alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 202 (Friday, October 19, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 59258]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-5178]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE: 11 a.m., Friday, November 2, 2007.

PLACE: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission 
Conference Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Surveillance Matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Sauntia S. Warfield, 202-418-5084.

David A. Stawick,
Scretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 07-5178 Filed 10-16-07; 4:41 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
#### STATE v. SMITH

No. 190 PC.

Case below: 49 N.C. App. 546.

Petition by defendant for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 8 July 1981.
**Exhibit32.1**

 

 

**WRITTENSTATEMENT**

**PURSUANTTO**

**18U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

 

The undersigned, RONALDG. LEE, the Chief Executive Officer/Chief Financial Officer, of LEEPHARMACEUTICALS (the “Company”), pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, herebycertifies that, to the best of his knowledge:

 

(i)  the FORM 10-QSB of the Company for thequarter ended December 31, 2003 (the “Report”) fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and

 

(ii)  the information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date:  | FEBRUARY 11, 2004 |   |          |   |
|--------|-------------------|--------|---------------|--------|
|   |              |   |          |
|   |              |   |          |
|   |              |   | RONALD G. LEE |
|   |              |   | Ronald G. Lee |

 

----
Exhibit 23.1





Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm





The Board of Directors


SulphCo, Inc:





We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (No. 333-145460, No. 333-148499, No. 333-152723 and No. 333-169062) and Form S-8 (No. 333-145872, No. 333-150056 and No. 333-161682) of SulphCo, Inc. of our report dated  March 31, 2011, relating to the balance sheets of SulphCo, Inc. as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the related statements of operations, cash flows, and changes in stockholders’ equity (deficit) for the three years in the period ended December 31, 2010, which appear in this Form 10-K.





/s/ Hein & Associates LLPHein & Associates LLPHouston, Texas





March 31, 2011
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 31-5 Filed 06/15/2007 Page 1 of 8
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 31-5 Filed 06/15/2007 Page 2 of 8
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 31-5 Filed 06/15/2007 Page 3 of 8
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 31-5 Filed 06/15/2007 Page 4 of 8
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 31-5 Filed 06/15/2007 Page 5 of 8
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 31-5 Filed 06/15/2007 Page 6 of 8
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 31-5 Filed 06/15/2007 Page 7 of 8
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 31-5 Filed 06/15/2007 Page 8 of 8
#### STATE v. JOHNSON

No. 53P82.

Case below: 55 N.C. App. 481.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 30 March 1982.
Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. CASE NOS. 1:10cr5/MCR

 1:12cv268/MCR/GRJ

RICHARD MITER

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge’s Report and

Recommendation dated April 15, 2015. ECF No. 148. The parties have been

furnished a copy of the Report and Recommendation and have been afforded an

opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section

636(b)(1). I have made a de novo determination of Defendant’s timely filed

objections. (See doc. 149).

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and the objections

thereto, I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:

1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted and

incorporated by reference in this Order.

Case 1:10-cr-00005-MCR-GRJ Document 150 Filed 02/01/16 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

2. Defendant’s motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence, ECF No.

140, is DENIED.

3. A certificate of appealability is DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 1st day of February, 2016.

s/M. Casey Rodgers 

M. CASEY RODGERS

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case Nos. 1:10cr5/MCR; 1:12cv268/MCR/GRJ

Case 1:10-cr-00005-MCR-GRJ Document 150 Filed 02/01/16 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT
32.1





CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


PURSUANT
TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Scott
L. Kauffman, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of
Geeknet, Inc. on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 and that information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly
presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of
operations of Geeknet, Inc.





Date: 
      February 26, 2010
              By:
              /s/
      SCOTT L. KAUFFMANName:
              Scott
      L. KauffmanTitle:
              Chief
      Executive Officer and
President
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-7538

JAMES L. BOULER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

I. STEVEN COUNTS, Disciplinary Hearing Officer; M. E. RAY, Warden; MARGARET C. HAMBRICK,

Regional Director; N. G. TRUDEL, National Inmate Appeals; EPHRAIM W. GREEN, Correctional

Officer; STEVEN LARBER, Unit Manager,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Greenville. David C. Norton, District Judge.

(CA-96-3673-6-18AK)

Submitted: May 28, 1998 Decided: June 9, 1998

Before ERVIN, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James L. Bouler, Appellant Pro Se. Barbara Murcier Bowens, OFFICE

OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

James L. Bouler appeals the district court's order dismissing

his civil action challenging his prison disciplinary conviction. We

have reviewed the record and the district court's opinions and find

no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the

district court. Bouler v. Counts, No. CA-96-3673-6-18AK (D.S.C.

