alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Official Journal C 254A/19 J

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 254A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6619 July 2023 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 254A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6619 July 2023

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | V   Announcements |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | Court of Justice |
| 2023/C 254 A/01 | Notice of open competition on the basis of qualifications and tests No CJ 238/21 – Head of Unit (AD 12) of the Irish language in the field of legal translation | 1 |

Contents

page

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

Court of Justice

2023/C 254 A/01

Notice of open competition on the basis of qualifications and tests No CJ 238/21 – Head of Unit (AD 12) of the Irish language in the field of legal translation

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
STATE v. Ailkeem Anthony NORMAN

153P17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 17, 2017

Ben G. Irons, II, Attorney at Law, Greenville, for Norman, Ailkeem Anthony.

*55Douglas W. Corkhill, Assistant Attorney General, Seth H. Edwards, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 17th of May 2017 by State of NC for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 17th of May 2017."
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.                  

###### National Aeronautics and Space Administration

          - [Notice 05-145] 

# AGENCY:

National Aeronautics and Space Administration. 

# ACTION:

Notice of prospective patent license. 

# SUMMARY:

NASA hereby gives notice that United Aerospace, Inc., of New York, New York, has applied for an exclusive license to practice the invention disclosed in U.S. Patent No. 6,186,693 entitled PASSIVE CAPTURE JOINT WITH THREE DEGREES OF FREEDOM and assigned to the United States of America as represented by the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Written objections to the prospective grant of a license should be sent to Mr. Jerry L. Seemann, Chief Patent Counsel/LS01, Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL 35812. NASA has not yet made a determination to grant the requested license and may deny the requested license even if no objections are submitted within the comment period. 

# DATES:

Responses to this notice must be received by October 13, 2005. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sammy A. Nabors, Technology Transfer Department/ED03, Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL 35812, (256) 544-5226. 

Dated: September 16, 2005. 

Keith T. Sefton, 

Deputy General Counsel (Admin & Mgmt). 

[FR Doc. 05-19376 Filed 9-27-05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7510-13-P
#### Christopher HALL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 5D02-3373.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

July 22, 2003.

James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Allison Havens, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Christopher Hall, Wewahitchka, pro se.

Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Allison Leigh Morris, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. *State v. Causey,*503 So.2d 321 (Fla.1987).

SHARP, W., PALMER and TORPY, JJ., concur.
#### Vernon L. JORDAN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D01-3547.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Sept. 3, 2003.

Vernon L. Jordan, in proper person.

Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, and Fredericka Sands, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before COPE, GERSTEN, and GREEN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Vernon Jordan (“defendant”) appeals an order resentencing him, on the ground that he was sentenced without counsel present. The state properly concedes that the resentencing of the defendant without the benefit of counsel was error. *See Spivey v. State,*829 So.2d 386 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); *Smith v. State,*820 So.2d 1052 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002).

*559Accordingly, we remand this case for resentencing, at which time the defendant will present and represented by the Public Defender.

Reversed and remanded for resentenc-ing.
ESTATE OF Taylor A. PEYTON, BY AND THROUGH Administrator John PEYTON, and John Peyton, Individually v. N.C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

John Peyton, as Guardian Ad Litem for John Peyton, II, and John Peyton, Individually v. N.C. Department of Transportation

No. 410P17

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 1, 2018

David J. Ventura, Attorney at Law, Greensboro, for Peyton, Taylor A. (Estate of), et al.

Donna B. Wojcik, Assistant Attorney General, for NC Department Of Transportation.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 5th of December 2017 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 1st of March 2018."

Jackson, J. recused
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Jackson Hewitt Tax Service Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended October 31,
2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Michael D. Lister, as President and 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, to the best of 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 results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/ Michael D. Lister                
|Michael D. Lister                    
|President and Chief Executive Officer
|December 13, 2005
State v. Donna Helms Ledbetter

402PA15-2

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 22, 2016

Ms. Meghan AdelleJones, Attorney at Law, For Ledbetter, Donna Helms.

*528Ms. Ashleigh P. Dunston, Mr. Christopher W. Brooks, Assistant Attorney Generals, Ms. Brandy Cook, District Attorney, For State of North Carolina.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 22nd of December 2016 by Defendant for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 22nd of December 2016."
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM ABR
INFORMATION SERVICES, INC. AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
1998 FORM 10-K.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                      54,427,446
<SECURITIES>                                85,912,690
<RECEIVABLES>                               13,102,473
<ALLOWANCES>                                 2,582,277
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           156,024,886
<PP&E>                                      47,713,155
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             273,130,547
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       33,854,880
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       286,956
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               273,130,547
<SALES>                                     74,592,273
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                       42,386,859
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            13,909,617
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             15,466,758
<INCOME-TAX>                                 8,800,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 6,726,758
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .24
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .24
        

</TABLE>
* 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. 00-41487

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JOSE ANTONIO RAMIREZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. M-00-CR-409-1

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

December 12, 2001

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jose

Antonio Ramirez moves for leave to withdraw as appointed counsel

pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Ramirez

has filed a response. 

