alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Dale Eugene ELLIS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 11-7343.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Feb. 9, 2012.

Decided: Feb. 14, 2012.

Dale Eugene Ellis, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Dale Eugene Ellis seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2011) 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 certificate 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 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, 120 S.Ct. 1595. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Ellis 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.*
No. 89.

#### York Heating & Ventilating Corp. *v.*Malooly et al.

November 11, 1935.
IV 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 1264 

Expressing support for the designation of March as National Essential 

Tremor Awareness Month. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 15, 2010 

Mr. MOORE of Kansas (for himself, Mr. GRIJALVA, Mr. BISHOP of Georgia, 

Ms. LINDA T. SA ́NCHEZ of California, Ms. RICHARDSON, Ms. SPEIER, 

Mr. COBLE, Mr. TERRY, Mr. MARSHALL, and Mr. HOLT) submitted the 

following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight 

and Government Reform 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing support for the designation of March as National 

Essential Tremor Awareness Month. 

Whereas essential tremor is the most common movement disorder, affecting up to 10 million Americans, including 4 

to 5 percent of people aged 40 to 60, and 6 to 9 percent 

of people aged 60 and older; 

Whereas essential tremor is often misdiagnosed as Parkinson’s disease, dystonia and other neurological movement 

disorders, most people with essential tremor are not diagnosed until after several visits to many physicians; 

Whereas essential tremor is not a normal outcome of aging, 

as believed by many people including some physicians, 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 1264 IH 

but is an abnormal condition, primarily genetic, afflicting 

people of all ages, including newborns; 

Whereas there are no medications that have been developed 

for people with essential tremor, the medications currently being used were developed for other conditions and 

only help 60 percent of the people affected, and the only 

treatment specifically designed for essential tremor is 

brain surgery; 

Whereas essential tremor interferes with a person’s ability to 

perform activities of daily living such as grooming and 

writing, and in approximately 5 percent of cases, is totally disabling; 

Whereas research shows that people with essential tremor 

have a higher incidence of depression than the general 

population and that a significant number of these people 

isolate themselves in their homes; 

Whereas essential tremor is a chronic condition that undermines the American economy through lost wages and 

work hours and high medical costs in getting an accurate 

diagnosis; 

Whereas overcoming the medical, social, and economic issues 

listed in this resolution depends upon research and research funding is dependent upon awareness; and 

Whereas March would be an appropriate month to designate 

as ‘‘National Essential Tremor Awareness Month’’: Now, 

therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) supports the designation of ‘‘National Es3 sential Tremor Awareness Month’’ for the purpose 

4 of raising awareness about the Nation’s number one 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HRES 1264 IH 

1 neurological condition, affecting approximately 

2 10,000,000 Americans; and 

3 (2) encourages the people of the United States 

4 to support the observance of National Essential 

5 Tremor Awareness Month by participating in the 

6 educational activities of the International Essential 

7 Tremor Foundation. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
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 Edgemont Mining Inc. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-Q for the period ended October 31, 2008 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:  December
12, 2008








/s/
Guy Federspiel


Guy
Federspiel, President and C.E.O.


(Principal
Executive Officer)
D ISMISS; and Opinion Filed October 18 , 2016 . 

# S

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05
- 16
- 01162
- CR EX PARTE ANTOINE LAW VELL PERRY On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 7 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F16
- 41185
- Y 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Bridges , Lang

- Miers , and Whitehill Opinion by Justice Lang

- Miers Antoine Lawvell Perry has applied to this Court for a pretrial writ of habeas co rpus. This Court does not have original habeas jurisdiction in criminal cases. See T EX
. G OV ’ T C ODE A NN
. § 22.221(d) (West 2004 ); T EX
. C ODE C RIM
. P ROC
. A NN
. art. 11.05 (West 2015); In re Ayers , 2016 WL 1533747, at *1 (Tex. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] Apr. 1 4, 2016, orig. proceeding) (per curiam); Ex parte Denby , 627 S.W. 2d 435 (Tex. App.

— Houston [1st Dist.] 1981, orig. proceeding). We dismiss appellant’s application for writ of habeas corpus for want of jurisdiction.

