alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-6105
FRED SHORES, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus WILLIAM ONEAL RHOADES; JAMES METTS, High Sheriff; ONE DOE DEFENDANT DETECTIVE, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. William B. Traxler, Jr., District Judge. (CA-94-1704-6-21-AK) Submitted: July 25, 1996 Decided: August 7, 1996 Before LUTTIG and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion. Fred Shores, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Wilburn Brewer, Jr., Thomas C.R. Legare, Jr., NEXSEN, PRUET, JACOBS & POLLARD, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:Appellant appeals from the district court's orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have scrutinizedthe record and the district court's opinion reviewing the magistrate judge's recommendation, granting summary judgment in favor of two of the defendants, dismissing without prejudice DefendantRhoades, and denying Appellant's post-judgment motions. Our examination reveals no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Shores v. Rhoades , No. CA-94-1704- 6-21-AK (D.S.C. Jan. 5, 1996). To the extent that Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing without prejudice Defendant Rhoades, that order is not appealable because the defect upon which the dismissal was based could be cured by amending the complaint. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392 , 10 F.3d 1064 (4th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, this Court does not havejurisdiction over this portion of the appeal and it must be dismissed. We deny Appellant's motion to remand and 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.

AFFIRMED IN PART, DISMISSED IN PART
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20
- 6718

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. MATTHEW JAMES DURY , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina , at Asheville

. Martin K. Reidinger, Chief District Judge. ( 1:08

- cr
- 00016

- MR

- 1 )

Submitted : October 16, 2020 Decided: October 23, 2020

Before WYNN and KEENAN , Circuit Judges , and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Matthew James Dury, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Matthew James Dury appeals the district court’s order denying his postjudgment
motion

. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Dury , No. 1:08

- cr
- 00016

- MR

1 (W.D.N.C. Apr. 27, 2020) . 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
|   | CERTIFICATION      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND |
|--------|---------------------------------------------------|

|   | CHIEF      FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO |
|--------|------------------------------------------|

|   | 18      U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANTTO |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------|

|   | SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002 |
|--------|---------------------------------------------------|

|   | 1. | The Report fully complies with      the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act      of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d));and |
|--------|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

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

|                   |                                                                                             |
|------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                   |                                                                                             |
| November      13, 2008 | /s/Todd B.      Parriott                                                                         |
|                   | Todd      B. Parriott,                                                                           |
|                   | Chairman      of the Board, Chief Executive Officer, President and Chief Investment      Officer |
|                   |                                                                                             |
|                   |                                                                                             |
| November      13, 2008 | /s/Stacy M.      Riffe                                                                           |
|                   | Stacy      M. Riffe,                                                                             |
|                   | Chief      Financial Officer                                                                     |
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4923 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on 2,6-Dichlorotoluene. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 19, 2007 

Mr. SPRATT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on 2,6- 

Dichlorotoluene. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. 2,6-DICHLOROTOLUENE. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.32.82 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 2,6-Dichlorotoluene) is amended by striking the date in 

7 the effective period column and inserting ‘‘12/31/2011’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 


ccoleman on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
2 

•HR 4923 IH

1 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

2 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


ccoleman on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
Smith Barney California Municipals Fund Inc.

Supplement dated April 27, 1998 to
Prospectus dated June 27, 1997

The following information supplements the information in the 
Prospectus under "Investment Objectives and Management Policies"

Zero Coupon Bonds 
The Fund may also in zero coupon bonds.  Such bonds carry an 
additional risk that, unlike bonds which pay interest throughout the 
period to maturity, the Fund will realize no cash until the cash 
payment date unless a portion of such bonds is sold and, if the 
issuer defaults, the Fund may obtain no return at all on its 
investment.


FD01447
McCORMICK v. HANSON AGGREGATES SE, INC.

No. 304P04.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 21, 2004.

A. Lee Hogewood, III, Raleigh, for Hanson Aggregates Southeast.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 21st day of June 2004 by Plaintiff for Temporary Stay:

> "Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference this the 21st day of June 2004."
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-20-00196-CR

Jenna Ve Jordan CASTILLO,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 187th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018CR6683

Honorable Stephanie R. Boyd, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE ALVAREZ, JUSTICE CHAPA, AND JUSTICE RIOS

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED.

SIGNED May 6, 2020.

_________________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
Joseph Michael GUARASCIO v. NEW HANOVER HEALTH NETWORK, INC., d/b/a New Hanover Regional Medical Center, New Hanover Regional Medical Center and Bill Creech.

No. 165P04.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 6, 2004.

