alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 205 (Tuesday, October 25, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 61697]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-21314]


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

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS


Special Medical Advisory Group; Notice of Meeting

    The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) gives notice under Public 
Law 92-463 (Federal Advisory Committee Act) that the Special Medical 
Advisory Group will meet on Wednesday, November 16, 2005. The meeting 
will be held in Room 830 at VA Central Office, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., 
Washington, DC. The meeting is open to the public.
    The purpose of the Group is to advise the Secretary of Veterans 
Affairs and the under Secretary for Health on the care and treatment of 
disabled veterans, and other matters pertinent to the Department's 
Veterans Health Administration. The agenda for the meeting will include 
discussions on VA's role in national disaster relief, national response 
to influenza pandemic, information technology reorganization, budget, 
and the impact of obesity and diabetes on the military and veterans 
populations.
    Any member of the public wishing to attend should contact Ms. 
Juanita Leslie, Office of Administrative Operations (10B2), Veterans 
Health Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs at (202) 273-
5882. No time will be set aside at this meeting for receiving oral 
presentations from the public. Statements, in written form, may be 
submitted to Juanita Leslie before the meeting or within 10 days after 
the meeting.

    Dated: October 17, 2005.

    By Direction of the Secretary.
E. Philip Riggin,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 05-21314 Filed 10-24-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320-01-M
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.                  

###### Commission on Civil Rights

Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, that a conference call of the Rhode Island Advisory Committee will convene at 10 a.m. and adjourn at 11 a.m. on Tuesday, November 15, 2005. The purpose of the conference call is to recap real estate foreclosure “rescue” scams briefing, discuss achievement gap in elementary and secondary schools in Rhode Island, and plan projects.

This conference call is available to the public through the following call-in number: 1-800-473-8692, access code number: 45678870. Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. Callers can expect to incur charges for calls not initiated using the supplied call-in number or over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls using the call-in number over land-line connections. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-977-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and access code number.

To ensure that the Commission secures an appropriate number of lines for the public, persons are asked to register by contacting Barbara de La Viez of the Eastern Regional Office, 202-376-7533 (TTY 202-375-8116), by 4 p.m. on Monday, November 14, 2005.

The meeting will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the Commission.

      ( print page 69512)    
Dated at Washington, DC, November 4, 2005.

Barbara De La Viez,

Civil Rights Analyst, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.

[FR Doc. 05-22655 Filed 11-15-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
#### STATE v. FOWLER

No. 105 PC.

Case below: 1 N.C. App. 438.

Petition for writ of *certiorari*to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 3 February 1970.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 95-20737

Conference Calendar

__________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

FORTUNATUS BOMA WILCOX,

 Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. CR-H-95-0091

- - - - - - - - - -

June 26, 1996

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Fortunatus Boma Wilcox appeals from his sentence following

his convictions for one count of conspiracy to commit interstate

transportation of stolen property, four counts of interstate

transportation of stolen property and aiding and abetting, and

one count of possession of stolen mail and aiding and abetting. 

Wilcox argues that the district court erred by refusing to grant
No. 95-20737

-2-

him a three-level reduction for acceptance of responsibility

pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1 and that the Government breached the

plea agreement by releasing information that Wilcox was

cooperating with the Government. Based upon the testimony

presented at the sentencing hearing, we conclude that the

district court did not clearly err by refusing to grant Wilcox a

reduction for acceptance of responsibility. Further, Wilcox's

guilty plea was not entered pursuant to the terms of a plea

agreement; rather, Wilcox pleaded guilty after the initial plea

agreement between Wilcox and the Government had been withdrawn. 

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

AFFIRMED.
Case 2:05-cv-09559-VM-HBP Document 18 Filed 05/15/2006 Page 1 of 3Case 2:05-cv-09559-VM-HBP Document 18 Filed 05/15/2006 Page 2 of 3Case 2:05-cv-09559-VM-HBP Document 18 Filed 05/15/2006 Page 3 of 3
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

W.H., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE,

Newport News, VA, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 23-0724

Issued: June 2, 2023

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Before:

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

JAMES D. McGINLEY, Alternate Judge

On April 17, 2023 appellant filed an appeal from a May 18, 2022 merit decision of the 

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

assigned Docket No. 23-0724.

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 May 18, 2022 decision was November 14, 2022. As 

appellant did not file an appeal with the Board until April 17, 2023, more than 180 days after the

May 18, 2022 OWCP decision, the Board finds that the appeal docketed as No. 23-0724 is 

untimely filed. The Board is without jurisdiction to review the appeal. Appellant has not 

explained her failure to timely file an appeal with supporting documentation sufficient to 

1

5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.; 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3(a).

2

20 C.F.R. § 501.3(e) provides in pertinent part: “Any notice of appeal must be filed within 180 days from the 

date of issuance of a decision of the OWCP.”
2

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. 23-0724, must be dismissed.3 Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the appeal docketed as No. 23-0724 is dismissed.

