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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-1283

JOSEPH J. SCHEPIS, JR.,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Chief

District Judge. (0:07-cv-00753-JFA)

Submitted: August 14, 2008 Decided: August 19, 2008

Before MICHAEL, Circuit Judge, and WILKINS and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joseph J. Schepis, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Joseph J. Schepis, Jr., appeals the district court’s

order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and

dismissing his petition for a writ of coram nobis. We have

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we

grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm the appeal for

the reasons stated by the district court. Schepis v. United

States, No. 0:07-cv-00753-JFA (D.S.C. Feb. 20, 2008). 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
# CE2004088EN.01046201.xml

| 8.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 88/462 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 88/462

---

(2004/C 88 E/0474)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3369/03

by Cees Bremmer (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(14 November 2003)

Subject:   Detention of EU citizen in Thailand

Subject:

Is the Commission aware of the sentencing of a European citizen, the Netherlands national Machiei Kuijt, to life imprisonment for alleged drugs dealing? Is the Commission aware that this sentence was handed down in appeal proceedings brought by the Thai Public Prosecutor after a lower Thai court had acquitted Machiei Kuijt in March 2002, and that neither the convicted man nor his counsel, Geert-Jan Knoops, has so far been allowed to see the grounds for the court's decision?

Is the Commission aware of the extremely inhumane conditions in which Machiei Kuijt has been held since 1997 in Klong Prem prison in Bangkok, where a strict regime of public corporal punishment is in force, murder and rape are everyday occurrences, water is scarce and visits by relatives have so far been permitted only twice a year?

Does the Commission agree that the above facts constitute a serious violation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (particularly Articles 10 and 14), to which Thailand has been a party since 29 January 1997?

Will the Commission at the earliest possible opportunity bring pressure to bear on the Thai authorities to seek a fair and public judicial procedure and prevent Machiei Kuijt's being held in such inhumane conditions?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(17 December 2003)

(17 December 2003)

The Commission, through its Delegation in Bangkok, has been following the case of Mr Machiei Kuijt in close liaison with the Embassy of the Netherlands in Thailand.

The Commission is aware of the recent judicial developments in this case and of the conditions of Mr Kuijt's imprisonment referred to by the Honourable Member.

The Commission does not get involved in cases of a consular nature, nor does it take a position, unless in the context of a Union démarche previously agreed with the Member States.

In the Commission's view, as indicated in its reply to written question E-2775/03 by Mr Maaten (1), the competence to intervene in Mr Kuijt's case lies primarily with the Dutch authorities.

1

The Commission would therefore suggest that the Honourable Member might wish to discuss this issue in the first place with the Dutch Government.

---

(1)  See page 114.

1

---
### C OURT OF 

### A PPEALS FOR THE



### F IRST 

### D ISTRICT OF 

### T EXAS AT 

### H OUSTON



### O RDER ON 

### M OTION



### November 7, 2008 Revision Cause number: 01

- 1 3

- 00633

- C R

Style: Rudy Matamoros, Jr.

v

. The State of Texas

Date motion filed * : February 25, 2014

Type of motion: Motion for extension of time to file reporter’s record

Party filing motion: Court reporter

Document to be filed: Reporter’s record

Is appeal accelerated? No

If motion to extend time:

Original due date: October 23 , 2013

Number of previous extensions granted: 2 Current Due date: February 14, 2014

Date Requested: March 25, 2014

Ordered that motion is:

 Granted in part, denied in part

If document is to be filed, document due: March 17 , 2014

 T he Court will not grant a dditional motions to extend time

 Denied

 Dismissed ( e.g. , want of jurisdiction, moot)

 Other: _____________________________________

The record was originally due on October 23, 2013. The court reporter’s motion for extension is granted

part and denied in part . The reporter’s record is ordered filed no later than March 17, 2014, and no

further extensions will be granted. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 35.3(c) (requiring court to ensure record is timely

filed). If the record is not filed on or before March 17, 2014, this Court may require the court reporter to

a ppear and show cause why the record has not been filed.

Judge's signature: /s/ Evelyn V. Keyes



Panel consists of

____________________________________________

Date: M a rch 6

, 2014
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 20 (Tuesday, February 1, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5194-5195]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-1839]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Mental Health; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. appendix 2), notice

[[Page 5195]]

is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Mental Health Special 
Emphasis Panel, Imaging and Mood Disorders.
    Date: February 23, 2005.
    Time: 12 p.m. to 1:30 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, Neuroscience Center, 6001 
Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852 (Telephone conference 
call).
    Contact Person: Peter J. Sheridan, PhD, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute 
of Mental Health, NIH, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Blvd., 
Room 6142, MSC 9606, Bethesda, MD 20892-9606, 301-443-1513, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f686859e93849f9297b69b979f9ad8989f9ed8919980"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5a2a29323f28333e3b1a373b333674343332743d352c">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.242, 
Mental Health Research Grants; 93.281, Scientist Development Award, 
Scientist Development Award for Clinicians, and Research Scientist 
Award; 93.282, Mental Health National Research Service Awards for 
Research Training, National Institutes of Health, HHS)