Do Not Publish T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 47 161162F.U05 /Elizabeth Lang

- Miers/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIERS JUSTICE– 2

– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT

EX PARTE ANTOINE LAW VELL PERRY No. 05

- 16

- 01162

- CR On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 7, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F16

- 41185

- Y. Opinion delivered by Justice Lang

- Miers. Justices Bridges and Whitehill participating. Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the application for writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED for want of jurisdiction.
Judgment entered this 18th day of October, 2016.
AMENDMENT TO THE

                           2004 CSA ACQUISITION CORP.

                              STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN

                           (EFFECTIVE AUGUST 5, 2005)

                  WHEREAS, Cooper-Standard Holdings, Inc. (f/k/a CSA Acquisition
Corp.), a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), previously established the 2004
CSA Acquisition Corp. Stock Incentive Plan (the "Plan");

                  WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 12 of the Plan, the Board of
Directors of the Company has determined that it is in the best interests of the
Company to amend the Plan as set forth below; and

                  WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 12 of the Plan, the shareholders
of the Company have approved the amendment to the Plan as set forth below.

                  NOW, THERETOFORE, the Plan shall be amended as set forth
below:

                  1. The first sentence of Section 3 shall be amended to read
in its entirety as follows:

                  "The total number of Shares which may be issued under the
Plan is 228,615."
# FCM Data May 2012

SELECTED FCM FINANCIAL DATA AS OF May 31,&KFF0000 &K0000002012FROM REPORTS FILED BY July 03,&KFF0000 &K0000002012	&P of &N
EXHIBIT 23.4




            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM



The Board of Directors
Global Payment Technologies, Inc.


We consent to the  incorporation by reference in the registration  statement No.
333-114529 on Form S-3 and Nos.  333-112934 and 333-30829 on Forms S-8 of Global
Payment  Technologies,  Inc. of our report dated December 19, 2003, with respect
to the balance sheet of Global Payment  Technologies  Pty Limited as of June 30,
2003, and the related statements of income,  stockholders' equity and cash flows
for each of the years in the two-year  period ended June 30, 2003,  which report
appears in the  September 30,  2004 annual report on Form 10-K of Global Payment
Technologies, Inc.


KPMG


Sydney Australia
November 29, 2004
<PAGE>   1
CALCULATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES


                                  EXHIBIT 12.1

                           NORCAL WASTE SYSTEMS, INC.
                       RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                      (THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS, EXCEPT RATIO)
                      FISCAL YEARS ENDING 1994 THROUGH 1998

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                  YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30,
                                              -------------------------------------------------------------
                                                1998          1997          1996         1995        1994
                                              --------      --------      --------      -------     -------
<S>                                           <C>           <C>           <C>           <C>         <C>    
Income (loss) before Income Taxes,
   Extraordinary Item and Change
   in Accounting Principle ..............     $  9,461      $  6,526      $ (1,136)     $17,096     $ 8,859
Interest Expense(a) .....................       26,400        25,853        24,326       19,909      20,920
Capitalized Interest ....................         (235)         (204)         (413)           0           0
Interest Portion of Rental charge(b) ....          956           882           751          506         504
Income (loss) before Income Taxes,
   Extraordinary Item, Interest and
   Interest Portion of Rental charge ....     $ 36,582      $ 33,057      $ 23,528      $37,511     $30,283
Interest Expense ........................     $ 26,400      $ 25,853      $ 24,326      $19,909     $20,920
Interest Portion of Rental Charge .......          956           882           751          506         504
Interest Expense plus Interest Portion
   of Rental Charge .....................     $ 27,356      $ 26,735      $ 25,077      $20,415     $21,424
Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges ......         1.34          1.24        --    (c)      1.84        1.41
</TABLE>

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

(a)     In addition, the Company guaranteed certain obligations of a less than
        50% owned entity in the amounts of $0.4 million, $1.2 million and $2.0
        million as of September 30, 1998, 1997 and 1996, respectively. The less
        than 50% owned entity incurred approximately $0.1 million, $0.2 million
        and $0.2 million of interest expense on these obligations in the years
        ended September 30, 1998, 1997 and 1996, respectively. This amount was
        not included in the calculation of the ratio of earnings to fixed
        charges as the Company had not been required to honor the guarantees and
        does not expect to be required to do so.

