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

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency 

          - [FEMA-1604-DR] 

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate, Department of Homeland Security. 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Mississippi (FEMA-1604-DR), dated August 29, 2005, and related determinations. 

# EFFECTIVE DATE:

September 21, 2005. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Magda Ruiz, Recovery Division, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2705. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Acting Under Secretary for Emergency Preparedness and Response, Department of Homeland Security, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Vice Admiral Thad Allen, of the United States Coast Guard is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this declared disaster. 

This action terminates my appointment of William L. Carwile, III as Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster. 

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and Households Disaster Housing Operations; 97.050, Individuals and Households Program—Other Needs; 97.036, Public Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.) 

R. David Paulison, 

Acting Under Secretary, Emergency Preparedness and Response, Department of Homeland Security. 

[FR Doc. 05-19632 Filed 9-29-05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
LILLIE v. CARVER

421P10-7

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 7, 2017

Anne M. Middleton, Special Deputy Attorney General, Patrick Nadolski, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

Robert Alan Lillie, for Lillie, Robert Alan.

*566The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 21st of September 2017 by Petitioner to Reconsider:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 7th of December 2017."
# C_2008079EN.01000402.xml

| 29.3.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 79/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.3.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 79/4

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 14 February 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Spain

(Case C-274/06) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Article 56 EC - National provision limiting the voting rights of shareholders in undertakings in the energy sector - Limitation applicable to public bodies)

(2008/C 79/06)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: H. Stovlbæk and R. Vidal Puig, Agents, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: N. Díaz Abad, acting as the Agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Infringement of Article 56 EC — National provision which provides, in certain cases, for the limitation of voting rights in undertakings in the energy sector

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Declares that, by maintaining in force measures such as those laid down in the Supplementary Provision No 27 to Law 55/1999 of 29 December 1999 on fiscal, administrative and social measures, in the version of that provision in Article 94 of Law 62/2003 of 30 December 2003, which limits the voting rights of shares held by public bodies in Spanish undertakings operating in the energy sector, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 56 EC. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, by maintaining in force measures such as those laid down in the Supplementary Provision No 27 to Law 55/1999 of 29 December 1999 on fiscal, administrative and social measures, in the version of that provision in Article 94 of Law 62/2003 of 30 December 2003, which limits the voting rights of shares held by public bodies in Spanish undertakings operating in the energy sector, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 56 EC.

| 2. | Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 212 of 2.9.2006.

1

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

LARRY SHEROD BOONE,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 247 MAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 5th day of September, 2018, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.
In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

______________________________

No. 06-08-00056-CR

______________________________

MALCOLM GEORGE, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

 

On Appeal from the 114th Judicial District Court

 Smith County, Texas

Trial Court No. 114-2212-07

 

Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Morriss
This case has been transferred to this Court as part of the Texas Supreme Court's docket 1

equalization program.

2

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Malcolm George was assessed two thirty-five-year sentences for aggravated assaults in Smith

County based on threats to use a deadly weapon against Stephanie Veasey and her seventeen-year1

old son, Jonathan Veasey. In separate appeals, George alleges that, in both convictions, the evidence

is legally and factually insufficient to support the verdict. Since both assaults occurred during one

time period, we have discussed the facts of the cases in our opinion in cause

 number 06-08-00055-CR. We hereby incorporate that factual discussion in this opinion. 

Both cases were tried together and the points on appeal are identical. Accordingly, for the

reasons stated in George v. State, cause number 06-08-00055-CR, we resolve the issues in this

appeal in favor of the State, affirm the trial court's judgment, and reform the written sentence in this

case to conform with the oral judgment pronounced at trial: thirty-five years' confinement to run

concurrently with the sentence in cause number 06-08-00055-CR. 

Josh R. Morriss III

Chief Justice 

Date Submitted: September 29, 2008

Date Decided: October 22, 2008

Do Not Publish
No. 13-0766 – Larry Tabata, et al v. Charleston Area Medical Center, et al. 

FILED 

May 28, 2014 

released at 3:00 p.m.
 

RORY L. PERRY II, CLERK
 

SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS
 

OF WEST VIRGINIA
 

Justice Ketchum, dissenting: 

This case is a typical example of a frivolous class-action lawsuit. The named plaintiffs’ 

lawyer admitted during oral argument that discovery did not reveal that any of his client’s 

medical records or personal information was accessed or viewed by any unauthorized person. 

As soon as it was discovered the information was placed accidently on the internet it was 

removed before any unauthorized person viewed the named plaintiffs’ records. The majority 

opinion concedes that discovery reveals the named plaintiffs have suffered no injury. 

No harm, no foul. The plaintiffs lack standing to sue or represent a class of unnamed 

plaintiffs. 

