alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense POW/MIA Accounting AgencyFulfilling Our Nation's Promise

Search
Search

Search

              - 
              - 
              - 

-  Home		 
-  Families		 
-  Our Missing    -  Searchable List of the Missing             
  -  Searchable Map of the Missing             
  -  Recently Accounted For             
  -  World War II      -  World War II Summary             
    -  Battle of Tarawa             
    -  Attack on Pearl Harbor 
  -  Korean War      -  Korean War Summary             
    -  Battle of Chosin Reservoir             
    -  Battle of Unsan             
    -  Korean Air Battles             
    -  The Inchon Campaign             
    -  The Pusan Perimeter             
    -  The DMZ Campaigns             
    -  Korean War Disinterments             
    -  Operation Glory             
    -  POW Camps 
  -  Vietnam War      -  Vietnam War Summary             
    -  Vietnam War Identification Project             
    -  Tet Offensive             
    -  Battle of Khe Sanh             
    -  Mayaguez Incident             
    -  Battle of Ia Drang             
    -  Lam Son 
  -  Cold War             
  -  Gulf Wars & Libya             
  -  Unknowns 
-  News & Stories    -  Our Stories             
  -  Press Releases             
  -  DPAA In The News             
  -  Year In Review 
-  Multimedia    -  Livestreams             
  -  Podcast             
  -  Briefing Videos             
  -  Science Videos             
  -  DPAA Laboratory             
  -  Media Gallery 
-  Resources    -  FAQs             
  -  AFMES DNA Laboratory             
  -  Publicly Released Documents             
  -  Family/VSO Update Notes             
  -  Family Member Guide             
  -  POW/MIA Day Toolkit             
  -  USRJC 
-  About    -  Leadership             
  -  Vision-Mission-Values             
  -  DPAA Organizational Chart 
-  Contact    -  Contact Us             
  -  Join Us      -  Careers 
  -  Report a Site             
  -  Donate to the Mission 
-  Volunteer		 

## 

## Image Gallery

Search

Search

                              - Upload Date
                              - Photo Date
                              - Title

Share

----

Download Image: Small ()Medium ()Full Size (0.48 MB)

Tags:

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
Case 1:07-cv-03228-VM-GWG Document 14 Filed 09/02/2008 Page 1 of 3Case 1:07-cv-03228-VM-GWG Document 14 Filed 09/02/2008 Page 2 of 3Case 1:07-cv-03228-VM-GWG Document 14 Filed 09/02/2008 Page 3 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-03308-TPG Document 12 Filed 04/25/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-03308-TPG Document 12 Filed 04/25/2007 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:06-cv-15028-AKH Document 3 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 1
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20-6123

SONTAY TERRELL SMOTHERMAN,

 Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

J. R. BELL, Warden,

 Respondent - Appellee.

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

Stephanie A. Gallagher, District Judge. (1:20-cv-00049-SAG)

Submitted: June 18, 2020 Decided: June 23, 2020

Before FLOYD, THACKER, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Sontay Terrell Smotherman, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Sontay Terrell Smotherman, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order 

denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2018) petition in which he sought to challenge his

conviction by way of the savings clause in 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2018). Pursuant to § 2255(e), 

a prisoner may challenge his conviction in a traditional writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 

§ 2241 if a § 2255 motion would be inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of his 

detention. 

[Section] 2255 is inadequate and ineffective to test the legality of a 

conviction when: (1) at the time of conviction, settled law of this circuit or 

the Supreme Court established the legality of the conviction; (2) subsequent 

to the prisoner’s direct appeal and first § 2255 motion, the substantive law 

changed such that the conduct of which the prisoner was convicted is deemed 

not to be criminal; and (3) the prisoner cannot satisfy the gatekeeping 

provisions of § 2255 because the new rule is not one of constitutional law.

In re Jones, 226 F.3d 328, 333-34 (4th Cir. 2000). 

We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, although 

we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district 

court.*

 Smotherman v. Bell, No. 1:20-cv-00049-SAG (D. Md. filed Jan. 14, 2020 & entered 

Jan. 15, 2020). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions 

* Although the district court applied the test for challenges to a petitioner’s sentence 

set out in United States v. Wheeler, 886 F.3d 415, 429 (4th Cir. 2018), Smotherman’s 

claims are more accurately challenging the legality of his conviction and are, therefore, 

more appropriately analyzed under Jones. In any event, Smotherman alleges no change in 

substantive law affecting the legality of his conviction or sentence, a requirement under 

both Wheeler and Jones.
3

are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

AFFIRMED
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

____________

No. 20-5366 September Term, 2021

1:20-cv-00325-UNA

Filed On: September 23, 2021

Garry David Gallardo,

Appellant

v.

Donald J. Trump, President of the United

States, et al.,

Appellees

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

BEFORE: Pillard, Rao, and Jackson, Circuit Judges

J U D G M E N T

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court

for the District of Columbia and on the brief filed by appellant. See Fed. R. App. P.

