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

No. 96-1686EA

_____________

Patricia L. Gaffney, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the Eastern

* District of Arkansas.

Shirley S. Chater, Commissioner *

of Social Security * [UNPUBLISHED]

Administration, *

*

Appellee. *

_____________

Submitted: November 1, 1996

 Filed: November 7, 1996

_____________

Before FAGG, WOLLMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

_____________

PER CURIAM.

Patricia L. Gaffney appeals the district court's grant of summary

judgment affirming the Commissioner's decision to deny Gaffney disability

insurance and supplemental security income benefits. After careful review

of the administrative record, we conclude the administrative law judge

properly assessed the uncontradicted opinions of the examining physicians,

carefully applied the analysis under Polaski v. Heckler, 739 F.2d 1320,

1322 (8th Cir. 1984), and properly relied on the medical vocational

guidelines despite evidence about Gaffney's nonexertional impairments. We

also conclude the Commissioner proved that substantial gainful employment

was realistically within Gaffney's physical and mental capabilities. In

sum, substantial evidence supports the decision of the Commissioner that

Gaffney is not disabled for Social Security purposes. We affirm the

district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
-2-

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 110 (Thursday, June 7, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 30749]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-14371]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[CO-930; COC-012292]


Public Land Order No. 7487; Partial Revocation of Public Land 
Order No. 1742; Colorado

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Public land order.

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

SUMMARY: This order partially revokes Public Land Order No. 1742 
insofar as it affects approximately 2 acres of National Forest System 
lands withdrawn for a roadside zone.

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 9, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Doris E. Chelius, BLM Colorado State 
Office, 2850 Youngfield Street, Lakewood, Colorado 80215-7093, 303-239-
3706.
    By virtue of the authority vested in the Secretary of the Interior 
by Section 204 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, 
43 U.S.C. 1714 (1994), it is ordered as follows:
    1. Public Land Order No. 1742, which withdrew National Forest 
System lands for a roadside zone along Colorado Highway 119, Peak-to-
Peak Highway, is hereby revoked insofar as it affects the following 
described lands:

Sixth Principal Meridian

Roosevelt National Forest
    T. 1 S., R. 73 W.,

    A strip of land 200 feet north of the centerline of Colorado 
Highway 119 as it runs through the NE\1/4\ of section 24 crossing 
lots 8, 9, 25 and 32.
    The areas described aggregate approximately 2 acres in Boulder 
County.

    2. At 9 a.m. on July 9, 2001, the lands shall be opened to such 
forms of disposition as may by law be made of National Forest System 
lands, including location and entry under the United States mining 
laws, subject to valid existing rights, the provisions of existing 
withdrawals, other segregations of record, and the requirements of 
applicable law. Appropriation of lands described in this order under 
the general mining laws prior to the date and time of restoration is 
unauthorized. Any such attempted appropriation, including attempted 
adverse possession under 30 U.S.C. 38 (1994), shall vest no rights 
against the United States. Acts required to establish a location and to 
initiate a right of possession are governed by State law where not in 
conflict with Federal law. The Bureau of Land Management will not 
intervene in disputes between rival locators over possessory rights 
since Congress has provided for such determinations in local courts.

    Dated: May 21, 2001.
Gale A. Norton,
Secretary of the Interior.
[FR Doc. 01-14371 Filed 6-6-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P
155 So. 309

#### STATE v. TITLE GUARANTEE LOAN & TRUST CO.

3 Div. 103.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

May 24, 1934.

Thos. E. Knight, Jr., Atty. Gen., and Front-is H. Moore, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

Smyer, Smyer & Bainbridge, of Birmingham, for appellee.

BOULDIN, Justice.

This is a companion case with Title Guarantee Loan & Trust Company v. State of Alabama, ante, p. 636,155 So. 305, this day decided.

The excise'tax here involved was governed by the amended statute of April 4,1933. Gen. Acts 1933 (Ex. Sess.) p. 107, § 3.

The trial court allowed a credit for taxes paid on personal property, which being in excess of the excise tax as fixed by the State. Tax Commission, no excise tax was found due for the calendar year 1933. In this the court erred. The cause is, therefore, reversed on the authority of the above decision, and a decree will be here rendered against the appellee for the amount of the excise tax fixed by the State Tax Commission, namely, $551.-87.

Reversed and rendered.