W. Randall Stroud, for Guarascio.

B. Danforth Morton, Wilmington, for New Hanover Health Network, Inc.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 6th day of April 2004 by Plaintiff in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

> "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 6th day of May 2004."
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5015 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain sardines in oil, in airtight 

containers, neither skinned nor boned. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 16, 2008 

Mrs. TAUSCHER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain sardines in oil, 

in airtight containers, neither skinned nor boned. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN SARDINES IN AIRTIGHT CONTAINERS. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Sardines, in oil, in airtight 

containers, neither skinned 

nor boned (provided for in 

subheading 1604.13.20) ...... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2011 ’’. 


smartinez on PRODPC61 with BILLS
2 

•HR 5015 IH

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


smartinez on PRODPC61 with BILLS
SEABOARD CONTAINER CLEANING, LLC v. FOUR SEASONS ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.

No. COA03-1367

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Filed December 21, 2004

Certification Date January 10, 2005

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed in part, dismissed in part.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4927 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 4927

 To authorize and request the President to award the Medal of Honor to 
 Danny P. Dietz, formerly of Littleton, Colorado, for acts of valor on 
 June 28, 2005, while fighting against the Taliban in Konar Province, 
                              Afghanistan.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           December 19, 2007

 Mr. Tancredo introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To authorize and request the President to award the Medal of Honor to 
 Danny P. Dietz, formerly of Littleton, Colorado, for acts of valor on 
 June 28, 2005, while fighting against the Taliban in Konar Province, 
                              Afghanistan.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION AND REQUEST FOR AWARD OF MEDAL OF HONOR TO 
              DANNY DIETZ FOR ACTS OF VALOR WHILE FIGHTING AGAINST THE 
              TALIBAN IN KONAR PROVINCE, AFGHANISTAN.

