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

# AGENCY:

United States Commission on Civil Rights. 

# ACTION:

Notice of briefing.

# Date and Time:

Friday, November 9, 2007; 9:30 a.m. 

# Place:

U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 624 Ninth Street, NW., Rm. 540, Washington, DC 20425. 

## Briefing Agenda 

### Briefing on Minorities in Foster Care and Adoption 

I. Introductory Remarks by Chairman

II. Speakers' Presentations

III. Questions by Commissioners and Staff Director

IV. Adjourn

# CONTACT PERSON FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:

Sock Foon MacDougall, Press and Communications (202) 376-8582. 

Dated: October 30, 2007. 

David Blackwood, 

General Counsel. 

[FR Doc. 07-5458 Filed 10-30-07; 1:05 pm] 

BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-6397

SAMUEL A. WILDER,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

DOUG CATOE, Director of South Carolina

Department of Corrections; CHARLES M. CONDON,

Attorney General of South Carolina,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge.

(CA-00-3257)

Submitted: April 18, 2002 Decided: April 30, 2002

Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Samuel A. Wilder, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief

Deputy Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Samuel A. Wilder seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West

1994 & Supp. 2001). We have reviewed the record and the district

court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny

a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the

reasoning of the district court. See Wilder v. Catoe, No. CA-00-

3257 (D.S.C. Feb. 8, 2002). We further deny Wilder’s motion for a

preliminary injunction. 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
#### HANNAH VESTER STRICKLAND and husband, BOBBY STRICKLAND; JOHN MILTON VESTER and wife, MADELINE VESTER; and FRANK LANE VESTER v. H. P. JACKSON and wife, ANNIE S. JACKSON.

(Filed 18 September 1963.)

Appeal and Error § 59; Pleadings § 24—

■Where the Superior Court sustains demurrer and grants leave to amend, and plaintiff appeals therefrom, the appeal stays further proceedings, but upon certification of decision affirming the judgment the thirty-day period begins to run, and an amendment filed after the thirty-day period may -be stricken. An order of the Superior Court “ratifying and affirming” a decision of the Supreme -Court does not affect the rights of either party.

Appeal from *Latham, S.J.,*May, 1963 Term. Pitt Superior Court.

The first chapter in this civil action is recorded in this Court’s opinion reported in 259 N.C. 81. The pleadings are there analyzed.

At the September Term, 1962, Judge Mintz entered an order sustaining the demurrer and allowing the plaintiffs 30 days in which to amend. The plaintiffs, refusing to amend, appealed. On March 20, 1963, this Court filed its opinion affirming the order. This Court’s Certificate was received by, and recorded in, the Superior Court of Pitt County on April 3, 1963.

On April 19, 1963, Judge Hubbard, upon motion of the defendants’ counsel, entered an order in the Superior Court of Pitt County “that the opinion of the Supreme Court in said action be, and the same is hereby in all respects ratified and affirmed.” On May 13, 1963, the *191plaintiffs attempted to file in the Superior Court of Pitt County an amendment to the complaint. At the May 27, 1963 Term, the defendants moved to strike the proposed amended complaint upon the ground it was not filed within the 30 days allowed by Judge Mintz. After hearing, Judge Latham entered an order striking the amendment upon the ground it was not timely filed. The plaintiffs again excepted and appealed.

*Sam B. Underwood, Jr., for plaintiffs, appellants.*

*James & Hite, by Kenneth G. Hite, for defendants, appellees.*

HiggiNS, J.

The parties to the present controversy have shown a disposition to stand strictly upon their legal rights. Discretionary power vested in the judges of superior court to permit amendments to pleadings (G.S. 1-161; *Electric Co. v. Dennis,*255 N.C. 64, 120 S.E. 2d 533; *Dobias v. White,*240 N.C. 680, 83 S.E. 2d 785;) has not been invoked.

The appeal from the Mintz judgment had the effect of suspending further proceedings pending the appeal. The suspension, however, was lifted when this Court’s affirming Certificate was received in the Superior Court of Pitt County on April 3, 1963. As of that date the rights of the parties were fixed by G.S. 1-131, with which the challenged order conformed. The plaintiffs had authority to amend within 30 days. *Dudley v. Dudley,*250 N.C. 95, 107 S.E. 2d 918; *Teague v. Oil Co.,*232 N.C. 469, 61 S.E. 2d 345. Judge Hubbard’s order of April 19,1963, neither added to nor took from the rights of either party.

The plaintiffs’ amendment of May 13, 1963, was not filed within 30 days. Consequently, the order of Judge Latham striking the amendment is

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         1165164
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                        29824391
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                   13767773
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                        26187821
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                          26385527
<LOANS>                                       43834758
<ALLOWANCE>                                     200000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               115873757
<DEPOSITS>                                    67697866
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            6566254
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         25921
<OTHER-SE>                                    39583716
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               115873757
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                1796344
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              1274189
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                159780
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               3230313
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                             1619167
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             1625777
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                          1604536
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                1839904
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 203402
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      203402
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    141880
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.72
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  73000
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                200000
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               200000
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            200000
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
FLND Form 245B (rev 12/2003) Judgment in a Criminal Case Page 4 of 9

3:10cr40-001/MCR - CALEB ANDREW GLOVER

SUPERVISED RELEASE

Upon release from imprisonment, the defendant shall be on supervised release for a term of 5

years as to Counts One and Two, and 3 years as to Counts Three, Five and Six, with all

counts to run concurrently. 