    Dated: January 26, 2005.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 05-1839 Filed 1-31-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 01-31133

Summary Calendar

 

GODFREY OKECHUKU OBIOZOR,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

WARDEN FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL 

INSTITUTION OAKDALE; UNITED

STATES OF AMERICA,

Respondents-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 01-CV-1175

- - - - - - - - - -

January 3, 2002

Before JOLLY, BARKSDALE, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

In this habeas corpus case filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 2241, Godfrey Okechuku Obiozor, federal prisoner # 59498-079,

filed a notice of appeal from an order of the district court

construing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition as a 28 U.S.C. § 2255

motion and transferring it to this court for consideration of

whether it meets the requirements for filing a successive 28

U.S.C. § 2255 motion. Obiozor has indicated that he is not

seeking to raise a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion, and he
No. 01-31133 

-2-

argues that the district court erred in construing his petition

as such. 

This court must examine the basis of its jurisdiction on its

own motion if necessary. Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th

Cir. 1987). We lack jurisdiction over the district court’s

interlocutory order. See Brinar v. Williamson, 245 F.3d 515, 518

(5th Cir. 2001). Therefore, the appeal is DISMISSED. The case

is TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the

Western District of Louisiana for consideration of Obiozor’s 28

U.S.C. § 2241 petition.

APPEAL DISMISSED; CASE TRANSFERRED TO THE DISTRICT COURT.
BEHRE DOLBEAR & COMPANY, INC.
                          Minerals Industry Consultants


1601 Blake Street                                           TEL: (303) 620-0020
Suite 301                                                   FAX: (303) 620-0024
Denver, Colorado 80202




                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ENGINEERS
                        --------------------------------


     As Independent  Engineers,  Behre Dolbear & Company, Inc. ("Behre Dolbear")
has  rendered its report  entitled  TECHNICAL  AUDIT OF THE TONKIN  SPRINGS GOLD
PROPERTY,  EUREKA  COUNTY,  NEVADA,  dated April,  1996.  Behre  Dolbear  hereby
consents to all  references  to Behre Dolbear in the Form 10- KSB for the period
ended December 31, 1996, of Gold Capital Corporation.


                                          BEHRE DOLBEAR & COMPANY, INC.




                                          By:    /s/    Bernard J. Guarrera
                                              ---------------------------------
                                          Bernard J. Guarrera, President,
                                          Chief Executive Officer, and
                                          Chief Operating Officer

Denver, Colorado
March 24, 1997








Denver    New York     Toronto    Guadalajara    Santiago     Sydney
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Interior

###### Bureau of Land Management 

          - [WY-920-1310-01; WYW157569] 

# AGENCY:

Bureau of Land Management, Interior. 

# ACTION:

Notice of proposed reinstatement of terminated oil and gas lease. 

# SUMMARY:

Under the provisions of 30 U.S.C. 188(d) and (e), and 43 CFR 3108.2-3(a) and (b)(1), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) received a petition for reinstatement of oil and gas lease WYW157569 from Rocky Mountain Land & Leasing, Inc. for lands in Hot Springs County, Wyoming. The petition was filed on time and was accompanied by all the rentals due since the date the lease terminated under the law. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Bureau of Land Management, Pamela J. Lewis, Chief, Fluid Minerals Adjudication, at (307) 775-6176. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The lessee has agreed to the amended lease terms for rentals and royalties at rates of $10.00 per acre or fraction thereof, per year and 16                    2/3                     percent, respectively. The lessee has paid the required $500 administrative fee and $166 to reimburse the Department for the cost of this                     **Federal Register**                     notice. The lessee has met all the requirements for reinstatement of the lease as set out in Section 31(d) and (e) of the Mineral Lands Leasing Act of 1920 (30 U.S.C. 188), and the Bureau of Land Management is proposing to reinstate lease WYW157569 effective April 1, 2004, under the original terms and conditions of the lease and the increased rental and royalty rates cited above. BLM has not issued a valid lease affecting the lands.                 

Pamela J. Lewis,

Chief, Fluid Minerals Adjudication.

[FR Doc. 05-18452 Filed 9-15-05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310-22-P
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-40849