(b)     Interest portion of rentals is assumed to equal 33% of operating lease
        and rental expense for the period.

(c)     In 1996, earnings were insufficient to cover fixed charges by $1,549.
**FORM OF**

***D.F. King & Co., Inc.***

**Telephone Script**

**Fidelity Investments**

**Introduction**
**Spartan® Index Funds**

**Summary Prospectus**

**June 28, 2014**

**As Revised October 17, 2014**
No. —, original.

#### Ex parte C. M. Brummett.

November 16, 1936.

Motion for leave to file petition for writ of habeas corpus denied.
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
  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.
 Dated:       May 16, 2011
    By:
    /s/ Kenneth P. ReganChief Executive OfficerBy:
    /s/ Peter WingerChief Financial Officer
```

[Federal Register: September 10, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 175)]
[Corrections]
[Page 47059]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr10se01-89]



[[Page 47059]]



COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

17 CFR Parts 3 and 170


Notice Registration as a Futures Commission Merchant or
Introducing Broker for Certain Securities Brokers or Dealers

Correction

    In rule document 01-20628 beginning on page 43080 in the issue of
Friday, August 17, 2001, make the following correction:
    On page 43081, in the third column, in footnote number 9, in the
second line, ``NRA's amendment'' should read ``NFA's amendment''.

[FR Doc. C1-20628 Filed 9-7-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
```
```

[Federal Register: April 21, 1997 (Volume 62, Number 76)]
[Notices]
[Page 19312]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr21ap97-51]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

TIME AND DATE: 11:00 a.m., Friday, May 23, 1997.

PLACE: 1155 21st St., N.W., Washington, D.C., 9th Fl. Conference Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Surveillance Matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Jean A. Webb, 202-418-5100.
Jean A. Webb,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 97-10353 Filed 4-17-97; 1:18 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
```

----

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

----
#### Kay STONE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HEALTH CARE AUTHORITY OF the CITY OF HUNTSVILLE, The, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 06-12206

Non-Argument Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

Sept. 7, 2006.

Henry F. Sherrod,, III, Henry F. Sher-rod III, PC, Florence, AL, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Frank McRight, Lanier Ford Shaver & Payne, PC, Huntsville, AL, for Defendant Appellee.

Before ANDERSON, BIRCH and DUBINA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

This is the second time we have considered an appeal of this case. In the first appeal, we vacated the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the Health Care Authority of the City of Huntsville (“Huntsville Hospital”) for failure to make findings of fact and conclusions of law and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with our opinion. *See Stone v. The Health Care Authority of the City of Huntsville,*No. 03-10829, 85 Fed.Appx. 726 (11th Cir. Oct. 10, 2003). On remand, the district court once again granted summary judgment in favor of Huntsville Hospital and complied with our mandate by making detailed findings of fact and conclusions of law.

Appellant Kay Stone (“Stone”) commenced this action by filing a complaint alleging separate and individual violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101-12213, as amended, and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794. We review a district court’s grant of summary judgment *de novo. Wilson v. B/E Aerospace, Inc.,*376 F.3d 1079, 1085 (11th Cir.2004).

After reviewing the record and reading the parties’ briefs, we conclude that Stone failed to produce sufficient evidence that *761Huntsville Hospital discriminated against her because of her disability sufficient to overcome summary judgment. In fact, the record demonstrates that the reason for Stone’s termination was her threat made against her supervisor.1 Moreover, the undisputed record of evidence demonstrates that no reasonable accommodations were denied to Stone and Huntsville Hospital did not retaliate against her.

For the above-stated reasons, we affirm the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of Huntsville Hospital on Stone’s discrimination, retaliation, and failure to accommodate claims.

AFFIRMED.