Sept. 2, 1997). We deny Bouler's motion to supplement the record.

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
#### STATE v. OXNER

No. 52 PC.

No. 5 (Spring Term)

Case below: 37 N.C. App. 600.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 allowed 3 November 1978.
Document No. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

VS CASE NO. 3:01cr9LAC

VALENTINE RIVERA

REFERRAL AND ORDER

Referred to Judge Lacey Collier on May 29, 2007

Motion/Pleadings: MOTION TO DISMISS INDICTMENT 

Filed by DEFENDANT on 5/22/2007 Doc.# 179

RESPONSES:

BY GOVERNMENT on5/29/07 Doc.# 180

on Doc.#

Stipulated Joint Pldg.

Unopposed Consented

WILLIAM M. McCOOL, CLERK OF COURT

s/Mary Maloy

LC (1 OR 2) Deputy Clerk: Mary Maloy

ORDER

Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is ORDERED this 30th day of

May, 2007, that:

(a) The relief requested is DENIED.

(b) 

 s/L.A. Collier

LACEY A. COLLIER

Senior United States District Judge

Entered On Docket: By: 

Rules 58 & 79(a) FRCP or 32(d)(1) & 55 FRCRP

Copies sent to:

Case 3:01-cr-00009-LC Document 182 Filed 05/30/07 Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 3
LANCER-BARBIERI EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

This employment agreement is entered into this 5th day of April, 2004, by and
between Lancer Orthodontics Inc., (Lancer) and Allen Barbieri (Barbieri).

Whereas; Lancer desires to hire Barbieri as an employee of the corporation
and Barbieri desires to be employed by Lancer. The following will establish
the terms and conditions of such employment.

Position: Effective immediately, Barbieri shall become and serve as the
interim Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Lancer, and will report directly to
the Board of Directors.  Further, Barbieri shall become a member of the Board
of Directors as soon as such appointment can be made. It is understood and
agreed that Barbieri's position as CEO shall be Part-time only, and temporary
in term, with the intention of Lancer's Chairman the additional position of
CEO. This said, Barbieri shall rely heavily on existing managers to run and
manage the day to day operations of the company. Further, Barbieri shall
spend some of his time working from his Orange County office.

Term: Both Parties agrees to that Barbieri shall be employed in the position
of CEO for a period of two years or less.

Compensation: Barbieri shall receive as compensation 62,500 restricted shares
of Lancer's common stock for every six month of employment by Lancer.   The
shares shall vest 31,250 at the beginning of each quarter.   Other than the
above shares of restricted common stock, Barbieri shall not be entitled to
any other form of cash or equity compensation, unless determined otherwise in
the future by the Board of Directors.

Benefits: In addition to the above compensation, Barbieri shall be entitled
to all healthcare and other benefits available to employees of Lancer.

Employment Termination: Barbieri's employment and this contract may be
terminated by Lancer at any time without cause. Further, Barbieri's
employment and this contract may be terminated by Barbieri at any time for
any reason. In the event Barbieri's employment is terminated by either party,
all stock compensation vested as of the date of termination shall be retained
by Barbieri.  Any unvested stock as of the date of termination shall return
to Lancer, and Barbieri shall have no rights to such unvested shares.

Change of control: Not withstanding the forgoing, in the event Barbieri's
employment is terminated by either party following any transaction wherein
over 50% of Lancer's common shares outstanding are transferred to and
acquired by a single entity, corporation or individual, all unvested shares
shall vest immediately and Barbieri shall be entitled to retain all granted
shares.

The undersigned acknowledge, agree to and accept all above terms, and further
agree that if any individual terms are found to be unenforceable for any
reason, the remaining terms shall survive.


____________________                ________________________
Zack Irani                          Allen Barbieri
Chairman of the Board
Lancer Orthodontics, Inc.
The Honorable Jerry W. Cavaneau, United States Magistrate Judge for the

1

Eastern District of Arkansas, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by

consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 98-2084

___________

Terrick Terrell Nooner, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Eastern District of Arkansas.