Although the majority allows class certification, our law is clear that if discovery reveals 

that no unnamed member of the class has suffered harm that the trial judge should decertify the 

class action and dismiss the suit. Of course, this cannot occur until massive amounts of attorney 

fees are incurred by the defendants conducting discovery relating to more than 3,000 unnamed 

class members. 

Therefore, I dissent.
STATE of North Carolina v. Darryll Douglas CLAY

No. 96P17

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 3, 2017

*49Linda B. Weisel, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, Daniel R. Politt, Attorney at Law, for Clay, Darryll Douglas.

Zachary Padget, Associate Attorney General, Roxann L. Vaneekhoven, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the notice of appeal from the North Carolina Court of Appeals, filed by the Defendant on the 27th of March 2017 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-30, and the motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question filed by the State of NC, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the motion to dismiss the appeal is

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 3rd of May 2017."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 27th of March 2017 by Defendant 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 3rd of May 2017."
STATE of North Carolina v. Tyrone ELLIOTT, Defendant.

No. COA17-338

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: October 3, 2017

NO ERROR IN PART; DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE IN PART; DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE IN PART.
STATE of North Carolina v. Jerome James CARLTON

No. COA17-36

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: September 5, 2017

NO ERROR.
STATE of North Carolina v. John Owen JACOBS

No. 126PA17

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 8, 2017.

Paul F. Herzog, Attorney at Law, Fayetteville, for Jacobs, John Owen.

Elizabeth J. Weese, Assistant Attorney General, Jon David, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 18th of April 2017 by Defendant 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:

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 8th of June 2017."

Therefore the case is docketed as of the date of this order's certification. Briefs of the respective parties shall be submitted to this Court within the times allowed and in the manner provided by Appellate Rule 15(g)(2).
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-22-00150-CR

Rachel Leigh Drain

v.

The State of Texas

On Appeal from the

13th District Court of Navarro County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. D40709-CR

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed. The Court orders the appeal 

DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

April 28, 2022
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

February 24, 2009 

s0217 

Order 

 

February 24, 2009 

137726 & (50) 

CREDIGY RECEIVABLES, INC., 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 137726 

 COA: 280027 

Oakland CC: 2007-008597-AV 

ROBERT F. TOWNSLEY, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the motion for leave to file brief amicus curiae is 

GRANTED. The application for leave to appeal the October 16, 2008 judgment of the 

Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the 

questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-6939

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

TREVOR PLACIDO BENJAMIN,

Defendant - Appellant.

No. 00-7022

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

TREVOR PLACIDO BENJAMIN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CR96-217-DKC, CA-00-1723-DKC)

Submitted: September 21, 2000 Decided: September 29, 2000
2

Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Trevor Placido Benjamin, Appellant Pro Se. Jan Paul Miller, OFFICE

OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
* Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on

June 23, 2000, the district court’s records show that it was

entered on the docket sheet on June 26, 2000. Pursuant to Rules 58

and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date

that the order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the

effective date of the district court’s decision. See Wilson v.

Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).

3

PER CURIAM:

Trevor Placido Benjamin seeks to appeal the district court’s

orders denying his motions filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West

Supp. 2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s

opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeals on the reasoning

of the district court. See United States v. Benjamin, Nos. CR-96-

217-DKC; CA-00-1723-DKC (D. Md. June 20 & June 26, 2000).* 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
STATE of North Carolina v. Jairus Tyrone HENLEY

No. COA16-1171

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: July 5, 2017

NO ERROR.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
on Form S-3 (Nos. 333-51625 333-86509, 333-50214 and 333-33192) and Form S-8
(Nos. 33-83064, 333-03889, 333-28151, 333-58907, 333-61738, 333-78523 and
333-48220) pertaining to Targeted Genetics Corporation's 1992 Restated Stock
Option Plan, Stock Option Plan for Nonemployee Directors, 1999 Stock Option Plan
and Genovo Roll-Over Stock Option Plan, of our report dated February 14, 2002,
with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Targeted Genetics
Corporation included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended
December 31, 2001.

                                                           /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Seattle, Washington
March 18, 2002
In the MATTER OF: S.K.D.M.

No. COA17-573

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: February 6, 2018

AFFIRMED.
STATE of North Carolina, v. Richard Malton REAVES, Defendant, and Herbert Woodard, Surety.

No. COA16-1311

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: October 3, 2017

VACATED.
**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 amended Quarterly Report of Triangle Petroleum Corporation
      (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ending July 31, 2006, as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
      I, Shaun Toker, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
      18
      U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
      to my
      knowledge 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 result of operations of the Company.





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




/s/
                SHAUN TOKERShaun
                TokerChief
                Financial OfficerMarch
                6, 2008
United States Department of Labor 

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

__________________________________________ 

G.B., Appellant 

and 

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, AIR 

SYSTEMS COMMAND CENTER, 

China Lake, CA, Employer 

__________________________________________ 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket No. 15-1959 

Issued: February 11, 2016 

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se 

Office of Solicitor, for the Director 

ORDER REMANDING CASE 

Before: 

CHRISTOPHER J. GODFREY, Chief Judge 

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge 

COLLEEN DUFFY KIKO, Judge 

On September 28, 2015 appellant filed a timely appeal of a September 10, 2015 merit 

decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP) which denied his claim for 

traumatic injury. 

