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

**No. 10**  **- 7**  **12 1** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , P laintiff

– Appell ee ,
v. TIMOTHY JONES, a/k/a Dog, a/k/a Digity, a/k/a Digity Chemist, Defendant

– Appell ant
.

Appeal from the Uni ted States District Court for the Ea st ern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh
. James C. Dever III , D istrict Judge. ( 5:04

- cr - 00324

- D

- 1; 5 :0 8

- cv - 0 0 582

- D )

Submitted : February 28, 2011 Decided: March 15, 2011

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and SHEDD , Circ uit Judges.

Dismiss e d by un published per curiam opinion
. Timothy Jones , Appellant Pro Se
. Matthew Fesak, Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorneys, Michael Gordon James, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina , f or Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Timothy Jones seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. A. § 2255 ( West Supp. 2010 ) motion. The order is not appealable unless a ci rcuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(1) (200 6 ). 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) (200 6 ). When the d istrict 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 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (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 cl aim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Jones 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 adequa tely presented in the materials3 before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process. DISMISSED
EXHIBIT 32.1








The following certification will not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or otherwise subject to the liability of that section, nor will the certification be deemed incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, except to the extent that the registrant specifically incorporates it by reference.








CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








I, Robert E. Wheaton, President and Chief Executive Officer of Star Buffet, Inc. (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:





1.           The accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal year ended January 25, 2010 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 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.













May 10, 2010
By:
/s/ Robert E. WheatonRobert E. WheatonPresident andChief Executive Officer


A signed original of the above certification has been provided to Star Buffet, Inc. and will be retained by Star Buffet, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
<PAGE>
                                 EXHIBIT 23.1 

                      Consent of Independent Accountants

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement of
Westower Corporation on Form S-8 (File No.3333-65337) of our report dated
February 4, 1999, on our audit of the consolidated financial statements of
Westower Corporation and its subsidiaries as of September 30, 1998 and the seven
months ended September 30, 1998 which report is included in this Amendment No. 2
on Form 10-KSB/A to the Transition Report on Form 10-KSB as filed on January 25,
1999.


/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Seattle Washington
February 8, 1999
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 207/2013 (repealed)Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 207/2013 of 11 March 2013 derogating from Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 as            regards the deadline for reviewing the decision on specific support for 2013 and from Commission Regulation (EC) No 1120/2009            as regards the notification of such a review (repealed)         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 207/2013                     

# of 11 March 2013

# derogating from Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 as regards the deadline for reviewing the decision on specific support                        for 2013 and from Commission Regulation (EC) No 1120/2009 as regards the notification of such a review (repealed)                     

F1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                        

Textual Amendments

F1Repealed by Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 639/2014 of 11 March 2014 supplementing Regulation (EU) No 1307/2013 of the European                                 Parliament and of the Council establishing rules for direct payments to farmers under support schemes within the framework                                 of the common agricultural policy and amending Annex X to that Regulation.
STATE v. Eric Glenn LANE.

No. 606A05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

September 11, 2007.

C. Branson Vickory, III, District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 10th day of September 2007 by Defendant for Extension of Time for Court Reporter to Deliver Transcripts:

> "Motion Allowed. Court reporter shall have up to and including the 6th day of November 2007 to prepare and deliver transcript to counsel. By order of the Court in conference this the 11th day of September 2007."
Exhibit 32.2
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                               18 U.S.C. ss.1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Advanced Optics  Electronics,  Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, John
Cousins, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss.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 operations
          of the Company.


                                               /s/ John Cousins
                                               ----------------
                                               John Cousins
                                               Chief Financial Officer
                                               April 6, 2006


A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, an other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of this written  statement
required by Section  906,  has been  provided to Company and will be retained by
the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 292/2013Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 292/2013 of 26 March 2013 establishing the standard import values for determining            the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 292/2013                     

# of 26 March 2013

# establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural                           markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation)(1),                        

Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application                           of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors(2), and in particular Article 136(1) thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations,                              the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products                              and periods stipulated in Annex XVI, Part A thereto.

(2)The standard import value is calculated each working day, in accordance with Article 136(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU)                              No 543/2011, taking into account variable daily data. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its                              publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

# Article 1U.K.

The standard import values referred to in Article 136 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 are fixed in the Annex to                     this Regulation.                  

# Article 2U.K.

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*.                  