Larry Norris, Director, Arkansas *

Department of Correction, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellee. *

___________

 Submitted: October 1, 1998

 Filed: October 8, 1998 

___________

Before WOLLMAN, HANSEN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Arkansas inmate Terrick Terrell Nooner appeals from the district court’s order 1

denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Having

carefully reviewed the record and the parties’ submissions, we affirm the judgment of

the district court for the reasons set forth in its memorandum. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
-2-

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 19 Filed 06/08/2007 Page 1 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 19 Filed 06/08/2007 Page 2 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 19 Filed 06/08/2007 Page 3 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 19 Filed 06/08/2007 Page 4 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-03345-RJS Document 27-6 Filed 07/31/2008 Page 1 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-03345-RJS Document 27-6 Filed 07/31/2008 Page 2 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-03345-RJS Document 27-6 Filed 07/31/2008 Page 3 of 3
Exhibit
32.2




Certification
Pursuant to


18
U.S.C. Section 1350


As
Adopted Pursuant to


Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





In
connection with the Annual Report of GFR Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the “Company”)
on Form 10-k for the year ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Zhong Ya Li, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as
adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based on 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 results of operations of the
      Company.





Date:
April  29, 2009





GFR
      PHARMACEUTICALS, INC./s/Zhong Ya LiZhong
      Ya Li, Chief Financial
Officer
#### CAMPBELL v. MAYBERRY

No. 72 PC.

Case below: 12 N.C. App. 469.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 7 December 1971.
# EUR-Lex - 52011PC0646 - EN

*|*

# 52011PC0646

**Joint Proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION repealing Regulation (EC) No 1763/2004 imposing certain restrictive measures in support of effective implementation of the mandate of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) /* COM/2011/0646 final - 2011/0279 (NLE) */**

			*

			*

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM

Council Regulation (EC) No 1763/2004
imposing certain restrictive measures in support of effective implementation of
the mandate of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia
(ICTY)[1]
freezes the assets of certain individuals in support of the ICTY mandate. It gives
effect to Council Decision 2010/603/CFSP.

(1)
On ... September 2011, the Council adopted Council
Decision 2011/.../CFSP, by which the Council repealed Council Decision 2010/603/CFSP.

(2)
The Commission therefore proposes that the
Council should repeal Council Regulation (EC) No 1763/2004 with immediate
effect.

2011/0279 (NLE)

Joint Proposal for a

COUNCIL REGULATION

repealing Regulation (EC) No 1763/2004
imposing certain restrictive measures in support of effective implementation of
the mandate of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia
(ICTY)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning
of the European Union, and in particular Article 215 thereof,

Having regard to Council Decision 2011/[...]/CFSP
repealing Council Decision 2010/603/CFSP on further measures in support of the
effective implementation of the mandate of the International Criminal Tribunal for
the former Yugoslavia (ICTY)[2],

Having regard to the joint proposal from
the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy
and the European Commission,

Whereas:

(1)
Council Regulation (EC) No 1763/2004 of 11
October 2004 imposing certain restrictive measures in support of effective implementation
of the mandate of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia
(ICTY)[3]
freezes the assets of certain individuals in support of the ICTY mandate. It gives
effect to Council Decision 2010/603/CFSP[4].

(2)
On ... September 2011, the Council adopted Council
Decision 2011/.../CFSP, by which it repealed Council Decision 2010/603/CFSP.

(3)
It is therefore appropriate to repeal Council
Regulation (EC) No 1763/2004 with immediate effect.

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Regulation (EC) No 1763/2004 is repealed.

Article 2

This
Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official
Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding
in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, [...]

For
the Council

The
President
                                                                       [...]

[1]               OJ L 315, 14.10.2004, p.14

[2]               OJ L , .9.2011, p.

[3]               OJ L 315, 14.10.2004, p.14

[4]               OJ L 265, 8.10.2010, p. 15.
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NO. WR-84,836-01

EX P ARTE BENIT O DAVILA, JR., Applicant

ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. 15143C-A IN THE 29TH DIS TRICT COURT

F ROM P ALO PIN TO COUNTY

Per curiam . A L C A L A , J., fi led a concurring opin ion in wh ich J O H N S O N , J., joined. Y E A R Y , J., fi led a concurring opin ion in wh ich K E A S L E R , and H E R V E Y , JJ., joined. O R D E R Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texa s C o d e o f Criminal Procedur e, the cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of eng ag ing in org aniz ed criminal activity and sentenc ed to twenty y ear s’ imprisonment. He did not appea l his conviction. Applicant contends that his trial counsel rende red ineffe ctive assista n ce beca use counsel failed to challeng e t h e voluntariness of Applicant’s confe ssion, failed to investiga te whether Applicant’s c onfession wa s taken in vi olation of Miranda , and fa iled to challeng e the tria l court’s2

jurisdiction. Applicant has alleg ed fac ts that, if true, might entitle him to relief