34(a)(2); D.C. Cir. Rule 34(j). It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court's orders filed March 9 and

April 22, 2020, be affirmed. The district court did not err in dismissing appellant’s

complaint and civil action concerning his criminal convictions and clemency petitions,

nor did the court abuse its discretion in denying his motion to alter or amend the

judgment. See, e.g., Yelvington v. Presidential Pardon & Parole Attorneys, 211 F.2d

642, 643-44 (D.C. Cir. 1954) ("The pardoning power is ... expressly vest[ed] in the

President” and “should ... be free of judicial control, even to the limited extent here

proposed.”); Clark v. Memolo, 174 F.2d 978, 980 (1949) (“It is well settled that the

Declaratory Judgment Act does not confer or extend jurisdiction over an area not

already covered, nor can it be used to give relief indirectly which could not be given

directly.”); Williams v. Hill, 74 F.3d 1339, 1340-41 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (per curiam) (holding

that rationale of Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994), applies to Bivens claims and

that plaintiff may not recover damages for "harm caused by actions whose unlawfulness

would render [his] conviction or sentence invalid" unless his conviction or sentence has

been set aside).
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

____________

No. 20-5366 September Term, 2021

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk

is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution

of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R. App.

P. 41(b); D.C. Cir. Rule 41.

Per Curiam

FOR THE COURT:

Mark J. Langer, Clerk 

BY: /s/

Daniel J. Reidy 

Deputy Clerk

2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 7
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                            SEP-30-2000
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                         12,746
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                         3,045
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                          12,733
<EQUITIES>                                      639
<MORTGAGE>                                    2,625
<REAL-ESTATE>                                   132
<TOTAL-INVEST>                               19,536
<CASH>                                           61
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                            1,532
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                        2,050
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               27,272
<POLICY-LOSSES>                              18,888
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                              53
<POLICY-OTHER>                                  298
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                           216
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                               1,044
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           300
<PREFERRED>                                       0
<COMMON>                                        134
<OTHER-SE>                                    2,871
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 27,272
<PREMIUMS>                                    1,011
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                           1,068
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                              105
<OTHER-INCOME>                                  246
<BENEFITS>                                    1,214
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                       0
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                              0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 613
<INCOME-TAX>                                    215
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             398
<DISCONTINUED>                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0
<CHANGES>                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                                    398
<EPS-BASIC>                                  3.86
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  3.83
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                    0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                               0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                 0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                  0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                   0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                           0


</TABLE>
Case 1:07-cv-03328-CM-HBP Document 60 Filed 07/18/2008 Page 1 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03328-CM-HBP Document 60 Filed 07/18/2008 Page 2 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03328-CM-HBP Document 60 Filed 07/18/2008 Page 3 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03328-CM-HBP Document 60 Filed 07/18/2008 Page 4 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03328-CM-HBP Document 60 Filed 07/18/2008 Page 5 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03328-CM-HBP Document 60 Filed 07/18/2008 Page 6 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03328-CM-HBP Document 60 Filed 07/18/2008 Page 7 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03328-CM-HBP Document 60 Filed 07/18/2008 Page 8 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03328-CM-HBP Document 60 Filed 07/18/2008 Page 9 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03328-CM-HBP Document 60 Filed 07/18/2008 Page 10 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03328-CM-HBP Document 60 Filed 07/18/2008 Page 11 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03328-CM-HBP Document 60 Filed 07/18/2008 Page 12 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03328-CM-HBP Document 60 Filed 07/18/2008 Page 13 of 13
#### STATE v. SIMPSON

No. 87 PC.

Case below: 25 N.C. App. 176.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 6 May 1975.
Case 1:07-cv-03303-CM-DCF Document 7-4 Filed 07/16/2007 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                              JUL-1-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                          98,776
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                9,341,500
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                 13,107,903
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            24,196,295
<PP&E>                                      13,482,668
<DEPRECIATION>                            (11,187,519)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              27,336,373
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,642,055
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        33,238
<OTHER-SE>                                  27,303,335
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                27,336,373
<SALES>                                     11,755,125
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            11,925,421
<CGS>                                        7,330,668
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,330,668
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,201,168
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              20,356
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,377,167
<INCOME-TAX>                                   975,744
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,401,423
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,401,423
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .41
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### EASON v. INSURANCE CO.

No. 93 PC.

Case below: 8 N.C. App. 293.

Petition for writ of *certiorari*to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 14 July 1970.
<PAGE>




                                                                   Exhibit 32.2

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Robert M. Barniskis, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Delphax
Technologies Inc. (the Company), do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that to my knowledge:

     o   the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal year ended
         September 30, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
         Commission (the Report), fully complies with the requirements of
         Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

     o   the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
         material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
         the Company.


Dated:     February 24, 2004              By:    /s/ Robert M. Barniskis
           -----------------                 -----------------------------------
                                                      Robert M. Barniskis
                                             Vice President and Chief Financial
                                             Officer
#### STATE v. WILLIAMS

No. 2 PC.

