN B. WILKERSON, a/k/a Melvin Coleman, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:02-cr-00217-RAJ-JEB-4; 2:07-cv-00493-RAJ) Submitted: April 17, 2008 Decided: April 23, 2008 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Melvin B. Wilkerson, Appellant Pro Se. Laura Marie Everhart, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Melvin B. Wilkerson seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion as untimely and successive. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Wilkerson has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED
154 So. 918

#### G. B. JOHNSON v. ONEONTA GUARANTY CO. et al.

6 Div. 429.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

April 19, 1934.

A. A. Griffith, of Cullman, and J. T. Johnson, of Oneonta, for appellant.

P. A. Nash, of Oneonta, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed on certificate.
Cite as 2014 Ark. App. 331



## ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION II No. CV-13-1156

BERTHA BELLE GRAVES APPELLANT V. JAMES JAY GRAVES APPELLEE Opinion Delivered May 28, 2014 APPEAL FROM THE VAN BUREN COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [NO. DR-2012-59] HONORABLE DAVID M. CLARK, JUDGE DISMISSED
ROBIN F. WYNNE, Judge Bertha Belle Graves appeals from the trial court’s denial of her motion for new trial in the parties’ divorce action. She argues on appeal that the trial court erred by denying her motion because there was no corroboration of grounds, the guardianship of the person and estate of appellee James Jay Graves is void, and the settlement agreement entered into by the parties was obtained as a result of duress and coercion. We must dismiss the appeal for lack of a final order. An appeal may be taken only from a final judgment or decree entered by the trial court. Ark. R. App. P.–Civ. 2(a)(1) (2013). Whether an order is final and appealable is a jurisdictional question that may be raised by this court sua sponte. See Lamont v. Healthcare Capital, Inc. , 2013 Ark. App. 283. For a judgment to be final, it must dismiss the parties from the court, discharge them from the action, or conclude their rights to the subject matter inCite as 2014 Ark. App. 331

controversy. Roberts v. Roberts , 70 Ark. App. 94, 14 S.W.3d 529 (2000). Thus, the order must put the trial court’s directive into execution, ending the litigation or a separable branch of it. Id. The decree orders the parties to agree to a division of their property within fifteen days of the filing of the decree and states that any property not agreed on is to be sold at auction, with the proceeds divided between the parties. However, the decree also states that “[i]f after the sale either party is not satisfied that all items were in fact returned, they have the right to request a hearing on the issue of the missing items.” The decree does not fully dispose of the parties’ property and explicitly contemplates the possibility of future litigation with regard to the subject matter in controversy. The decree is not final for the purposes of appeal; therefore, the appeal must be dismissed. Dismissed. WALMSLEYand H ARRISON , JJ., agree. Worsham Law Firm, P.A. , by: Richard E. Worsham , for appellant. Jensen Young & Houston, PLLC , by: Terence C. Jensen , for appellee.

2
**Exhibit
      32**





**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 North Shore Acquisition Corp. (the
      “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2007 as
      filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”), the undersigned, in the capacities and on the date indicated below,
      hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





1.  The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





2.  The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.








Date:
                January 9, 2008
            /s/
                Barry J. GordonName:
            Barry
                J. GordonTitle:
            Chairman
                and Chief Executive Officer
              (Principal
                Executive Officer)/s/
                Marc H. KleeName:
            Marc
                H. KleeTitle:
            President,
                Chief Financial Officer and Secretary
              (Principal
                Financial and Accounting Officer)
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 97 (Friday, May 18, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27702-27703]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-12587]


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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Special Emphasis Panel in Experimental and Integrative 
Activities; Notice of Meetings

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meetings of the Special Emphasis Panel in Experimental and 
Integrative Activities (#1193):

[[Page 27703]]



------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Date/time                              Place
------------------------------------------------------------------------
June 4, 2001; 8 a.m.-5 p.m................  National Science Foundation,
                                             4201 Wilson Boulevard,
                                             Arlington, VA.
June 11-12, 2001; 8 a.m.-5 p.m............  National Science Foundation,
                                             4201 Wilson Boulevard,
                                             Arlington, VA.
June 14-15, 2001; 8 a.m.-5 p.m............  National Science Foundation,
                                             4201 Wilson Boulevard,
                                             Arlington, VA.
June 21-22, 2001; 8 a.m.-5 p.m............  National Science Foundation,
                                             4201, Wilson Boulevard,
                                             Arlington, VA.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Type of Meetings: Closed.
    Contact Person: Gary Strong, National Science Foundation, 4201 
Wilson Boulevard, Room 1160, Arlington, VA 22230, (703) 292-8980.
    Purpose of Meetings: To provide advice and recommendations 
concerning proposals submitted to NSF for financial support.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate Information Technology Research 
proposals as part of the selection process for awards.
    Reason for Closing: The proposals being reviewed include 
information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including 
technical information; financial data, such as salaries; and 
personal information concerning individuals associated with the 
proposals. These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), (4) and 
(6) of the Government in the Sunshine Act.

