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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-6454

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

LEWIS BANKS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Florence. C. Weston Houck, Chief District

Judge. (CR-91-567)

Submitted: October 8, 1998 Decided: October 26, 1998

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lewis Banks, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Hayden Bickerton, Assistant

United States Attorney, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Lewis Banks appeals from a district court order denying his

motion to file a motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp.

1998), out of time. Banks’ conviction became final in 1994, and he

did not file the motion denied by the district court until February

17, 1998. Under the grace period afforded to prisoners whose convictions became final prior to the effective date of the one-year

limitations period imposed by the 1996 amendments to § 2255, Banks

had until April 23, 1997, to file a § 2255 motion. See Brown v.

Angelone, 150 F.3d 370 (4th Cir. 1998). Hence, the district court

properly found that Banks cannot now file a timely § 2255 motion.

Banks argues on appeal that the one-year limitation should not

apply to him because, as a Spanish speaking inmate, he had no way

of learning of the amendments to § 2255 because his institution

only provides law books written in English. There is no requirement, however, that prisoners be personally notified, in English or

any other language, of changes in the law which might effect them.

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the

appeal. 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
Exhibit 32

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 Annual Report of Telos Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ending
December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the report), I, John B. Wood, Chief Executive Officer of the Company and I, Michele Nakazawa, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) to
my knowledge, 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.



Date: May 22, 2006/s/ John B. WoodJohn B. WoodChief Executive OfficerDate: May 22, 2006/s/ Michele NakazawaMichele NakazawaChief Financial Officer
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5384 

To require air carriers to refund passenger baggage fees if such baggage 

is lost, delayed, or damaged, and require air carriers and ticket agents 

to include the actual cost of checked baggage when quoting an airfare. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 25, 2010 

Mr. CAPUANO (for himself, Mr. BACA, Ms. RICHARDSON, Mr. DOYLE, Ms. 

MOORE of Wisconsin, Mr. RUPPERSBERGER, Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of 

California, Ms. MCCOLLUM, Mr. BRADY of Pennsylvania, Mr. GRAYSON, 

Mr. BLUMENAUER, Mr. JACKSON of Illinois, Mr. SHULER, Ms. PINGREE

of Maine, Ms. GIFFORDS, Ms. HARMAN, Mr. RODRIGUEZ, Mrs. 

MALONEY, Mrs. CHRISTENSEN, Mr. DEFAZIO, Mr. MCGOVERN, Mr. 

KAGEN, Mr. COHEN, Mr. GRIJALVA, Ms. NORTON, and Mr. STUPAK) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 

Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To require air carriers to refund passenger baggage fees 

if such baggage is lost, delayed, or damaged, and require 

air carriers and ticket agents to include the actual cost 

of checked baggage when quoting an airfare. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Baggage Fee Fairness 

5 Act of 2010’’. 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5384 IH

1 SEC. 2. BAGGAGE FEE REFUNDS. 

2 Not later than 30 days after arrival of a passenger 

3 flight in which a piece of baggage is lost, delayed, or dam4 aged, the air carrier for such flight shall refund to a pas5 senger any baggage fee collected. For purposes of this sec6 tion, the term ‘‘delayed’’ means baggage that is not on 

7 the conveyor belt or held by the air carrier for retrieval 

8 by the passenger one hour after arrival of the flight at 

9 such passenger’s final destination. 

10 SEC. 3. NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS REGARDING THE 

11 SALE OF AIRLINE TICKETS. 

12 Section 41712 of title 49, United States Code, is 

13 amended by adding at the end the following: 

14 ‘‘(c) NOTICE OF FEES.—It shall be an unfair or de15 ceptive practice under subsection (a) for an air carrier, 

16 foreign air carrier, or ticket agent to sell a ticket for air 

17 transportation, including sale on the Internet or over the 

18 phone, to fail, before the sale of the ticket, to ask a poten19 tial ticket purchaser if such purchaser has one or more 

20 pieces of baggage to check and to inform the potential pur21 chaser of the cost of checking each piece of baggage. In 

22 the case of a sale of such a ticket on the Internet, the 

23 seller may provide an opportunity for a purchaser to indi24 cate the number of bags when selecting other flight and 

25 airport information.’’. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Appellant,

v.

RANDAL DEAN RATLEDGE

,

Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 1 3

- 5718

____ _________________________/

Opinion filed February 13, 2015.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County

. James H. Daniel , Judge.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Trisha Meggs Pate, A ssistant A ttorney
G eneral , Giselle Denise Lylen, A ssistant A tto rney G eneral , Tallahassee, and Brittany Rose Mauerberger, Assistant State Attorney

, Jacksonville, for Appellant

.