The defendant shall report to the probation office in the district to which the defendant is released

within 72 hours of release from custody of the Bureau of Prisons.

The defendant shall not commit another federal, state, or local crime and shall not possess a

firearm, destructive device, or any other dangerous weapon.

The defendant shall not unlawfully possess a controlled substance. The defendant shall refrain

from any unlawful use of a controlled substance. The defendant shall submit to one drug test within

15 days of release from imprisonment and at least two periodic drug tests thereafter, as determined

by the court.

The defendant shall cooperate in the collection of DNA as directed by the probation officer.

STANDARD CONDITIONS OF SUPERVISION

The defendant shall comply with the following standard conditions that have been

adopted by this court.

1. The defendant shall not leave the judicial district without the permission of the court or probation

officer;

2. The defendant shall report to the probation officer and shall submit a truthful and complete written

report within the first five days of each month;

3. The defendant shall answer truthfully all inquiries by the probation officer and follow the instructions

of the probation officer;

4. The defendant shall support his or her dependents and meet other family responsibilities;

5. The defendant shall work regularly at a lawful occupation, unless excused by the probation officer for

schooling, training, or other acceptable reasons;

6. The defendant shall notify the probation officer at least 10 days prior to any change in residence or

employment;

7. The defendant shall refrain from excessive use of alcohol and shall not purchase, possess, use,

distribute, or administer any controlled substance or any paraphernalia related to any controlled

substances, except as prescribed by a physician;

8. The defendant shall not frequent places where controlled substances are illegally sold, used,

distributed, or administered;

9. The defendant shall not associate with any persons engaged in criminal activity and shall not

associate with any person convicted of a felony unless granted permission to do so by the probation
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 222 (Monday, November 19, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 65053]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-5743]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of General Medical Sciences; Notice of Closed 
Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of General Medical 
Sciences Special Emphasis Panel, MBRS Support of Competitive 
Research.
    Date: November 26-27, 2007.
    Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, 45 
Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Virtual Meeting).
    Contact Person: C. Craig Hyde, PhD, Office of Scientific Review, 
National Institute of General Medical Sciences, National Institutes 
of Health, Building 45, Room 3AN18, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-
3825, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#caa9a2f8bc8aa4a3a2e4ada5bc"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f99a91cb8fb9979091d79e968f">[email protected]</span></a>.
    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and 
funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.375, 
Minority Biomedical Research Support; 93.821, Cell Biology and 
Biophysics Research; 93.859, Pharmacology, Physiology, and 
Biological Chemistry Research; 93.862, Genetics and Developmental 
Biology Research; 93.88, Minority Access to Research Careers; 93.96, 
Special Minority Initiatives, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: November 8, 2007.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 07-5743 Filed 11-16-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 213 (Monday, November 5, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 62493]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-5472]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Federal Bureau of Investigation


Meeting of the CJIS Advisory Policy Board

AGENCY: Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

ACTION: Meeting notice.

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

SUMMARY: The purpose of this notice is to announce the meeting of the 
Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) Advisory Policy Board 
(APB). The CJIS APB is a federal advisory committee established 
pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act. This meeting 
announcement is being published as required by Section 10 of the FACA.
    The CJIS APB is responsible for reviewing policy issues and 
appropriate technical and operational issues related to the programs 
administered by the FBI's CJIS Division, and thereafter, making 
appropriate recommendations to the FBI Director. The programs 
administered by the CJIS Division are the Integrated Automated 
Fingerprint Identification System, the Interstate Identification Index, 
Law Enforcement Online, National Crime Information Center, the National 
Instant Criminal Background Check System, the National Incident-Based 
reporting System, Law Enforcement national Data Exchange, and Uniform 
Crime Reporting.
    The meeting will be open to the public on a first-come, first-
seated basis. Any member of the public wishing to file a written 
statement concerning the CJIS Division programs or wishing to address 
this session should notify senior CJIS Advisory Roy g. Weise at (304) 
625-2730 at least 24 hours prior to the start of the session. The 
notification should contain the requestor's name, corporate 
designation, and consumer affiliation or government designation along 
with a short statement describing the topic to be addressed and the 
time needed for the presentation. A requestor will ordinarily be 
allowed no more than 15 minutes to present a topic.

DATES AND TIMES: The APB will meet in open session from 8:30 a.m.until 
5 p.m., on December 5-6, 2007.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will take place at the Renaissance Glendale 
Hotel and Spa, Glendale, Arizona, (623) 937-3700.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Inquiries may be addressed to Mrs. 
Rebecca S. Durrett; Management and Program Analyst; Adivsory Groups 
Management Unit, Liaison, Advisory, Training and Statistics Section; 
FBI CJIS Division; Module C3; 1000 Custer Hollow Road; Clarksburg; West 
Virginia 26306-0149; telephone (304) 625-2617; facsimile (304) 625-
5090.

    Dated: October 24, 2007.
Roy G. Weise,
Senior CJIS Advisory, Criminal Justice Information Services Division, 
Federal Bureau of Investigation.
[FR Doc. 07-5472 Filed 11-02-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-02-M
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

BEVERLY NICHOLS,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO. 5:10cv169/RS-GRJ

INTERMOUNTAIN MANAGEMENT,

LLC and IMM-ICH, LLC

a Delaware corporation,

Defendants.

_____________________________/

ORDER

The relief requested by Plaintiff’s Motion For Order Extending Deadline (Doc. 41)

is granted.

ORDERED on May 12, 2011.

/S/ Richard Smoak 

RICHARD SMOAK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 5:10-cv-00169-RS-GRJ Document 43 Filed 05/12/11 Page 1 of 1
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

RALPH WARREN GOLDEN,

Petitioner,

v. CASE NO. 1:10-cv-00113-MP-GRJ

WALTER MCNEIL,

Respondent.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 19, Respondent’s third motion for a 30-

day extension of time to respond to the Petition. Upon due consideration, it is 

ORDERED:

1. The motion, Doc. 19, is GRANTED. Respondent shall file the response

on or before January 24, 2011. No further extensions will be granted

absent exceptional circumstances.

2. Petitioner’s reply, if any, shall be filed on or before February 23, 2011.

DONE AND ORDERED this 27 day of December, 2010. th

s/Gary R. Jones

GARY R. JONES

United States Magistrate Judge
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1

Subsidiaries of Knology, Inc.:


     Interstate Telephone Company
     Valley Telephone Co., Inc.
     Globe Telecommunications, Inc.
           ITC Globe, Inc.
     Knology of Knoxville, Inc.
     Knology of Lexington, Inc.
     Knology of Louisville, Inc.
     Knology of Nashville, Inc.
     Knology of Kentucky, Inc.
     Knology of North Carolina, Inc.
     Knology of Tennessee, Inc.
     Knology Broadband, Inc.
           Knology of Augusta, Inc.
           Knology of Charleston, Inc.
           Knology of Columbus, Inc.
           Knology of Huntsville, Inc.
           Knology of Montgomery, Inc.
           Knology of Panama City, Inc.
           Knology of Alabama, Inc.
           Knology of Florida, Inc.
           Knology of Georgia, Inc.
           Knology of South Carolina, Inc.
# Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed April 26, 2023

. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________ No. 3D22

- 717 Lower Tribunal No. F15

- 8075

________________
Fabian Pickett , Appellant,

vs. The State of Florida , Appellee.
An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Miami

- Dade County, Mavel Ruiz , Judge. Daniel J. Tibbitt, P.A., and Daniel Tibbitt , for appellant

. Ashley Moody, Attorney General , and Katryna Santa Cruz, Assista nt Attorney General , for appellee.

Before LOGUE, SCALES and HENDON , JJ. SCALES, J.2 Fabian Pickett appeals the trial court’s summary denial of his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion. Picke t t’s post

- conviction motion alleged that Pickett is entitled to a new trial based both on newly discovered evidence and on six bases of ineffective assistance of trial counsel. Pickett was convicted of attempted second

- degree murder after firing multiple gun shots toward the v ictim. At trial, Pickett’s defense was that he fired his gun toward the victim in preemptive self

- defense , believing (though erroneously) that the victim might have a gun. The trial court sentenced Pickett to twenty years in prison, applying a minimum mand atory sentence . On plenary appeal, this Court upheld Pickett’s conviction and sentence. Pickett v. State , 254 So. 3d 1162 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018). About four years after sentencing , the victim signed an affidavit in which the victim recanted his trial testimony , and stated that, contrary to his testimony (and the testimony of several other witnesses) , the victim indeed was carrying a gun. In its detailed, eight

- page, well

- reasoned order, the trial court concluded that, even if the assertions in the victim’s affi davit were true, the outcome of the trial would have been no different because, at trial, Pickett testified that he did not see the victim holding any weapon. We, therefore, agree with the trial court that the victim’s recantation is immaterial to Pickett’s guilty verdict. See Stephens v. State , 829 So. 2d 945,3 945

- 46 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002) ( recognizing that (i) recantation evidence is a type of newly discovered evidence that “must be such that it would probably produce an acquittal on r etrial,” and (ii) “an evidentiary hearing in the context of recantations” is not required where the recantation affidavit is immaterial to the verdict). As to Pickett’s assertion that he was the victim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel, we agree with the trial court that none of Pickett’s asserted grounds meet s the standards of Strickland v. Washington , 466 U.S. 687 (1984). Affirmed.