    Dated: May 15, 2001.
Susanne Bolton,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 01-12587 Filed 5-17-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
WITEL
CORP.
 (A
DEVELOPMENT STAGE COMPANY)








Exhibit
32.2
 
 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 WiTel Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on or about the date hereof ("Report"), the undersigned, in the
capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that to his 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.
 
 
 Dated:  May
      19, 2008
              /s/ James E.
      Renton
                James
      E. Renton
                Chief
      Financial Officer
                (Principal
      Accounting and Financial Officer)
Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed August 9 ,

2012

.

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 12

- 00206

- CV

KEVIN PRE N DERGAST AND JAMES IN BODEN , Appellant s
V.

DANIEL J. HOFFMAN AN D DANIEL J. HOFFMAN, LLC D/B/A DANIEL J. HOFFMAN & ASSOCIATES , FKA DANIEL J. HOFF MAN , Appellee s

On Appeal from the 80th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2010

- 07609



### M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

This is an attempted appeal from a judgment signed November 9, 2011

. Appellant s filed a timely motion for new trial on December 9, 2011

. Appellan ts ’ notice of appeal was filed March 1, 2012

. When an appellant has filed a timely motion for new trial, the notice of appeal

must be filed within ninety days after the date the judgment is signed. See Tex. R. App.
P. 26.1(a).2

Appellant s ’ notice of appeal was not filed timely. A motion for extension of time is necessarily implied when an appellant, acting in good faith, files a not ice of appeal beyond the time allowed by Rule 26.1, but within the fifteen

- day grace period provided by Rule 26.3 for filing a motion for extension of time. See Verburgt v. Dorner , 959 S.W.2d 615, 617

– 18 (1997) (construing the predecessor to Rule 26). Ho wever, the appellant must offer a reasonable explanation for failing to file the notice of appeal in a timely manner. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.3, 10.5(b)(1)(C); Verburgt , 959 S.W.2d at 617

- 18; Miller v. Greenpark Surgery Center Assocs., Ltd. , 974 S.W.2d 805 , 808 (Tex. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] 1998, no pet.). Appellan ts ’ notice of appeal was not filed within the
fifteen

- day period provided by Rule 26.3

.
On July 2 , 2012, notification was transmitted to all parties of the court ’ s intention to dismiss the appe al for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a). Appellan ts ’ response fails to demonstrate that this c ourt has jurisd iction to entertain the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
On July 25, 2012, appellees filed a motion to dismiss the appeal on various grounds

. Having dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, we de ny appellees’ motion

as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Frost, McCally , and Busby

.
# MASTER PRODUCTS PIVOT

# MASTER PRODUCTS LIST

# MASTER PRODUCTS LIST (Old)

# CFTC Fed. Spot Month Limits

https://www.cftc.gov/IndustryOversight/MarketSurveillance/SpeculativeLimits/index.htmhttps://www.cftc.gov/IndustryOversight/MarketSurveillance/SpeculativeLimits/index.htmhttps://www.cftc.gov/IndustryOversight/MarketSurveillance/SpeculativeLimits/index.htm

# Deleted

# Sheet2

# Sheet1

# CFTC_AEGIS SEF Product List
Exhibit 32.2




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 NRDC Acquisition Corp. (the “Company”)
on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Richard
A. Baker, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:




1.  The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




2.  The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.




Date:
      November 12, 2008
                            By:
                            /s/ RICHARD A. BAKERRichard
      A. BakerChief
      Executive Officer(Principal
      Financial
Officer)
Exhibit 99.6

CONSENT OF EXPERT

Reference is made to the Annual Report on Form 40-F (the 40-F) of Turquoise Hill Resources Ltd.
(the Company) to be filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

I hereby consent (i) to the use of and reference to my name as a qualified person for the Oyu Tolgoi 2016 Technical
Report with an effective date of October 14, 2016, and to the use of and reference to my name, in the Companys Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2016, dated March 23, 2017, and the Companys
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, dated March 23, 2017, in each case which form part of the 40-F, and (ii) to the incorporation by reference of such information into the
Companys Registration Statement on Form S-8 (333-160783).



|                                    |  | 
|----------------------------------- |  | 
|Sincerely,                          |  | 
|                                    | 
|/s/ Sharron Sylvester               |  | 
|Name: Sharron Sylvester             |  | 
|Title: Technical Director  Geology |  | 
|Company: OreWin Pty Ltd.            |  | 

Date:   March 27, 2017
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS 

Appeal of--

Siemens Industry, Inc. 

Under Contract No. F41689-99-D-0500 

APPEARANCE FOR THE APPELLANT: 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: 

ASBCA No. 59897 

Steven R. Shamash, Esq. 

Litigation Counsel 

Lt Col James H. Kennedy III, USAF 

Air Force Chief Trial Attorney 

Erika L. Whelan Retta, Esq. 