In his response, Ramirez raises the following issues: 

1) the indictment is insufficient because it failed to charge

every element of the 8 U.S.C. § 1326 offense; 2) the indictment

is insufficient because it fails to allege Ramirez’s prior felony

conviction; 3) Ramirez was not provided access to his country’s
No. 00-41487

-2-

consul pursuant to the Vienna Convention; 4) Ramirez did not

receive an adjustment to his sentence for his acceptance of

responsibility; and 5) the court erred by not departing downward

from the guideline range.

Our independent review of the appellate record and of the

possible issues raised by counsel and by Ramirez reveals no

nonfrivolous issue. 

The 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.
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 Transportation

###### Maritine Administration

          - [Docket No: MARAD 2005-22519] 

# AGENCY:

Maritime Administration, Department of Transportation. 

# ACTION:

Notice of the availability of a Draft Environmental Assessment.

# SUMMARY:

The purpose of this Notice is to make available for public review and comment the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the Port of Anchorage, Cherry Hill Gravel Extraction Project (Project). The DEA analyzes the potential impacts on the natural and manmade environment associated with gravel extraction from Elmendorf Air Force Base to be used as fill for the Port of Anchorage Intermodal Expansion. 

# DATES:

Comments on this DEA must be received by October 28, 2005. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Daniel E. Yuska, Jr., Environmental Protection Specialist, Office of Environmental Activities, U.S. Maritime Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590; telephone (202) 366-0714, fax (202) 366-6988. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Comments may be submitted by mail to the Docket Clerk, U.S. DOT Dockets, Room PL-401, Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh St., SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001. Written comments should refer to docket number MARAD 2005—22519. All comments will become part of this docket and will be available for inspection and copying at the above address between 10 a.m. and 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays. An electronic version of this document and all documents entered into this docket are available at                     *http://dms.dot.gov*. No comments will be accepted after October 28, 2005. In addition, copies of the DEA are                           ( print page 56769)                        available for public viewing on the Port of Anchorage Web site (                    *www.portofanchorage.org*) or at the Loussac Library in Anchorage.                 

(Authority: 49 CFR 1.66) 

By order of the Maritime Administrator. 

Dated: September 22, 2005. 

Joel C. Richard, 

Secretary, Maritime Administration. 

[FR Doc. 05-19288 Filed 9-27-05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910-81-P
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18
- 1737

JOHN YAW ANDOH , Beneficiary of a visa petition filed by Denise Ann Johnson, Appellant

.

---------------------------------------- DENISE ANN JOHNSON , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. WILLIAM P. BARR , Attorney General; KIRSTJEN M. NIELSEN, Secretary of the United States Department of Homeland Security; L. FRANCIS CISSNA, Director of the Unite d States Citizenship and Immigration Services; CONRAD ZARAGOZA, USCIS Baltimore Field Director, Defendants

- Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Baltimore

. Richard D. Bennett , District Judge. ( 1:15

- cv - 03317

- RDB )

Submitted : February 14, 2019 Decided: March 7, 2019

Before KEENAN, WYNN, and RICHARDSON , Circuit Judges.
Affirmed in part, dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion

.2 Steven Kreiss, Washington, D.C., for Appellants. Joseph H. Hunt, Assistant Attorney General, William C. Peachey, Director, J. Max Weintraub, Senior Litigation Counsel, C. Frederick Sheffield, Trial Attorney, O ffice of Immigration Litigation, Civil Divisio n, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.3 PER CURIAM: Denise Ann Johnson and John Yaw Andoh appeal the district court’s order granting summary judgment to t he Defendants and dismissing their complaint brought under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 701

- 706 (2012). We affirm in part and dismiss in part. We review an order granting summary judgment de novo. Roland v. USCIS , 850 F.3d 625, 62 8 (4th Cir. 2017). We are required “to apply the same legal standards the district court applied” in reaching its decision. Perez v. Cissna , 914 F.3d 846, 851 (4th Ci r. 2019). Summary judgment is appropriate when “there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). Insofar as Johnson and Andoh seek review of the United States Citize nship and Immigration Services’ decision denying Johnson’s I

- 130 visa petition and the Board of Immigration Appeals ’ (Board) order denying the motion to reopen, we have reviewed the record and affirm for the reasons cited by the district court. Johnson v. Sessions , No. 1:15