The Board has duly considered the matter and finds that the case is not in posture for a 

decision and must be remanded to OWCP. In the case of William A. Couch1 the Board held that 

when adjudicating a claim, OWCP is obligated to consider all evidence properly submitted by 

the claimant and received by OWCP before a final decision is issued. In this case, OWCP 

denied appellant’s claim for a traumatic injury by decision dated September 10, 2015. That 

decision found that he had failed to provide any medical evidence to support his claim. 

On September 8, 2015 however OWCP received an August 31, 2015 report from 

Dr. Mehul Taylor, a Board-certified orthopedic surgeon. The Board finds that OWCP did not 

review the medical evidence it received on September 8, 2015. The Board has held that OWCP 

must review all evidence submitted by claimant prior to the issuance of a final decision.2

 This 

 1

 41 ECAB 548 (1990). 

2 Linda Johnson, 45 ECAB 439 (1994). 
2

case is remanded to OWCP to enable it to properly consider all the evidence submitted at the 

time of its September 10, 2015 decision. 

Following such further development as OWCP deems necessary, it shall issue an 

appropriate decision on appellant’s claim. 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the September 15, 2015 Office of Workers’ 

Compensation Programs’ decision is set aside. The case is remanded for further proceedings 

consistent with the order of the Board. 

Issued: February 11, 2016 

Washington, DC 

 

 Christopher J. Godfrey, Chief Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Colleen Duffy Kiko, Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board
STATE v. Melvin Lee WHITE, Jr.

505P96-3

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 15, 2017

*877Kristin D. Parks, Attorney at Law, Richard McNeil, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for White, Melvin Lee, Jr.

L. Michael Dodd, Special Deputy Attorney General, Scott E. Thomas, District Attorney, for State of N.C.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 13th of June 2017 by Defendant for Extension of Time to File Petition for Writ of Certiorari:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 15th of June 2017."
BETTS v. ARMSTRONG, et al.

260P17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

September 28, 2017

Amy Betts, for Betts, Amy.

Tamie Jenkins-Rice, LeAnne Quattrucci, for Armstrong, Stephen Brett, et al.

Cynthia L. Van Horne, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, for Costine, Eric.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 17th of August 2017 by Respondents (Eric Costine and Edward S. (Ted) Shapack) to Dismiss Petition for Writ of Certiorari and Writ of Prohibition:

"Motion Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 28th of September 2017."
IN RE: JOHNSON

214A17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 30, 2017

Stacey Phipps, Attorney at Law, for Johnson, Belinda L., et al.

Frank V. Trainor, III, Attorney at Law, Noel L. Allen, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, Nathan Standley, Attorney at Law, for NC State Board of CPA Examiners.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 30th of June 2017 by Petitioners:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 30th of June 2017."

Petitioners shall have up to and including the 7th day of August 2017 to serve his/her proposed record upon the district attorney. The parties shall then proceed to settle and *666file the record on appeal pursuant to the provisions of Appellate Rules 11 and 12.
**Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) of 26 November 2008 – Avon Products v OHIM (ANEW ALTERNATIVE)**

**(Case T-184/07)**

Community trade mark – Application for the Community word mark ANEW ALTERNATIVE – Absolute ground for refusal – Lack of distinctive character – Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94

Community trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark – Absolute grounds for refusal – Marks devoid of any distinctive character (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 7(1)(b)) (see paras 26, 32)

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 22 March 2007 (Case R 1471/2006-2), concerning an application for registration as a Community trade mark of the word mark ANEW ALTERNATIVE. |

**Information relating to the case**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| Applicant for the Community trade mark: | Avon Products, Inc. |
| Community trade mark sought: | Word mark ANEW ALTERNATIVE for goods in Class 3 – Application No 4357919 |
| Decision of the examiner: | Registration refused |
| Decision of the Board of Appeal: | Appeal dismissed |

**Operative part**

The Court:

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

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Orders Avon Products, Inc. to pay the costs. |
<PAGE>

                                                                      Exhibit 23


                         Clark, Schaefer, Hackett & Co.
                          Certified Public Accountants



                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
Form S-8 (Registration Nos. 33-97586 and 33-97588) of Western Ohio Financial
Corporation (the "Company") of our report dated January 25, 1997, on the 1996
consolidated financial statements of the Company, which report is included in
the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1996.



                                              /s/ Clark, Schaefer, Hackett & Co.

                                              CLARK, SCHAEFER, HACKETT & CO.


Springfield, Ohio
March 26, 1997