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 26 March 2013.

*For the Commission, On behalf of the President*,                           

José Manuel Silva Rodríguez                            

*Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development*                            

## ANNEXU.K.Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

1

OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.                           

2

OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.
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 Knight Transportation, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Kevin P. Knight, 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 to the best of 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.





August 10, 2009
By:
/s/ Kevin P. KnightKevin P. KnightChief Executive Officer





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




Back to Form 10-Q
In the Matter of S.T.K. and N.S.K., Minor Children. appealed by Mother.

No. 397P07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 11, 2007.

Christy E. Wilhelm, for Mother.

*653Charles E. Frye, III, Lexington, for Davidson County DSS.

Laura Beck, Attorney Advocate, for Guardian ad Litem.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 9th day of August 2007 by Respondent (Mother) 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 11th day of October 2007."
IN RE T.A.B.

No. COA06-960

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Filed April 17, 2007

Certification Date May 7, 2007

Appeal from Mecklenburg (02J286).

Cases reported without published opinion. Reversed and remanded for a new dispositional hearing.
DYE v. DYE.

COA06-717.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed May 15, 2007.

Certification Date June 4, 2007.

Appeal from Guilford (86CVD8875).

Case reported without published opinion. Dismissed.
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3161 

To name the Department of Veterans Affairs spinal cord injury center in 

Tampa, Florida, as the ‘‘Michael Bilirakis Department of Veterans Affairs Spinal Cord Injury Center’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 19, 2008 

Mr. MARTINEZ introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To name the Department of Veterans Affairs spinal cord 

injury center in Tampa, Florida, as the ‘‘Michael Bilirakis Department of Veterans Affairs Spinal Cord Injury 

Center’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. NAME OF DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS 

4 SPINAL CORD INJURY CENTER, TAMPA, 

5 FLORIDA. 

6 The spinal cord injury center located at the James 

7 A. Haley Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center 

8 in Tampa, Florida, shall after the date of the enactment 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

2 

•S 3161 IS

1 of this Act be known and designated as the ‘‘Michael Bili2 rakis Department of Veterans Affairs Spinal Cord Injury 

3 Center’’. Any reference to such center in any law, regula4 tion, map, document, record, or other paper of the United 

5 States shall be considered to be a reference to the ‘‘Mi6 chael Bilirakis Department of Veterans Affairs Spinal 

7 Cord Injury Center’’. 

Æ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-7734
JAMI' A. KHALIQ, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus D. PATRICK, Officer, Jasper Lock-up Unit; ELLIS GREENE, Nurse, A.C.I. Medical Unit, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CA-95-3261-2-17AJ) Submitted: September 25, 1997 Decided: October 20, 1997 Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jami' A. Khaliq, Appellant Pro Se. Norma Anne Turner Jett, EARLY & NESS, Bamberg, South Carolina; William Henry Davidson, II, James Miller Davis, Jr., ELLIS, LAWHORNE, DAVIDSON & SIMS, P.A., Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation dismissing Appellant's claim of deliberate indifference to a serious medical need, see Estelle v. Gamble , 429 U.S. 97 (1976), and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Khaliq v. Patrick, No. CA-95-3261-2-17AJ (D.S.C. Oct. 25, 1996; July 3, 1996). We also conclude that the district court did not err in entering judgment adverse to Appellant on his claim of excessive use of force. See Graham v. Connor , 490 U.S. 386 (1989). Appellant failed to create a genuine issue of material fact regarding any more than de minimis injury resulting from the alleged use of force on the part of the prison guard. See Norman v. Taylor , 25 F.3d 1259, 1263 (4th Cir. 1994). 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.

AFFIRMED
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 349/2013 (repealed)Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 349/2013 of 17 April 2013 amending the rate of additional duty for products listed            in Annex I to Council Regulation (EC) No 673/2005 establishing additional customs duties on imports of certain products originating            in the United States of America (repealed)         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 349/2013                     

# of 17 April 2013

# amending the rate of additional duty for products listed in Annex I to Council Regulation (EC) No 673/2005 establishing additional                        customs duties on imports of certain products originating in the United States of America (repealed)                     

F1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                        

Textual Amendments

F1Repealed by Regulation (EU) 2018/196 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 February 2018 on additional customs duties on                                 imports of certain products originating in the United States of America.
**EXHIBIT
      15**





**AWARENESS
      LETTER OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**








MidAmerican
      Energy Company


Des
      Moines, Iowa





We
      have
      made a review, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
      Oversight Board (United States), of the unaudited consolidated interim financial
      information of MidAmerican Energy Company and subsidiary for the three-month
      periods ended March 31, 2006 and 2005, as indicated in our report dated
      May 4, 2006; because we did not perform an audit, we expressed no opinion
      on that information.