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JUAN MANUEL MORENO-QUIROZ

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:07-CR-666-1

Before GARZA, CLEMENT, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

TheFederalPublic Defender appointed to represent Juan Manuel MorenoQuiroz has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Moreno-Quiroz has not filed a

response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief discloses no

nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

August 20, 2008

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2

        CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
Form S-8 No. 333-2886 pertaining to the 1985 Stock Incentive Program, the
Outside Directors' Stock Option Plan, the Employee Qualified Stock Purchase Plan
and the 1994 Stock Option Plan, Form S-8 No. 333-52037, No. 333-89275 and
No. 333-100784 pertaining to the 1994 Stock Option Plan, Form S-8 No. 333-68249
pertaining to the Employee Qualified Stock Purchase Plan, Form S-8 No. 333-49906
pertaining to the 1994 Stock Option Plan and the 2000 Nonstatutory Stock Option
Plan, Form S-8 No. 333-67624 pertaining to the 1994 Stock Option Plan and the
Employee Qualified Stock Purchase Plan, Form S-8 No. 333-102538 pertaining to
the Tavanza, Inc. 2000 Stock Incentive Plan, and Form S-8 No. 333-110164
pertaining to the 1994 Stock Option Plan and the Outside Directors' Stock Option
Plan of Celeritek, Inc. of our report dated April 25, 2003, except for Note 20,
as to which the date is June 13, 2003, with respect to the consolidated
financial statements and schedule of Celeritek, Inc. for each of the two years
in the period ended March 31, 2003 included in the 2004 Annual Report
(Form 10-K).


                                                               Ernst & Young LLP


Palo Alto, California
June 16, 2004
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Captaris, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Form 10-Q), I, Jeffrey B. deCillia, the Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as
adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) |  | The Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and
| | --- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (3) |  | The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated: August 14, 2003



/s/    JEFFREY B.
DECILLIAJeffrey B. deCilliaSenior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary
STATE of North Carolina v. Johnathan Shelton ALLEN.

No. COA15-489.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

March 15, 2016.

**Case Reported Without Published Opinion**

No Error.
IN RE A.K.

No. COA08-905.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed December 16, 2008.

Certification Date January 5, 2009.

Appeal from Wilson (06JA118, 06JA119, 06JA120, 06JA121, 08JA35).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed in part, Reversed and Remanded in part.
# C_2009032EN.01000201.xml

| 7.2.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 32/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 32/2

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 11 December 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Spain

(Case C-380/06) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Late payment in commercial transactions - Time-limit - Directive 2000/35/EC - Infringement of Article 3(1), (2) and (4))

(2009/C 32/02)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: B. Schima and S. Pardo Quintillán, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: F. Díez Moreno, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Article 3(1)(2) and (4) of Directive 2000/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 June 2000 on combating late payment in commercial transactions (OJ 2000 L 200, p. 35) — Period of 90 days for the payment of certain staple foods

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 294 of 2.12.2006.

1

---
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

August 7, 2018

No. 04

- 17

- 00596

- CV

REGENT CARE CE NTER OF SAN ANTONIO, L.P., Appellant

v.

Robert H. DETRICK and Carolyn Dart Detrick, Appellee s

From t he 285th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2015

- CI

- 19462 Honorable Richard Price, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

On August 1, 2018, appellees filed an unopposed motion requesting that we reschedule oral argument in this appeal. We GRANT appellees’ motion. Oral argument in this appeal is rescheduled for Tuesday, October 2, 2018, at 1:30 PM.

_________________________________ Irene Rios , Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 7th day of August, 2018

.

___________________________________ KEITH E. HOTTLE

, Clerk of Court
___________ No. 95-2186

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Ronald Gregory Garcia, also * Western District of Missouri. known as Anthony Degeena, also * known as Anthony Geena, also * [UNPUBLISHED] known as Vincent Vereli, also * known as Eric V. Variel, * * Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: February 7, 1996 Filed: March 25, 1996

___________ Before BEAM, LOKEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM.
Ronald Gr egory Garcia pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting (1) the pos sessionof cocaine with intent to distribute, and (2) the use of a firearm during and in relation to a drug traffic king offense, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B), and 18 U.S.C. §§ 2 and 924(c)(1)
. While Garcia's appeal was pending, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Bailey v. United States , 116 S. Ct. 501 (1995), defining the "use" pron g of § 924(c)(1), and Garcia then filed a supplemental brief arguing that hi s guilty plea to the firearm count was not volunta ry and intelligent because it was based upon the Eighth Circuit's prior, in consistent construction of § 924(c)(1). Because the government has now conceded that "the gun count should be reversed in this case," we vacate Garcia's guilty plea and reman d for further proceedings. We

### -2-

have not considered a nd take no position regarding whether the government on remand may amend Count Two of the indictment.
Accordin gly, the judgment of the district court is vacated and th e case remanded.
A true copy.

Attest:
CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
# C_2008092EN.01000401.xml

| 12.4.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 92/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.4.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 92/4

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 21 February 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v French Republic

(Case C-201/06) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Plant protection products - Parallel imports - Marketing authorisation procedure - Conditions - Common origin of a plant protection product imported in parallel and the reference product)

(2008/C 92/05)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: B. Stromsky, acting as Agent)

Applicant:

Defendant: French Republic (represented by: G. de Bergues and R. Loosli-Surrans, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the defendant: Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by H.G. Sevenster, acting as Agent)

Intervener in support of the defendant:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Article 28 EC — Requirement that a plant protection product imported in parallel and a reference product have a common origin

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs;

| 3. | Orders the Kingdom of the Netherlands to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Kingdom of the Netherlands to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 165, 15.7.2006.

1

---