1

. The record also demonstrates that Huntsville Hospital terminated an African-American employee earlier the same week it terminated Stone for making similar threats in the workplace.
Exhibit 10.5

DEGOLYER AND MACNAUGHTON

5001 SPRING VALLEY ROAD

SUITE 800 EAST

DALLAS, TEXAS 75244

June 22, 2010

Dr. Juan José Suárez Coppel

Director General

Petróleos Mexicanos

Avenida Marina Nacional No. 329

Colonia Huasteca

Torre Ejecutiva, Piso 41

11311 Mexico, D.F. Mexico

Dear
Dr. Suárez Coppel:

We hereby consent to the references to DeGolyer and MacNaughton as set forth under the heading
Exploration and Production (Reserves) in the Annual Report on Form 20-F of Petróleos Mexicanos for the year ended December 31, 2009, and to the filing as an exhibit to the Form 20-F of our report describing our review of the
estimates of proved oil, condensate, natural gas, and oil equivalent reserves owned by the United Mexican States (Mexico) as of January 1, 2010, for 68 fields located offshore of Mexico in the Southwest Marine Region. These
estimates were prepared in accordance with the reserves definitions of Rules 4-10(a) (1)-(32) of Regulation S-X of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission.



Very truly yours,/s/ DeGolyer and MacNaughtonDeGOLYER and MacNAUGHTONTexas Registered Engineering Firm F-716
BAY AREA DISTRIBUTING

1061 Factory Street

Richmond, Ca.  94804



Bus (510) 232-8554

Fax  (510) 232-5017

BAY AREA DISTRIBUTING TERRITORIAL AGREEMENT

THIS AGREEMENT MADE AND ENTERED THIS 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2000
BY AND BETWEEN BAY AREA DISTRIBUTING CO., INC., A LICENSED BEER WHOLESALES,
HEREBY REFERRED TO AS "SUPPLIER" APPOINTS SAID
"DISTRIBUTOR", AND BUTTE CREEK HEREBY REFERRED TO AS
"SUPPLIER" APPOINTS SAID DISTRIBUTOR THE TERRITORIAL AUTHORIZATION TO
DISTRIBUTE THE FOLLOWING BRANDS:

ROLANDS RED

CREEKSIDE WHEAT

GOLD ALE

WINTER ALE (SEASONAL)

ORGANIC ALE

ORGANIC PORTER

IN THE FOLLOWING COUNTIES OF:

ALAMEDA, CONTRA COSTA, MARIN, & SAN FRANCISCO

"DISTRIBUTOR" COST TO THE RETAIL TRADE WILL BE BASED
ENTIRELY AND SOLELY ON EXISTING F.O.B. AND LAID-9N COSTS AS PREDETERMINED BY
"SUPPLIER".

THIS AGREEMENT IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE AND/OR TERMINATION ONLY UPON
WRITTEN NOTICE.

 

	BAY AREA DISTRIBUTING COMPANY	BREWERY/SUPPLIER
		
	/s/ Keith Tabayegan     	/s/ Tom
      Atmore               
      
	DATED:   2/17/00     	DATED:   2/17/00
Exhibit 32


CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the accompanying  Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal
year ended  September 30, 2003 (the "Report") of Cadence  Resources  Corporation
("Cadence") as filed with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on January 13,
2004,  the  undersigned,  in his  capacity  as an  officer  of  Cadence,  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, as amended; and

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

Dated:  January 12, 2004               /s/ Howard M. Crosby
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       Howard M. Crosby
                                       President and Treasurer


Dated:  January 12, 2004               /s/ John P. Ryan
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       John P. Ryan
                                       Vice President and Secretary


This certification made in accordance with Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002  accompanies  the Annual  Report on Form  10-KSB of Cadence for the year
ended  September  30,  2003.  This  certification  shall not be deemed  filed by
Cadence for purposes of Section 18 of the  Securities  and Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended.
#### Ho Agustinus HARYASYAH, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 04-74832.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 26, 2008.*

Filed Sept. 8, 2008.

David M. Haghighi, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner.

CAC-District Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Joan E. Smiley, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: SCHROEDER, KLEINFELD, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Ho Agustinus Haryasyah, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order summarily affirming an immigration judge’s decision denying his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture. We dismiss the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to review Haryas-yah’s contention that he was deprived of a full and fair hearing due to errors in the administrative record, because he failed to raise it before the BIA. *See Barron v. Ashcroft,*358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir.2004) (due process challenges that are “procedural in nature” must be exhausted).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
No. 142.

#### Dorsey Co. *v.*Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

October 14, 1935.

*Mr. Eugene P. Locke*for petitioner.

*Solicitor General Reed, Assistant Attorney General Wideman,*and *Messrs. Sewall Key*and *Joseph M. Jones*for respondent.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.