We
      are
      aware that our report referred to above, which is included in your Quarterly
      Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2006, is incorporated
      by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-110398 on
      Form S-3.





We
      also
      are aware that the aforementioned report, pursuant to Rule 436(c) under the
      Securities Act of 1933, is not considered a part of the Registration Statement
      prepared or certified by an accountant or a report prepared or certified by
      an
      accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act.








/s/
      Deloitte & Touche LLP





Des
      Moines, Iowa


May 4,
      2006
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                  1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   Year
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                    DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                  JAN-01-1998
<CASH>                               46,500
<SECURITIES>                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                       116,675
<ALLOWANCES>                              0
<INVENTORY>                         131,688   <F1>
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                          0
<PP&E>                              894,407
<DEPRECIATION>                     (24,756)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                    1,164,514
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>               221,341   <F2>
<BONDS>                             593,168
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                     0
<PREFERRED>                              60
<COMMON>                                151
<OTHER-SE>                          349,794
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>      1,164,514
<SALES>                                   0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                    147,601
<CGS>                                     0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                             0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                     95,202   <F3>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                   30,901
<INCOME-PRETAX>                      21,498
<INCOME-TAX>                              0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                       1,253
<CHANGES>                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                         20,245
<EPS-PRIMARY>                          0.83
<EPS-DILUTED>                          0.83
        

<FN>
<F1> Restricted  cash escrows  ($53,820),  net deferred costs  ($32,891),  other
     assets ($44,977)

<F2> Accrued  Interest  Payable  ($2,440),  accrued real estate taxes ($29,657),
     accounts  payable and accrued  expenses  ($26,068),  liabilities for leases
     assumed ($4,792),  dividends declared ($8,080),  other liabilities ($4,523)
     and minority interest ($145,781)

<F3> Property operations  ($29,598),  real estate taxes ($25,077),  depreciation
     and  amortization  ($25,447),   general  and  administrative  ($5,712)  and
     minority interest allocation ($9,368)
</FN>

</TABLE>
# Commission Implementing Decision of 27 March 2014 concerning animal health control measures relating to African swine fever            in certain Member States (notified under document C(2014) 1979) (Text with EEA relevance) (2014/178/EU) (repealed)         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Decision

# of 27 March 2014

# concerning animal health control measures relating to African swine fever in certain Member States

# (notified under document C(2014) 1979)

# (Text with EEA relevance)

# (2014/178/EU) (repealed)

F1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                        

Textual Amendments

F1Repealed by Commission Implementing Decision of 9 October 2014 concerning animal health control measures relating to African swine fever                                 in certain Member States and repealing Implementing Decision 2014/178/EU (notified under document C(2014) 7222) (Text with                                 EEA relevance) (2014/709/EU).
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 19 (Monday, January 31, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 4884]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-1714]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Reclamation


Meeting of the Yakima River Basin Conservation Advisory Group, 
Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement Project, Yakima, WA

AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: As required by the Federal Advisory Committee Act, notice is 
hereby given that the Yakima River Basin Conservation Advisory Group, 
Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement Project, Yakima, Washington, 
established by the Secretary of the Interior, will hold a public 
meeting. The purpose of the Conservation Advisory Group is to provide 
technical advice and counsel to the Secretary of the Interior and 
Washington State on the structure, implementation, and oversight of the 
Yakima River Basin Water Conservation Program.

DATES: Wednesday, February 23, 2005, 9 a.m.-4 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Bureau of Reclamation Office, 1917 Marsh Road, Yakima, 
Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. James Esget, Manager, Yakima River 
Basin Water Enhancement Project, 1917 Marsh Road, Yakima, Washington, 
98901; 509-575-5848, extension 267.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The purpose of the meeting will be to review 
the staff reports requested at the last meeting and provide program 
oversite. This meeting is open to the public.

    Dated: January 12, 2005.
James A. Esget,
Program Manager.
[FR Doc. 05-1714 Filed 1-28-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-MN-M