Wm. J. Sheppard, Elizabeth L. White, Matthew R. Kachergus, Bryan E. DeMaggio of Sheppard, White, Kachergus & Demaggio, P.A., Jacksonville

, fo r Appellee

.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

BENTON, CLARK, and ROWE, JJ., CONCUR.
#### NORTON v. SAWYER

No. 64 PC.

Case below: 30 N.C. App. 420.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 4 November 1976.
<PAGE>

Exhibit 99.4


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                              18 USC. SECTION 1350
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Quarterly Report of American Banknote Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2004, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Patrick J. Gentile, Executive Vice President Finance and Chief Financial Officer
of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 USC. 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 result of operations of the Company.


                                            /s/ Patrick J. Gentile
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Patrick J. Gentile
                                            Executive Vice President Finance and
                                            Chief Financial Officer


Date: November 15, 2004
#### Patricia Kane *v.*James D. Parry

(14607)

Peters, C. J., Borden, Berdon, Palmer and Santaniello, Js.

Argued March 25

decision released August 3, 1993

*818
      *Philip M. French,*with whom was *Patricia Kane,*for the appellant (plaintiff).

*Sperry A. DeCew,*for the appellee (defendant).

Per Curiam.

After examining the record on appeal and after considering the briefs and arguments of the parties, we have concluded that the appeal in this case should be dismissed on the ground that certification was improvidently granted.

The appeal is dismissed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
UNAUDITED CONDENSED STATEMENTS OF ASSETS, LIABILITIES AND TRUST CORPUS OF SAN
JUAN BASIN ROYALTY TRUST AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1996, AND THE RELATED CONDENSED
STATEMENTS OF DISTRIBUTABLE INCOME AND CHANGES IN TRUST CORPUS FOR THE TWELVE-
MONTH PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                       3,127,828
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,127,828
<PP&E>                                     133,275,528
<DEPRECIATION>                              70,467,380
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              65,935,976
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,127,828
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  62,808,148
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                65,935,976
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            41,312,770
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,509,603
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             37,803,167
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         37,803,167
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                37,803,167
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 212 (Thursday, November 3, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 66902]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-21923]



[[Page 66902]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

October 28, 2005.
    The Department of the Treasury has submitted the following public 
information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Copies of 
the submission(s) may be obtained by calling the Treasury Bureau 
Clearance Officer listed. Comments regarding this information 
collection should be addressed to the OMB reviewer listed and to the 
Treasury Department Clearance Officer, Department of the Treasury, Room 
11000, 1750 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220.

DATES: Written comments should be received on or before December 5, 
2005, to be assured of consideration.

Internal Revenue Service (IRS)

    OMB Number: 1545-1537.
    Type of Review: Extension.
    Title: REG-253578-96(NPRM) Health Insurance Portability for Group 
Plans; (Temporary) Interim Rules for Health Insurance Portability for 
Group Health Plans.
    Description: The regulations provide guidance for group health 
plans and the employers maintaining them regarding requirements imposed 
on plans relating to preexisting condition exclusions, discrimination 
based on health status, and access to coverage.
    Respondents: Business or other for-profit, Not-for-profit 
institutions, State, local or tribal.
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 262,289 hours.
    Clearance Officer: Glenn P. Kirkland, (202) 622-3428, Internal 
Revenue Service, Room 6516, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, 
DC 20224.
    OMB Reviewer: Alexander T. Hunt, (202) 395-7316, Office of 
Management and Budget, Room 10235, New Executive Office Building, 
Washington, DC 20503.

Michael A. Robinson,
Treasury PRA Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. 05-21923 Filed 11-2-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
Document

                                                

                                                Exhibit 10.18


FULTON FINANCIAL CORPORATION
NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTOR COMPENSATION OVERVIEW
EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2022


The following is a description of non-employee director (“Director”) compensation for Fulton Financial Corporation (“Fulton”), effective as of January 1, 2022.


Fulton pays cash fees to each Director on a quarterly basis as follows:


•$70,000 annual cash retainer for all Directors.


•$30,000 additional annual cash retainer for the Lead Director.


•$12,500 additional annual cash retainer for the Chair of all standing committees (Audit, Executive, Human Resources, Nominating and Corporate Governance, and Risk), except that if the Lead Director is also serving as chair of the Executive Committee, no cash retainer shall be paid for service as Chair of the Executive Committee.


•No additional fees will be paid to a Director for attending a Board meeting or a standing committee meeting.


•Directors who also serve on the Fulton Bank, N.A. Board of Directors shall not receive any additional cash fees or equity awards for service on the Fulton Bank, N.A. Board of Directors.


Each Director is granted an annual equity-based retainer award as follows:


•All equity-based awards are made under Fulton’s Amended and Restated Directors’ Equity Participation Plan, as amended (the “Plan”)


•Directors elected at Fulton’s Annual Meeting of shareholders shall be granted, as of the first of the month immediately following the meeting, under the Plan, an award of Director Restricted Stock Units (“DSU”) having an award value of $70,000, or such other value as determined by the Board


•A Director who joins the Board effective as of any other date shall be granted, as of such other date, a DSU award based on the award value of the most recent annual grant prorated to reflect the number of months (rounded up to the next whole month) remaining until the next Annual Meeting of shareholders.