Issued: June 2, 2023

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

James D. McGinley, 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.” Id.

at § 501.6(d).
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,

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

Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, as Chief Executive Officer of Norcraft Holdings, L.P. and Norcraft Companies, L.P. (together, the Company), does hereby certify that to the
undersigneds knowledge:

1) the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2006 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
Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2006 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                   |  |                                      
|------------------ |  | -------------------------------------
|Date: May 15, 2006 |  | /s/ Mark Buller                      
|                   |  | Mark Buller  Chief Executive Officer

A signed original of this written statement, required by Section 906, has been provided to Norcraft Holdings,
L.P. and Norcraft Companies, L.P. and will be retained by Norcraft Holdings, L.P. and Norcraft Companies, L.P. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### STATE v. ALSTON

No. 84 PC.

Case below: 6 N.C. App. 200.

Petition for writ of *certiorari*to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 2 December 1969.
**Exhibit32.1**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection withthe Quarterly Report of K-tel International, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the period ended September 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Philip Kives,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1.               The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

2.               The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

A signed originalof this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to theCompany and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request.
| By                                   |   /s/  PHILIP KIVES |   |
|--------------------------------------|-------------------------------|--------|
| Philip Kives                         |
| *Chairman, Chief Executive Officer,* |
| *President and Director*             |
| November 22, 2006                    |

 

----
EXHIBIT 31.1
                           SECTION 302 CERTIFICATIONS

I, Michael Sheriff, certify that:

1. I have  reviewed  this  quarterly  report  on  form  10-QSB  of The  X-Change
Corporation,

2.Based on my knowledge,  this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact  necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the  circumstances  under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.

3.Based  on  my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,   and  other  financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition,  results of operations and cash flows of the small business
issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.

4.The small business  issuer's other  certifying  officers and I are responsible
for establishing and maintaining  disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
in exchange act rules  13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the small business issuer and
have:

a)designed  such disclosure  controls and procedures,  or caused such disclosure
controls and  procedures to be designed  under our  supervision,  to ensure that
material  information  relating  to the small  business  issuer,  including  its
consolidated subsidiaries,  is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b)evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure controls
and  procedures  and  presented  in  this  report  our  conclusions   about  the
effectiveness  of the disclosure  controls and procedures,  as of the end of the
period covered by this report on such evaluation; and

c)disclosed  in this report any change in the small business  issuer's  internal
control  over  financial  reporting  that  occurred  during  the small  business
issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business  issuer's  fourth fiscal
quarter in the case of an annual  report) that has  materially  affected,  or is
reasonably  likely to materially  affect,  the small business  issuer's internal
control over financial reporting; and

5.The small business  issuer's other  certifying  officers and I have disclosed,
based  on  our  most  recent  evaluation  of  internal  control  over  financial
reporting,  to the small business  issuer's  auditors and the audit committee of
small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):

a)all  significant  deficiencies  and  material  weaknesses  in  the  design  or
operation of internal  control over  financial  reporting  which are  reasonably
likely to  adversely  affect  the small  business  issuer's  ability  to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and

b)any  fraud,  whether  or not  material,  that  involves  management  or  other
employees who have a significant  role in the small business  issuer's  internal
control over financial reporting.


Date: November 14, 2005


By:/s/ Michael L. Sheriff
-------------------------
Michael L. Sheriff,
Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
## In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07 - 18 - 00075 - CR AARON MICHAEL FRANKS , APPELLANT

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE On Appeal from the County Court Deaf Smith County, Texas Trial Court No. 2017 - 0010, Honorable D.J. Wagner, Presiding



### August 17 , 2018 ORDER Before QUINN, C.J., and PIRTLE and P ARKER , JJ. Pending before th is court is appellant A a ron Michael Franks’ Motion for Reinstatement . We dismissed this appeal for want of prosecution on July 31, 2018 , because appellant failed to pay for the appellate record after the trial court found he was not entitled to proceed without payment of costs . See T EX . R. A PP . P . 37.3(b). Appellant has now paid for the clerk’s and reporter’s record s and seeks to reinstate the appeal. Accordingly, w e grant appellant’s motion, vacate the dismissal, and restore the appeal to the court’s docket. Per Curiam Do not publish.
#### PIERCE v. PIVER

No. 88 PC.

No. 19 (Fall Term).

Case below: 45 N.C. App. 111.

Motion of defendant to dismiss appeal (see 300 N.C. 198) on ground case settled allowed 23 June 1980.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-2696
GARY J. WINTON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus AM-PRO PROTECTIVE AGENCY, Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, District Judge. (CA-95-65-A) Submitted: November 30, 1995 Decided: April 19, 1996 Before WILKINSON, Chief Judge, and WIDENER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Gary J. Winton, Appellant Pro Se. Bernard Phillip Je weler, OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order granting summary judgment to Defendant in this action alleging discrimination on the basis of race, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5 (1988). The record reveals that Appellant failed to meet his burden of establishing a prima facie case of discrimination. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Winton v. Am-Pro Protective Agency , No. CA-95-65-A (E.D. Va. Aug. 9, 1995). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court andargument would not aid the decisional process. The motion for production of documents is denied.