    (a) Authorization.--The President is authorized and requested to 
award the Medal of Honor under section 3741 of title 10, United States 
Code, to Danny Dietz, formerly of Littleton, Colorado, for the acts of 
valor described in subsection (b).
    (b) Action Described.--The acts of valor referred to in subsection 
(a) are the actions of Danny P. Dietz on June 28, 2005, in Konar 
Province, Afghanistan, while fighting against the Taliban, when, as a 
Petty Officer 2nd Class in the United States Navy, he demonstrated 
extraordinary heroism in the face of grave danger, fighting valiantly 
against the numerically superior and positionally advantaged enemy 
force. After the crash of a Chinook rescue helicopter sent to extract 
his team from the area, Dietz advanced on the enemy in an attempt to 
reach a location where he could establish radio communications. 
Although mortally wounded, Dietz held his position, fighting back the 
enemy to give one of his SEAL team members an opportunity to escape.
    (c) Waiver of Time Limitations.--The award under subsection (a) may 
be made without regard to the time limitations specified in section 
3744(b) of title 10, United States Code, or any other time limitation 
established by law or regulation with respect to the awarding of 
certain medals to persons who served in the Army.
                                 <all>
```
STATE of North Carolina v. Bobby Ray FRYE.

No. 54P02-2.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

February 3, 2005.

Robert C. Montgomery, Assistant Attorney General, Thomas J. Keith, District Attorney, for State.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 14th day of June 2004 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

> "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 3rd day of February 2005."
Jorge SANCHEZ-RODRIGUEZ, Petitioner v. LOUISIANA

No. 19-6171

Supreme Court of the United States.

December 9, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit denied.
Independent Auditors' Consent



To the Shareholders and Board of Directors of 
Smith Barney Concert Allocation Series Inc.:

We consent to the use of our report dated March 17, 1997 with 
respect to Smith Barney Concert Allocation Series Inc., incorporated 
herein by reference, and to the references to our Firm under the 
headings "Financial Highlights" in the Prospectuses and "Counsel and 
Auditors" in the Statement of Additional Information.





	

	KPMG Peat Marwick LLP
		


New York, New York	
May 28, 1997
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth ___________________________

No. 02-20-00010-CV

___________________________

On Appeal from Probate Court No. 2

Tarrant County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2011-PR00903-1-2

Before Bassel, Womack, and Wallach, JJ.

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

IN THE ESTATE OF JOHN DAVID HARRIS, DECEASED
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Pro se Appellant David Glen Harris attempts to appeal from an order denying 

his motion to recuse. We dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

On December 13, 2019, a statutory probate court denied Appellant’s motion to 

recuse. Appellant filed a notice of appeal, and on January 14, 2020, we notified him 

of our concern that this court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal because the “Order 

Denying Motion for Recusal” does not appear to be a final judgment or an appealable 

interlocutory order. We also stated that the appeal would be dismissed unless 

Appellant or any party desiring to continue the appeal filed with the court, on or 

before January 24, 2020, a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal. 

Although Appellant filed a response, he did not demonstrate the existence of a final 

judgment or an appealable interlocutory order and instead focused on his arguments 

about why he contends the probate court erred in denying the motion to recuse.

Generally, an appeal may be taken only from a final judgment or order. Estate 

of Harris, No. 02-17-00108-CV, 2017 WL 2590574, at *2 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth

June 15, 2017, pet. denied) (per curiam) (mem. op.) (citing Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 

39 S.W.3d 191, 195, 200 (Tex. 2001)). We may immediately consider appeals from 

interlocutory orders if a statute explicitly provides appellate jurisdiction. In re 

Guardianship of Hart, 460 S.W.3d 742, 743 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2015, no pet.) (per 

curiam) (citing De Ayala v. Mackie, 193 S.W.3d 575, 578 (Tex. 2006) (op. on reh’g)). 

“It is clear that a party may appeal from an order denying a motion to recuse a judge
3

of a statutory probate court only after final judgment has been entered.” Id.; see also 

Tex. Est. Code Ann. § 32.001(c); Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 25.00255(a); Tex. R. Civ. P. 

18a(j)(1)(A). Because the order from which Appellant attempts to appeal is an 

unappealable interlocutory order, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See 

Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f); see also Aguilar v. Morales, No. 04-16-00382-CV, 2017 

WL 4158090, at *5 (Tex. App.—San Antonio Sept. 20, 2017, no pet.) (mem. op.); In re 

Guardianship of Hart, 460 S.W.3d at 743.

Per Curiam

Delivered: February 20, 2020
STATE v. CLARK

No. COA03-1678

North Carolina Court of Appeals

Filed October 19, 2004

Certification Date November 8, 2004

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
STATE v. Sammy C. PERKINS.

No. 60A94-5.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 6, 2004.

Edwin L. West, III, Wilmington, for Sammy Perkins.

Steven Arbogast, Special Deputy Attorney General, Clark Everett, District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 6th day of October 2004 by Defendant to Stay His 8 October 2004 Execution Date to Provide the Court an Adequate Opportunity to Review Defendant's Petition:

> "Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference this the 6th day of October 2004."
<PAGE>


                                  EXHIBIT (21)
<PAGE>

Subsidiaries of Emerald Isle Bancorp, Inc.


       The following are the only subsidiaries of Emerald Isle Bancorp, Inc.:


Direct Subsidiary                       Jurisdiction of Incorporation   
-----------------                       -----------------------------   
                                                                      
The Hibernia Savings Bank               Massachusetts                   
                                                                      

Indirect Subsidiaries                   Jurisdiction of Incorporation   
------------------------                -----------------------------   

Meath Corporation(1)                    Massachusetts

Kildare Corporation(1)                  Massachusetts

The Limerick Securities Corporation(1)  Massachusetts

Roscommon Realty Corporation(2)         Massachusetts

Mayo Corporation(2)                     Massachusetts

Donegal Realty Corporation(2)           Massachusetts

Athlone Corporation(2)                  Massachusetts


(1) Subsidiaries of The Hibernia Savings Bank 

(2) Subsidiaries of Kildare Corporation
**Exhibit 32.2**

PHARMACOPEIA DRUG DISCOVERY, INC.

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Pharmacopeia DrugDiscovery, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period endedJune 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (the “Report”), I, Brian M. Posner, Executive Vice President and ChiefFinancial Officer (Principal Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer) ofthe Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

(2)  The information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company.
| By:    |   | /s/ Brian M. Posner                                         |   |
|--------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |   | Brian M. Posner                                             |   |
|   |   | Executive Vice President,                                   |   |
|   |   | Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer                       |   |
|   |   | (Principal Financial Officer and Chief Accounting  Officer) |   |
|   |   | August 4, 2006                                              |   |

 

----
Jermaine TART, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR the EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

No. 19-5188

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5012 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on artichokes, prepared or 

preserved by vinegar or acetic acid. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 16, 2008 

Mrs. TAUSCHER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on artichokes, 

prepared or preserved by vinegar or acetic acid. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. ARTICHOKES, PREPARED OR PRESERVED BY 

4 VINEGAR OR ACETIC ACID. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.03.90 of the Har6 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended 

7 by striking ‘‘12/31/2009’’ and inserting ‘‘12/31/2011’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered, or 


smartinez on PRODPC61 with BILLS
2 

•HR 5012 IH

1 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

2 the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


smartinez on PRODPC61 with BILLS
**Exhibit 32**

**CERTIFICATION**

The undersigned certifypursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, that:

(1)          The accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period endedNovember 30, 2006, fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and

(2)          The information contained in the accompanying Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.
| Date: January 16, 2007 |   | /s/ Dana Persson                                            |   |
|------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                   |   | Dana Persson, President & Chief Executive  Officer |
|                   |   |                                                        |
|                   |   |                                                        |
| Date: January 16, 2007 |   | /s/ Thomas A. Powell                                        |   |
|                   |   | Thomas A. Powell, Chief Financial Officer                   |
|                   |   |                                                        |

 

----