Trial Attorney 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

The dispute has been settled. The appeal is dismissed with prejudice. 

Dated: 23 April 2015 

~~ Administrative Judge 

Acting Chairman 

Armed Services Board 

of Contract Appeals 

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Order of Dismissal of the Armed 

Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA No. 59897, Appeal of Siemens Industry, 

Inc., rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. 

Dated: 

JEFFREY D. GARDIN 

Recorder, Armed Services 

Board of Contract Appeals
================================================================================

Exhibit 32.2


                            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 Startale Group Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby
certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his 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.


Date:  October 12, 2007


/s/ Serge Wilson
---------------------------
Serge Wilson
Chief Financial Officer, Secretary
Treasurer, principal accounting
officer and Director
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-7460

BLAKE SANDLAIN,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

BARBARA RICKARD, Warden,

Respondent - Appellee.

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

Bluefield. David A. Faber, Senior District Judge. (1:19-cv-00025-DAF)

Submitted: April 16, 2020 Decided: April 20, 2020

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and WYNN and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Blake Sandlain, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Blake Sandlain, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order accepting the 

recommendation of the magistrate judge, denying his motion for injunctive relief, and 

denying relief on Sandlain’s 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2018) petition. We have reviewed the 

record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the 

district court. Sandlain v. Rickard, No. 1:19-cv-00025-DAF (S.D.W. Va. Sept. 25, 2019). 

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.

AFFIRMED
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2449 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2449

 To amend title 49, United States Code, to provide for limitations on 
      duty hours for yardmaster employees, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 1, 2019

 Mr. Carbajal introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
             Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 49, United States Code, to provide for limitations on 
      duty hours for yardmaster employees, 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. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Railroad Yardmaster Protection Act 
of 2019''.

SEC. 2. LIMITATIONS ON DUTY HOURS OF YARDMASTER EMPLOYEES.

    (a) Limitations on Duty Hours of Yardmaster Employees.--Section 
21103 of title 49, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) in the heading of such section, by inserting ``and 
        yardmaster employees'' after ``train employees'';
            (2) by inserting ``or yardmaster employee'' after ``train 
        employee'' each place it appears; and
            (3) in subsection (e), by inserting ``or yardmaster'' after 
        ``During a train''.
    (b) Definitions.--Section 21101 of title 49, United States Code, is 
amended--
            (1) in paragraph (3) by inserting ``a yardmaster 
        employee,'' after ``dispatching service employee,''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:
                    ``(6) `yardmaster employee' means an individual 
                responsible for supervising and coordinating the 
                control of trains and engines operating within a rail 
                yard.''.
    (c) Conforming Amendment.--The table of sections for chapter 211 of 
title 49, United States Code, is amended by striking the item relating 
to section 21103 and inserting the following:

``21103. Limitations on duty hours of train employees and yardmaster 
                            employees.''.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit99.1**

 

 

December, 2002

 

 

To the Addresses listed on Schedule I hereto.

 

 

Ladies and Gentlemen:

 

This Annual Statement as to Compliance is delivered toyou pursuant to Section 4.10 (a) of the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated asof September 10, 2001 (the “Agreement”), executed in connection with theformation of AmeriCredit Automobile Receivables Trust 2001-C (the “Trust”), theissuance of the Notes by the Trust and the closing of the transactions and theexecution and delivery of the various documents by AmeriCredit FinancialServices, Inc. (the “Servicer”) and AFS Funding Corp. in connectiontherewith.  The capitalized terms usedherein shall have the same meanings as in the Agreement.

 

The undersigned certifies that I am the ChiefFinancial Officer and Treasurer of the Servicer.  I further certify as follows:

 

1.               I have conducted,or caused to be conducted under my supervision, a review of the Servicer duringthe preceding period from January 1, 2002 through December 31, 2002, and itsperformance under the Agreement.

 

2.               To the best of myknowledge, following such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all itsobligations under the Agreement throughout such period, and , to the best of myknowledge, there has been no default in the fulfillment of any such obligation.

 

 

AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc.

 

 
| By:    | /s/    | Preston A. Miller                     |   | Dated:  April  21, 2004 |
|--------|--------|---------------------------------------|--------|------------------------------|
|   |   | Preston A. Miller                     |
|   |   | Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer |

 

----

 

Schedule I

 

 

Trustee, Trust CollateralAgentand Backup Servicer:

 

JPMorgan Chase Bank

Global Debt/Asset Backed Securities

4 New York Plaza, 6th Floor

New York, NY 10004

 

Owner Trustee:

 

Bankers Trust (Delaware)

E. A. Delle DonneCorporate Center

Montgomery Building, Suite 200

Wilmington, DE 19805

 

Insurer:

 

Financial Security Assurance, Inc.

350 Park Avenue

New York, NY 10022

 

Rating Agencies:

 

Moody’s Investors Service, Inc.

99 Church Street

New York, NY 10007

 

Standard & Poor’s Rating Services

55 Water Street

40th Floor

New York, NY 10041

 

----