- cv - 03317

- RDB (D. Md. June 8, 2018). We dismiss the appeal from the Board ’s order dismissing the appeal because the Appellants fail to challenge the Board’s conclusion that it lacked jurisdiction. See Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(8)(A) ; Brown v. Nucor Corp. , 785 F.3d 895, 918 (4th Cir. 2015) ( “F ailure of a party in its opening brief to challenge an alternate ground for a district court’s ruling waives that challenge

. ” (alteration and internal quotation marks omitted)).4 Accordingly, we af firm in part and dismiss in part. 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 IN PART, DISMISSED IN PART
May 15, 2014

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

MOON SUN (CASEY) KANG, KATHLEEN (KATIE) LEE, and SANG PIL 

(SCOTT) LEE, Appellants

NO. 14-13-00086-CV V.

NO. 14-13-00088-CV

BRUCE W. DERRICK, Appellee

________________________________

These causes, appeals from the final judgment in favor of appellee, Bruce 

W. Derrick, signed November 27, 2012, were heard on the transcript of the record. 

We have inspected the record and find no error in the judgment. We order the 

judgment of the court below AFFIRMED.

We order appellants, Moon Sun (Casey) Kang, Kathleen (Katie) Lee, and 

Sang Pil (Scott) Lee, jointly and severally, to pay all costs incurred in this appeal. 

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
**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 Eternal Energy Corp. on Form 10-Q for
      the period ending September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
      Commission on the date hereof, I, Bradley M. Colby, President and Chief
      Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,
      as
      adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
      that:





1.
      The
      Report 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.




November
      7, 2008




*/s/
                Bradley M. Colby*Bradley
                M. Colby,President
                and Chief Executive Officer




A
        signed
        original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
        authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
        in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement has
        been
        provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished
        to the
        Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
STATE of North Carolina v. Kathryn Elizabeth ROLLAND

No. 316P17

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 7, 2018

Laura M. Cobb, Paul A. Tharp, Attorneys at Law, Charlotte, for Rolland, Kathryn

Joseph L. Hyde, Assistant Attorney General, R. Andrew Murray, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina *105***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the notice of appeal from the North Carolina Court of Appeals, filed by the Defendant on the 19th of September 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 7th of June 2018."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 19th of September 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 7th of June 2018."
#### Jonathan NEWMAN, Appellant, v. Richard CLARK d/b/a Richards Vending Company, Appellee.

No. 05-02-01884-CV.

Court of Appeals of Texas, Dallas.

Aug. 19, 2003.

*623Jonathan Newman, Dallas, pro se.

John V. Fundís, Downs & Stanford, P.C., Dallas, for appellee.

Before Justices JAMES, FRANCIS, and LANG.

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Appellant filed his original one-page brief with the Court on May 9, 2003. Thereafter the Clerk of this Court reviewed the brief and, in a letter dated May 14, 2003, notified appellant that his brief was deficient in the requirements of appellate rule 38.1. Appellant was instructed to amend his deficient brief within ten days. Appellant did not respond. In a letter dated July 2, 2003, appellant was instructed to file the amended brief, correcting all the deficiencies outlined in the Court’s May 14, 2003 letter, within ten days. Appellant was instructed that failure to correct the deficiencies would result in appellant’s brief being struck for noncompliance with the appellate rules and his appeal would be dismissed for want of prosecution without further notice.

Appellant did not timely file an amended brief within ten days. However on July 18, 2008, the Court received appellant’s two and a half page “supplement to appellant’s brief.” Such “supplement” consists of a list of references to the record supporting the “arguments” in appellant’s brief. Appellant’s untimely “supplement” does not correct the deficiencies of his brief.

Accordingly, we STRIKE appellant’s defective brief filed with this Court on May 9, 2003. *See*Tex.R.App. P. 38.9(a). We DISMISS this appeal for want of prosecution, for appellant’s failure to comply with the appellate rules, and for appellant’s failure to respond to a notice from the Clerk requiring action within a specified time. *See*Tex.R.App. P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b), (c).
#### OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner v. Arthur S. ALEXION, Respondent.

No. 841 Disciplinary Docket No. 3.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

June 11, 2003.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 11th day of June, 2003, there having been filed with this Court by Arthur S. Alexion his verified Statement of Resignation dated April 3, 2003, stating that he desires to resign from the Bar of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in accordance with the provisions of Rule 215, Pa.R.D.E., it is

ORDERED that the resignation of Arthur S. Alexion be and it is hereby accepted and he is DISBARRED ON CONSENT from the Bar of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; and it is further ORDERED that he shall comply with the provisions of Rule 217, Pa.R.D.E. Respondent shall pay costs, if any, to the Disciplinary Board pursuant to Rule 208(g), Pa.R.D.E.