•The number of shares of common stock underlying a DSU award shall be determined by dividing the award value by the closing price of Fulton common stock on the principal stock exchange on the date of grant (rounded up to the nearest whole share).


•Each equity-based grant will vest and be paid based on twelve months of service or in accordance with such other vesting schedule as determined by the Board, unless a Director has properly elected to defer payment and receipt of the common stock shares underlying such DSU award until they retire from Fulton’s Board.


Directors are also entitled to reimbursement of costs and expenses incurred in connection with attending Fulton meetings and educational conferences. Directors receive a company paid $50,000.00 term life insurance policy, with the benefit payable upon death.
#### Samuel Pollock, Appellant, *v.*Central Fish Company, Respondent.

*Pollock*v. *Central Fish Co.,*173 App. Div. 967, affirmed.

(Argued October 14, 1918;

decided October 29, 1918.)

Appeal, by permission, from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered May 19, 1916, unanimously affirming a judgment in favor of defendant, entered upon a verdict. The action was by an employee, under a written contract, for damages for wrongful discharge. The defense admitted the contract and the discharge, and relied solely upon justification owing to plaintiff’s alleged misconduct.

*Abraham H. Sarasohn*for appellant.

*Anson Beard*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Chase, Hogan, Cardozo, Pound; McLaughlin and Andrews, JJ.
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 Justice

###### Bureau of Prisons 

# AGENCY:

Bureau of Prisons, Justice. 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

The fee to cover the average cost of incarceration for Federal inmates in 2004 was $23,267. 

# EFFECTIVE DATE:

November 3, 2005. 

# ADDRESSES:

Office of General Counsel, Federal Bureau of Prisons, 320 First St., NW., Washington, DC 20534. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sarah Qureshi, (202) 307-2105. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

28 CFR part 505 allows for assessment and collection of a fee to cover the average cost of incarceration for Federal inmates. We calculate this fee by dividing the number representing Bureau facilities' monetary obligation                           ( print page 66854)                        (excluding activation costs) by the number of inmate-days incurred for the preceding fiscal year, and then by multiplying the quotient by 365.                 

Under § 505.2, the Director of the Bureau of Prisons determined that, based upon fiscal year 2004 data, the fee to cover the average cost of incarceration for Federal inmates in 2004 was $23,267. 

Harley G. Lappin, 

Director, Bureau of Prisons. 

[FR Doc. 05-21965 Filed 11-2-05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410-05-P
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

B.L., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, DETROIT NETWORK 

DISTRIBUTION CENTER, Detroit, MI, 

Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 22-0878

Issued: June 3, 2022

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Before:

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

On May 17, 2022 appellant filed an appeal from a December 17, 2020 nonmerit decision of the 

Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). The Clerk of the Appellate Boards

assigned Docket No. 22-0878.

The Board has duly considered the matter and notes that the Board has jurisdiction to review 

final adverse decisions of OWCP issued under the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act.1 For 

final adverse decisions of OWCP issued on or after November 19, 2008, the Board’s review 

authority is limited to appeals which are filed within 180 days from the date of issuance of OWCP’s 

decision.2

The 180th day following the December 17, 2020 decision was June 15, 2021. As appellant did 

not file an appeal with the Board until May 17, 2022, more than 180 days after the December 17, 

2020 OWCP decision, the Board finds that the appeal docketed as No. 22-0878 is untimely filed. 

The Board is without jurisdiction to review the appeal. Appellant has not offered a reason to 

1

5 U.S.C. § 8149; 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3(a) (2009).

2

Id. at § 501.3(e).
2

explain the failure to timely file an appeal with supporting documentation sufficient to establish 

compelling circumstances. Because there is no final adverse decision issued by OWCP within 180 

days of the filing of the instant appeal, the Board concludes that the appeal docketed as No. 22 -

0878, must be dismissed.3 Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the appeal docketed as No. 22-0878 is dismissed.

Issued: June 3, 2022

Washington, DC

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge

Employees' Compensation Appeals Board

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees' Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees' Compensation Appeals Board

3 The Board’s decisions and orders are “final upon the expiration of 30 days from the date of their issuance.” 20 

C.F.R. § 501.6(d).
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**Written Statement of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer**

**Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350**

 

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, we, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Alliant Energy Corporation (the “Company”), hereby certify, based on our knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended June 30, 2008 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 

/s/ William D. Harvey

William D. Harvey

Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer

 

/s/ Eliot G. Protsch

Eliot G. Protsch

Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

 

August 6, 2008