ANDERSON, C. J., and GARDNER and FOSTER, JJ., concur.
```

[Federal Register: January 24, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 15)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 3623]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr24ja00-11]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

17 CFR Part 1

RIN 3038-AB50


Proposed Revision of the Commission's Procedures for the Review
of Contract Market Rules

AGENCY:  Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

ACTION:  Extension of comment period.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY:  On November 26, 1999, the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission (``Commission'') published in the Federal Register a request
for public comment on a proposal to revise its procedures for the
review of contract market rules and rule amendments (64 FR 66428). The
original comment period expires January 25, 2000. By letter dated
January 3, 2000, seven agricultural organizations requested a thirty
day extension of the comment period to permit the membership of each
organization to fully consider the implications of the proposed
procedures.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The request was made in a January 3, 2000 letter jointly
signed by the American Farm Bureau Federation, the American Soybean
Association, the National Association of Wheat Growers, the National
Cattlemen's Beef Association, the National Corn Grower's
Association, the National Farmers Union, and the National Pork
Producers Council.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission has determined to extend the comment period for
thirty days in order to insure that an adequate opportunity is provided
for submission of meaningful comments.

EFFECTIVE DATE:  Written comments must be received on or before
February 24, 2000.

ADDRESSES:  Comments on the proposal should be sent to Jean A. Webb,
Secretary, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette
Center, 1155 21st Street, NW, Washington, DC 20581. Comments may be
sent by facsimile transmission to (202) 418-5521, or by e-mail to
secretary @cftc.gov. Reference should be made to ``Procedure for the
Review of Contract Market Rules''.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  David P. Van Wagner, Associate
Director, Division of Trading and Markets, Commodity Futures Trading
Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street, NW, Washington,
DC 20581. Telephone Number: (202) 418-5490. Facsimile Number: (202)
418-5536. Electronic Mail: [email protected].

    Issued in Washington, D.C. on January 18, 2000 by the
Commission.
Jean A. Webb,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 00-1568 Filed 1-21-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
```

----

**======== RETURN TO INDEX    ========**

----
H. Res. 1095 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

February 23, 2010. 

Resolved, That the following named Member be, and is 

hereby, elected to the following standing committee of the 

House of Representatives: 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE: Mr. Griffith. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

---

FORM 8-K

---

CURRENT REPORT



Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934





Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported): October 15, 2007



---

MINN-DAK FARMERS COOPERATIVE

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)



North Dakota
        33-94644
        23-7222188(State or other jurisdictionof incorporation)
        (Commission File Number)
        (I.R.S. EmployerIdentification No.)






7525 Red River RoadWahpeton, North Dakota
        58075(Address of principal executive offices)
        (Zip Code)






Registrants telephone number, including area code: (701) 642-8411



Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions:



o
        Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)




o
        Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-2 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-2)




o
        Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))




o
        Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))






---

Item 8.01
        OTHER EVENTS.




Minn-Dak Farmers Cooperative has announced that the Board of Directors, following the completion of the 2007 fiscal year audit, has approved the final payment for the 2006-crop of 15.6130316 cents per pound of extractable and bonus sugar ($46.56 per ton of beets harvested). The Board of Directors has also declared and allocated to shareholders of record, for the 2006-crop, non-qualified allocated patronage totaling $7,560,504 or $2.50 per ton of beets harvested.





---

SIGNATURE



Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.





MINN-DAK FARMERS COOPERATIVEDated: October 15, 2007
        By
        /S/   David H. RocheDavid H. RochePresident and Chief Executive Officer


---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS OF AMERIGAS PARTNERS,
L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES AS OF AND FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN
AMERIGAS PARTNERS' ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30,
1998. 
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000932628
<NAME> AMERIGAS PARTNERS, L.P.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                           8,873
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   65,210
<ALLOWANCES>                                     6,432
<INVENTORY>                                     49,394
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               133,346
<PP&E>                                         647,125
<DEPRECIATION>                                 205,083
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,217,216
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          160,297
<BONDS>                                        702,926
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     299,875
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,217,216
<SALES>                                        914,378
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               914,378
<CGS>                                          443,760
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  443,760
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 4,287
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              66,189
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 21,729
<INCOME-TAX>                                         3
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             21,402
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    21,402
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .51
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .51
        

</TABLE>
[Cite as State v. Pocock, 2014-Ohio-3787.]

 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 

 TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO 

CLINTON COUNTY 

STATE OF OHIO, : 

 Plaintiff-Appellee, : CASE NO. CA2014-03-006 

: D E C I S I O N

 - vs - 9/2/2014 

: 

 

DUSTIN W. POCOCK, : 

 Defendant-Appellant. : 

CRIMINAL APPEAL FROM CLINTON COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS 

Case No. 2013-5387 

Richard W. Moyer, Clinton County Prosecuting Attorney, 103 West Main Street, Wilmington, 

Ohio 45177, for plaintiff-appellee 

Foster Law, LLC, Mary T. Foster, 636 Northland Blvd., Suite 100, Cincinnati, Ohio 45240, for 

defendant-appellant 

 Per Curiam.

{¶ 1} This cause came on to be considered upon a notice of appeal, the transcript of 

the docket and journal entries, the transcript of proceedings and original papers from the 

Clinton County Court of Common Pleas, and upon a brief filed by appellant's counsel. 