Case below: 20 N.C. App. 310.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 5 March 1974.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           4,492,591
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   71,968,296
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                         0
<PP&E>                                           6,311,086
<DEPRECIATION>                                  (1,313,368)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  83,482,740
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           94,060,400
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                           176,772
<OTHER-SE>                                     (10,751,432)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    83,482,740
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    (9,239)
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                            0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                36,324,640
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              16,588,261
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (52,922,140)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    (8,427,030)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (44,495,110)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (44,495,110)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        (2.71)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (2.71)
        


</TABLE>
#### BRENNER v. SCHOOL HOUSE, LTD.

No. 632P82.

Case below: 59 N.C. App. 68.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 11 January 1983.
Case 1:06-cv-15089-AKH Document 4 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 1
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-82,034-01

EX PARTE RONALD J. EUBANKS, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. W92-67690-N(A) IN THE 195TH DISTRICT COURT

FROM DALLAS COUNTY

Per curiam.

O R D E R

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of aggravated sexual

assault and sentenced to ten years’ imprisonment. The Eleventh Court of Appeals affirmed his

conviction. Eubanks v. State, No. 11-93-00236-CR (Tex. App.—Eastland June 16, 1994) (not

designated for publication).

Applicant contends, among other things, that had scientific evidence, which was unavailable

at the time of his trial and would now be admissible, been presented at his trial, on the preponderance
2

of the evidence he would not have been convicted. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.073. We order

that this application be filed and set for submission to determine whether Applicant is entitled to

relief under Article 11.073. The parties shall brief this issue.

It appears that Applicant is represented by counsel. If that is not correct, the trial court shall

determine whether Applicant is indigent. If Applicant is indigent and desires to be represented by

counsel, the trial court shall appoint an attorney to represent Applicant. TEX.CODE CRIM. PROC. art

26.04. The trial court shall send to this Court, within 60 days of the date of this order, a

supplemental transcript containing: a confirmation that Applicant is represented by counsel; the

order appointing counsel; or a statement that Applicant is not indigent. All briefs shall be filed with

this Court within 90 days of the date of this order. 

Filed: May 18, 2016

Do not publish
Case 1:06-cv-15010-AKH Document 3 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 1
#### DICKINSON v. PAKE

No. 47 PC.

Case below: 19 N.C. App. 287.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of. Appeals allowed 1 November 1973.
Case 1:06-cv-14998-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-14998-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 2 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-14998-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 3 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-14998-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 4 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-14998-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 5 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-14998-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 6 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-14998-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 7 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-14998-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 8 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-14998-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 9 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-14998-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 10 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-14998-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 11 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-14998-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 12 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-14998-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 13 of 13
#### NYBOR CORP. v. RESTAURANTS, INC.

No. 209 PC.

Case below: 29 N.C. App. 642.

Petition by third-party defendant Gem Oil Co. for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 1 September 1976.
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

Wniteb ~tates <!Court of §ppeaIs

for tbe jfeberaI (!Circuit

IN RE BROADCOM CORPORATION, QUALCOMM

INCORPORATED, AND QUALCOMM ATHEROS,

INC.,

Petitioners.

Miscellaneous Docket No. 141

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United

States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas in

case no. 11-CV-0139, ChiefJudge Leonard Davis.

ON PETITION

ORDER

Azure Networks, LLC and Tri-County Excelsior

Foundation move without opposition for a 10-day extension of time to respond to the petition for a writ of mandamus.

Upon consideration thereof,

IT Is ORDERED THAT:

Case: 13-141 Document: 25 Page: 1 Filed: 11/02/2012
IN RE BROADCOM CORP 2

The motion is granted. The respondents are directed

to submit their responses no later than November 13,

2012.

FOR THE COURT

/s/ Jan Horbaly

Jan Horbaly

Clerk

s26

Case: 13-141 Document: 25 Page: 2 Filed: 11/02/2012
caah_ex10-34.htm


     

    
      

      

    

     

    
      



    

    


    


    July 1,
2009

    


    


    China
America Holdings, Inc.

    Attn:
Shaoyin Wang

    10871 NW
52nd Street, Suite 2,

    Sunrise,
FL 33351

    


    


    Re:           $400,000
Unsecured Promissory Note dated August 22, 2008 and between China Direct
Investments, Inc. and China America Holdings, Inc. (the “Loan”)

    


    


    Dear Mr.
Wang,

    


    Please
accept this letter as formal notification of our mutual agreement to extend the
maturity date of the Loan to June 30, 2010. All other terms and conditions of
the Loan shall remain in full force and effect.

    


    


    Warms
regards,

    


    
      
        
          	 	 	 	 	 
	
                  /s/Andrew
      Goldrich

                	 	 	
                  /s/
      Shaoyin Wang

                	 
	
                  Andrew
      Goldrich

                	 	 	
                  Shaoyin
      Wang,

                	 
	
                  

                    Vice
      President of Operation

                  

                	 	 	
                  Chief
      Executive Officer

                	 
	China
      Direct Industries, Inc.	 	 	China
      America Holdings, Inc.