AFFIRMED
Case 1:07-cr-00348-RPP Document 13 Filed 04/25/2007 Page 1 of 9
Case 1:07-cr-00348-RPP Document 13 Filed 04/25/2007 Page 2 of 9
Case 1:07-cr-00348-RPP Document 13 Filed 04/25/2007 Page 3 of 9
Case 1:07-cr-00348-RPP Document 13 Filed 04/25/2007 Page 4 of 9
Case 1:07-cr-00348-RPP Document 13 Filed 04/25/2007 Page 5 of 9
Case 1:07-cr-00348-RPP Document 13 Filed 04/25/2007 Page 6 of 9
Case 1:07-cr-00348-RPP Document 13 Filed 04/25/2007 Page 7 of 9
Case 1:07-cr-00348-RPP Document 13 Filed 04/25/2007 Page 8 of 9
Case 1:07-cr-00348-RPP Document 13 Filed 04/25/2007 Page 9 of 9
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-6202

KEVIN RASHAAN HORSEY, SR.,

 Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

SALISBURY POLICE DEPARTMENT; B. CATON, Officer; N. 

AMENDOLAGINE, Officer; DAVID UNDERWOOD, Officer; DRUG TASK 

FORCE,

 Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Baltimore. Ellen L. Hollander, District Judge. 

(1:14-cv-00147-ELH)

Submitted: May 29, 2014 Decided: June 3, 2014

Before SHEDD, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kevin Rashaan Horsey, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Kevin Rashaan Horsey, Sr., appeals the district 

court’s order dismissing his civil action without prejudice 

after concluding that his claims for damages were barred by Heck 

v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994), and that his claims for 

injunctive relief were not otherwise cognizable. On appeal, we 

confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s 

brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Horsey’s informal brief 

does not challenge the basis for the district court’s 

disposition, Horsey has forfeited appellate review of the 

court’s order. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s 

judgment. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and 

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

AFFIRMED
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     
</LEGEND>
                        
                       
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                           U.S.DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                    MAR-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                        APR-1-1995
<PERIOD-END>                         DEC-31-1995
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                    45,171
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                             19,923
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                              198,700
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                         405,415
<PP&E>                                 6,475,126
<DEPRECIATION>                         2,489,946
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                         4,393,073
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                    438,041
<BONDS>                                        0
<COMMON>                                   7,184
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<OTHER-SE>                             3,766,996
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>           4,393,073
<SALES>                                1,414,067
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                       2,969,947
<CGS>                                    790,201
<TOTAL-COSTS>                          2,733,550
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                          236,397
<INCOME-TAX>                              63,002
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                      173,395
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                             173,395
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                .25
<EPS-DILUTED>                                .25
        



</TABLE>
[ DO NOT PUBLISH] 

## In the 

# United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________ No. 24

- 11825
Non

- Argument Calendar

____________________ JEFFERY

- ALLEN HILL

- YISRA'EL, Plaintiff

- Appellant,

versus STATE OF GEORGIA, The, GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF DRIVER SERVICES, STATE OF GEORGIA LICENSE #060588618, STATE OFGEORGIA REGISTRATION #EMW 788, GRAY POLICE DEPARTMENT, The, et al.,

Defendants

- Appellees.2 Opinion of the Court 24

- 11825

____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia D.C. Docket No. 5:24

- cv

- 00040

- MTT

____________________ Before R OSENBAUM , B RANCH , and L UCK , Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: This appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte , for lack of jurisdiction. The 30

- day statutory time limit required Jeffrey

- Allen Hill

- Yisra’EL to file a notice of appeal from the district court’s February 14, 2024 judgment on or before March 15, 2024. See 28 U.S.C. § 2107(a); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A). However, Hill

- Yisra’EL did not fil e a notice of appeal until June 3, 2024. Further, even if both of Hill

- Yisra’EL’s post

-judgment motions were construed as proper tolling motions, his notice of appeal would nonetheless be untimely because it was filed more than 30 days after the district c ourt’s April 29, 2024 order disposing of those motions. See 28 U.S.C. § 2107(a); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), (4)(A)

. Lastly, the record contains no basis for relief under Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(5) or 4(a)(6). See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5 ) (providing that a party may move to extend the time for filing a notice of appeal within 30 days of entry of final judgment); id. R. 4(a)(6)(A) (providing that the court may reopen the time to file an appeal for a period of 14 days where a party does not receive notice of the entry of the judgment). Accordingly, the notice of24

- 11825 Opinion of the Court 3 appeal is untimely and cannot invoke our appellate jurisdiction. See Green v. Drug Enf’t Admin. , 606 F.3d 1296, 1300 (11th Cir. 2010). No petition for rehearing may be filed unless it complies with the timing and other requirements of 11th Cir. R. 40

- 3 and all other applicable rules.