{¶ 2} Counsel for defendant-appellant, Dustin W. Pocock, has filed a brief with this 

court pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), which (1) 
Clinton CA2014-03-006

indicates that a careful review of the record from the proceedings below fails to disclose any 

errors by the trial court prejudicial to the rights of appellant upon which an assignment of 

error may be predicated; (2) lists potential errors "that might arguably support the appeal," 

Anders at 744, 87 S.Ct. at 1400; (3) requests that this court review the record independently 

to determine whether the proceedings are free from prejudicial error and without infringement 

of appellant's constitutional rights; (4) requests permission to withdraw as counsel for 

appellant on the basis that the appeal is wholly frivolous; and (5) certifies that a copy of both 

the brief and motion to withdraw have been served upon appellant. 

{¶ 3} Although the brief filed by appellant's counsel does not specifically suggest 

potential errors that may have been committed at the trial level, counsel does "note that there 

were no motions filed on the defendant-appellant's behalf. There were no motions made by 

the defendant-appellant or counsel on his behalf to withdraw his guilty plea at anytime, the 

Court did not impose the maximum sentence in this case and the Court appeared to have 

complied with Crim.R. 11 in accepting appellant's plea." The court will construe this 

statement as suggesting potential errors involving (1) the lack of pretrial motions filed on 

appellant's behalf; (2) the appropriateness of appellant's sentence; and (3) compliance with 

Crim.R. 11. 

{¶ 4} Having allowed appellant sufficient time to respond, and no response having 

been received, we have accordingly examined the record and find no error prejudicial to 

appellant's rights in the proceedings in the trial court. The motion of counsel for appellant 

requesting to withdraw as counsel is granted, and this appeal is dismissed for the reason that 

it is wholly frivolous. 

S. POWELL, P.J., PIPER and M. POWELL, JJ., concur.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-40359

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

FELIPE MARTINEZ-GARCIA,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:11-CR-896-1

Before DAVIS, SOUTHWICK, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Felipe MartinezGarcia 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). Martinez-Garcia has not filed a response. Moreover,

Martinez-Garcia has served his prison term, and he has no additional term of

supervised release or payment of a fine or special assessment. We have

reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. 

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

October 16, 2013

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

 Case: 13-40359 Document: 00512408827 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/16/2013
No. 13-40359

We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous

issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw

is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the

APPEAL IS DISMISSED in part as frivolous and in part as moot. See 5TH CIR.

R. 42.2; United States v. Rosenbaum-Alanis, 483 F.3d 381, 382-83 (5th Cir.

2007).

2

 Case: 13-40359 Document: 00512408827 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/16/2013
EXHIBIT 32.1


Certification of President and Chief Executive Officer


Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted


Pursuant to Section 906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Danvers Bancorp, Inc. (the “Company”) for the three months ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I hereby certify, to the best knowledge and belief of the signatory, 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 consolidated financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of, and for, the period covered by the Report.





This statement is authorized to be attached as an exhibit to the Report so that this statement will accompany the Report at such time as the Report is filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350.  It is not intended that this statement be deemed to be filed for purposes of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.





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





Date:           May 10, 2011











/s/
Kevin T. BottomleyKevin T. BottomleyPresident and Chief Executive Officer
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-10896

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

RAMON RODARTE-MENDOZA,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:10-CR-6-2

Before GARZA, SOUTHWICK, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Ramon Rodarte-Mendoza 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). Rodarte-Mendoza has filed a response. The record is insufficiently

developed to allow consideration at this time of Rodarte-Mendoza’s claims of

ineffective assistance of counsel; such claims generally “cannot be resolved on

direct appeal when the claim[s] [have] not been raised before the district court

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

December 1, 2011

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not *

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

Case: 10-10896 Document: 00511681844 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/01/2011
No. 10-10896

since no opportunity existed to develop the record on the merits of the

allegations.” United States v. Gulley, 526 F.3d 809, 821 (5th Cir. 2008) (internal

quotation marks and citation omitted); United States v. Cantwell, 470 F.3d 1087,

1091 (5th Cir. 2006). We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions

of the record reflected therein, as well as Rodarte-Mendoza’s response. We

concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue

for appellate review. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is

GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the

APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. Rodarte-Mendoza’s request for

the appointment of new counsel is DENIED. Cf. United States v. Wagner, 158

F.3d 901, 902-03 (5th Cir. 1998).

2

Case: 10-10896 Document: 00511681844 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/01/2011
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                                CERTIFICATION OF
                          PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING OFFICER
                          OF STILLWATER MINING COMPANY
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and in connection with the accompanying
Amendment No. 1 to Annual report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31,
2005 that is being filed concurrently with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Gregory A. Wing, Vice President
and Chief Financial Officer of Stillwater Mining Company (the "Company") hereby
certify 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.

January 10, 2007,

                                                 /s/ Gregory A. Wing
                                     -------------------------------------------
                                                   Gregory A. Wing
                                     Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

The above certification is furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350) and is not being
filed as part of the Form 10-K/A or as a separate disclosure statement.
Exhibit 32
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (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 Partnership.
 /s/     Steven J. MalcolmSteven J. MalcolmChief Executive OfficerAugust 6, 2009/s/     Donald R. ChappelDonald R. ChappelChief Financial OfficerAugust 6, 2009