. Strickland v. W

ashington , 466 U.S. 668 (1984); Ex parte Patterson , 993 S.W .2d 114, 115 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999). I n these circ umstances, additional fac ts are neede d. As we held in Ex parte Rodriguez , 334 S.W .2d 294, 294 (Tex. Crim. App. 1960), the trial court is the appropr iate forum for finding s of fac t. The trial court

s h all order trial counsel to respond to Applicant’s claim of i neff ective assistance of counsel

. T h e trial court may

use any means set out in T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 11.07, § 3(d)

. I f t he trial court elects t o h o l d a hearing , it shall deter mine whether Applicant is indige nt. I f Applicant is indige nt and wishes to be repr esente d by counsel, the t ri al court shall appoint an attorney to repre sent Applicant a t the hear ing. T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 26.04. The trial co u rt shall make finding s of fac t and conclusions of law as to whether the perf ormanc e of Applicant’s trial counsel was defic ient and, if so, wh et h er counsel’s defic ient perf ormanc e prejudice d Applicant. The trial court shall also make any other finding s of fac t and conclusions of law that it deems rele vant and appropr iate to the dispositi on of Applicant’s claim for habea s corpus re lief. This application will be held in abey ance until the trial court has resolved the fac t issues. The issues sh al l b e re s o l ved within 90 day s of this order

. A supplemental transcr ipt containing all aff idavits and int err og atories or the t ransc ription of t he court repor ter’s notes from any hear ing or deposition, along with the trial court’ s supplemental finding s of fa ct and c onclusions of law, shall be forwar ded to this Court withi n 120 day s of the date of t his order

. Any extensions of t ime shall be obtained f

rom this Court.

Filed: June 29, 2016 Do not publish
Case 1:07-cv-03498-AKH Document 7-13 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 1 of 15Case 1:07-cv-03498-AKH Document 7-13 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 2 of 15Case 1:07-cv-03498-AKH Document 7-13 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 3 of 15Case 1:07-cv-03498-AKH Document 7-13 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 4 of 15Case 1:07-cv-03498-AKH Document 7-13 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 5 of 15Case 1:07-cv-03498-AKH Document 7-13 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 6 of 15Case 1:07-cv-03498-AKH Document 7-13 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 7 of 15Case 1:07-cv-03498-AKH Document 7-13 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 8 of 15Case 1:07-cv-03498-AKH Document 7-13 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 9 of 15Case 1:07-cv-03498-AKH Document 7-13 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 10 of 15Case 1:07-cv-03498-AKH Document 7-13 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 11 of 15Case 1:07-cv-03498-AKH Document 7-13 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 12 of 15Case 1:07-cv-03498-AKH Document 7-13 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 13 of 15Case 1:07-cv-03498-AKH Document 7-13 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 14 of 15Case 1:07-cv-03498-AKH Document 7-13 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 15 of 15
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

DE-UNDRE ATKINS,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO. 3:09cv561/RS-EMT

WAYNE-DALTON CORPORATION,

Defendant.

_________________________________________/

ORDER

Before me is Plaintiff’s motion to determine the amount of attorneys’ fees 

and costs (Doc. 93). 

IT IS ORDERED:

1. Plaintiff shall not later than January 18, 2011, file an amended 

itemization of costs excluding the costs already accounted for in the 

bill of costs (Doc.89), which is currently under review by the Clerk of 

Court.

2. Pursuant to N.D. Fla. Loc. R. 54.1(F) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 53(a)(C), a 

special master shall be appointed to review Plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees 

and Plaintiff’s costs beyond the statutory costs already submitted in 

the bill of costs. 
2

3. The parties shall nominate a person willing to serve as a special 

master not later than January 25, 2011. If the parties are unable to 

agree upon a special master, each party shall nominate two persons 

who are willing to serve as a special master and submit their 

qualifications to the Court. The parties shall also not later than 

January 25, 2011, submit a joint proposed order of appointment which 

conforms to the requirements set forth in Fed. R. Civ. P. 53(b). The 

parties shall also attempt to agree upon the level of review I am to 

apply in reviewing the special master’s report. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 

53(f)(3). 

4. Payment of the special master shall initially be paid in equal shares by 

the parties. However, the payment of the special master’s fees may 

reapportioned based upon the special master’s findings. See Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 53 (g)(3). 

ORDERED on January 11, 2011.

/s/ Richard Smoak 

RICHARD SMOAK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE