alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

ELIO DIEGUEZ FRIAS,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 4:11cv138-RH/WCS

IMMIGRATION & CUSTOM

ENFORCEMENT,

Respondent.

_________________________________/

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION AS MOOT

This petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is before

the court on the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, ECF No. 13, and

the objections, ECF No. 14. I have reviewed de novo the issues raised by the

objections. 

The petitioner, who is in state custody on a state criminal charge, has

obtained the only relief he sought in the petition—the cancellation of a detainer

placed by the respondent Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. He

now seeks different relief—in effect, an injunction requiring state correctional

Case 4:11-cv-00138-RH-WCS Document 15 Filed 07/19/11 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

authorities to change his classification and thus to change the petitioner’s

conditions of confinement. That is relief not available through a § 2241 petition or

from the respondent. The report and recommendation correctly concludes that the

petition is moot. 

This order expresses no opinion on whether the petitioner would be entitled

to relief from state correctional authorities or a court on a different basis. He

plainly is not entitled to relief on this § 2241 petition against this respondent. 

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED:

The report and recommendation is ACCEPTED and adopted as the court’s

further opinion. The clerk must enter judgment stating, “The petition is dismissed

as moot.” The clerk must close the file.

SO ORDERED on July 18, 2011.

s/Robert L. Hinkle 

United States District Judge

Case No: 4:11cv138-RH/WCS

Case 4:11-cv-00138-RH-WCS Document 15 Filed 07/19/11 Page 2 of 2
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23
- 6968

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. VICTOR LEBRON, a/k/a Victor Labron , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia , at Big Stone Gap

. James P. Jones , Senior District Judge. ( 2:18

- cr - 00008

- JPJ

- PMS

- 2; 2:22

- cv 81510

- JPJ )

Submitted : December 19 , 2023 Decided: December 27, 2023

Before HARRIS, QUATTLEBAUM , and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. Victor Lebron, Appellant Pro Se. Steven Randall Ramseyer, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Abingdon, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-6968 Doc: 6 Filed: 12/27/2023 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM: Victor Lebron seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 225 5 motion . The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)( B ). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating tha t reasonable jurists c ould find the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong. See Buck v. Davis , 580 U.S. 100, 115

- 17 (2017). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Gonzalez v. Thaler , 565 U.S. 134, 140

- 41 (2012) (citing Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000))

. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Lebron has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argumen t would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED USCA4 Appeal: 23-6968 Doc: 6 Filed: 12/27/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
**EXHIBIT 23.2**

 

**CONSENTOF INDEPENDENT PETROLEUM ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS**

 

We hereby consent to theuse of the name Netherland, Sewell & Associates, Inc., and theuse of information taken from our reserve report for BPZ Resources, Inc.,dated March 18, 2010, with respect to the estimate of reserves and futurerevenue to the Company’s interest in certain oil and gas properties located inthe Corvina and Albacora fields, offshore Peru, as of December 31, 2009,in the Annual Report on Form 10-Kof BPZ Resources, Inc. to be filedon or about March 31, 2010. We further consent to the incorporation byreference of information contained in our report as of December 31, 2009,in the BPZ Resources, Inc. Registration Statement Nos. 333-147461,333-126388 and 333-147462 on Form S-8, and Registration Statement Nos.333-126934, 333-147463, 333-153427 and 333-158337 on Form S-3, and anyamendments to these Registration Statements.

 

 
|                |   | Netherland,  Sewell & Associates, Inc. |
|---------------------|--------|------------------------------------------------------|
|                |   |                                                 |
|                |   | By:                                                  | /s/ C. H. (Scott) Rees  III, P.E. |
|                |   | C.H. (Scott) Reese III,  P.E.                        |
|                |   | Chairman and Chief  Executive Officer                |
|                |   |                                                 |
|                |   |                                                 |
| Dallas, Texas       |   |                                                 |
| March 24, 2010 |   |                                                 |

 

----
#### IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF MARCO MILLENOVICH, Deceased.—No. 2—Executor, Appellant.

Interest on Money borrowed by Executors not allowed. An executor or administrator has no authority to borrow money for the use of the estate represented by him, nor will interest on money borrowed for the estate be allowed.

Appeal from the District Court of the First Judicial District, Storey County.

This was an appeal by the executor from the same decree which was the basis of the appeal by the legatees reported in the foregoing case.

*It. S Mesic/c*and *Williams*Bixler, for Executor, Appellant.

P. *0. Hundley,*for Legatees, Respondents.

Executors are not allowed to borrow money or allowed interest. *(Lneich*v. *Medin,*3 Nev. 109; *Storer*v. *Storer,*9 Mass. 37.)

The point of interest has been passed on by this Court, and is the law of this case. *(Lucich*v. *Medin,*3 Nev. 109 ; *Phelan*v. *San Francisco,*20 Cal. 39.)

By the Court,

Lewis, C. J.:

Marco Medin, the executor of the estate of Millenovich, appeals to this Court from that part of the decree disallowing certain items charged in his final account as interest paid on money borrowed for the estate.

In our opinion, the decree in this particular is correct. The statute no where confers upon an executor or administrator the authority to borrow money for the use of the estate represented by him. No order of Court directing him, to do so was produced in this case, nor was there any showing or offer to show that the necessities of the estate required anything of the kind. Were either shown, there might be some show of right upon the side of the appellant; but in the absence of both we must conclude that the borrowing of the money was without authority, and that the estate *190should not be charged with interest money so paid by him. We do not wish to be understood as holding that even an order of Court directing an executor to borrow money for the use of the estate, without a showing that its necessities required it, will justify the payment of interest, or entitle the executor to haye it allowed out of the estate if paid by him. It is sufficient here to say that, as neither was shown in this case, the appellant has failed to show error in the particular complained of. The decree, so far as it disallows the item of interest, is therefore affirmed.

WhitmaN, J., did not participate in the foregoing decision.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

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:*                         Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel, ZRG RUS F 51 Nephrology Applications.                     

*Date:*                         December 10-11, 2007.                    

*Time:*                         8 a.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Ryan G. Morris, PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4205, MSC 7814, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1501,                         *morrisr@csr.nih.gov*.                    

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. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: November 19, 2007.

Jennifer Spaeth, 

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 07-5877 Filed 11-29-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Alton Thomas Davis, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

November 5, 2010 

s1102 

Order 

 

November 5, 2010 

140629 (80) 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 140629 

 COA: 287146 

 Macomb CC: 2006-005398-FC 

STEVEN MICHAEL WACLAWSKI, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the defendant’s motion to exceed the 50-page limit for his 

application for leave to appeal the December 29, 2009 judgment of the Court of Appeals 

is DENIED. The defendant failed to provide extraordinary and compelling reasons in 

support of the submission of an application with 81 pages of substantive argument 

(including 37 pages of text numbered by Roman Numerals and incorrectly labeled a 

“Statement of Jurisdiction and Relief Requested”). Applications for leave to appeal must 

conform to MCR 7.302(1) and 7.212(B). The only exceptions to the 50-page limit 

provided at MCR 7.212(B) are for tables, indexes, and appendices. The Statement of 

Jurisdiction and Relief Requested is for a brief description of jurisdiction and the relief 

sought only. Arguments regarding the substantive issues are appropriately placed in the 

argument section of the brief only. In addition, this Court will not be considering the 

brief dated June 18, 2009, which the defendant filed in propria persona in the Court of 

Appeals and which is an attachment to the defendant’s application in this Court, because 

the defendant has cited no authority for applying Admin Order 2004-6, Standard 4 to 

filings in this Court. The defendant shall have 14 days from the date of this order to 

submit an application that conforms to the court rules.
|    |                                                                                                                                                                    |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 1. | I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A for the period ended June 30, 2018 of ARMOUR Residential REIT, Inc. (the “registrant”); |

|    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 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; |

|                       |
|-----------------------|
|                       |  |  |  |
| Date: August 24, 2018 |   |   |   |
|                  | ARMOUR RESIDENTIAL REIT, INC. |
|                  |   |   |   |
|                  |   | By: | /s/ Jeffrey J. Zimmer |
|                  |   |   | Jeffrey J. Zimmer |
|                  |   |   | Co-Chief Executive Officer |
N OTE : This disposition is nonprecedential. 

# United States Court of Appeals **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

SIMULATION TECHNOLOGY, LLC, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee.

____________________

2012-5075

______________________ Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims in case no. 11-CV-408, Judge Edward J. Damich.

______________________

JUDGMENT

______________________

E DWARD R. G AY , Bogin, Munns & Munns, P.A., of Orlando, Florida, argued for plaintiff-appellant.

R USSELL J. U PTON , Trial Attorney, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for defendant-appellee. With him on the brief were S TUART F. D ELERY , Acting Assistant Attorney General, J EANNE E. D AVIDSON , Director, and M ARTIN F. H OCKEY , J R ., Assistant Director.

______________________T HIS C AUSE having been heard and considered, it is

O RDERED and A DJUDGED :

P ER C URIAM (D YK , P LAGER , and R EYNA , Circuit Judges ).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

E NTERED BY O RDER OF THE C OURT

November 9, 2012 _____Jan Horbaly

_____________ Date Jan Horbaly Clerk
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 248 (Friday, December 28, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 73856]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-6212]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; 
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 contract proposals and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive 
and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel, NIDDK Bio-Sample and 
Genetics Repository Contract Review.
    Date: January 24, 2008.
    Time: 11 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 
Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference 
Call).
    Contact Person: Xiaodu Guo, MD, PhD, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of 
Health, Room 761, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452, 
301-594-4719, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#ff988a9087bf9a878b8d9ed191969b9b94d1919697d1989089"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="187f6d7760587d606c6a793676717c7c7336767170367f776e">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.847, 
Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Research; 93.848, Digestive 
Diseases and Nutrition Research; 93.849, Kidney Diseases, Urology 
and Hematology Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)


    Dated: December 19, 2007.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 07-6212 Filed 12-27-07; 8:45am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

TERRENCE K. McDAVID, 

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 1:11cv81-MP-GRJ

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE,

Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

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

Recommendation dated April 4, 2012. (Doc. 20). 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 any timely filed objections.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and any objections thereto

timely filed, 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. 

2. The final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying plaintiff’s

applications for disability, disability insurance and for supplemental security income

benefits is AFFIRMED.

DONE and ORDERED this 30th day of June, 2012.

M. Casey Rodgers

M. CASEY RODGERS

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:11-cv-00081-MP-GRJ Document 22 Filed 06/30/12 Page 1 of 1
# C_2011098EN.01000201.xml

| 30.3.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 98/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.3.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 98/2

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

29 March 2011

2011/C 98/02

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,4066 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 115,60 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4574 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,88145 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 8,9850 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,2957 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,9040 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 24,511 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 267,78 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7092 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 3,9955 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,1225 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,1982 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,3759 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3737 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,9664 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,8731 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,7763 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 565,34 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 9,6678 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 9,2280 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,3876 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 12 257,24 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,2599 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 61,220 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 39,9660 |
| THB | Thai baht | 42,662 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,3370 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 16,8405 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 62,9910 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,4066

JPY

Japanese yen

115,60

DKK

Danish krone

7,4574

GBP

Pound sterling

0,88145

SEK

Swedish krona

8,9850

CHF

Swiss franc

1,2957

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,9040

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

24,511

HUF

Hungarian forint

267,78

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7092

PLN

Polish zloty

3,9955

RON

Romanian leu

4,1225

TRY

Turkish lira

2,1982

AUD

Australian dollar

1,3759

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3737

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,9664

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,8731

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,7763

KRW

South Korean won

1 565,34

ZAR

South African rand

9,6678

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

9,2280

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,3876

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

12 257,24

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,2599

PHP

Philippine peso

61,220

RUB

Russian rouble

39,9660

THB

Thai baht

42,662

BRL

Brazilian real

2,3370

MXN

Mexican peso

16,8405

INR

Indian rupee

62,9910

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
---

Exhibit 32.1Section 1350 Certifications

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED 
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, Jorge Osvaldo Orellana Orellana, the Chief Executive Officer of Chile Mining Technologies Inc. (the “Company”), DOES HEREBY CERTIFY that:

1. The Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the six months ended September 30, 2010 (the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
and

2. Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this statement this 19th day of November, 2010.

/s/Jorge Osvaldo Orellana OrellanaJorge Osvaldo Orellana Orellana 
Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Chile Mining Technologies Inc. and will be retained by Chile Mining Technologies Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.

The forgoing certification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to § 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be
incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.

---