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.                  

###### Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board

# AGENCY:

U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board.

# ACTION:

Notice of modification to two existing systems of records. 

# SUMMARY:

5 U.S.C. 552a requires that each federal agency review its systems of records containing personal information covered by the Privacy Act of 1974. As a result of its latest review, the Board is amending both of the systems of records that it maintains. A description of these systems was published in November 22, 2006 (71 FR 67654-67655). The Board proposed amending NWTRB-1 and expanding NWTRB-2 to include other information useful to the Board. In the first system, Administrative Files, some categories were overlooked in the previous notice. The Board further proposed expanding the second system, Mailing List, to become the Contact List. The Board determined that the changes to NWTRB-1 were important enough to republish the notice with the changes and that the changes to NWTRB-2 were substantial enough to accept comments on the proposed expansion until January 15, 2007. The Board received no comments on the proposed expansion. 

# DATES:

The changes to NWTRB-2 will become effective on February 28, 2007.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Victoria Reich, 703-235-4473.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Board currently maintains two systems of records , NWTRB-1 and NWTRB-2, that contain information covered by the Privacy Act of 1974. In its review of these systems, the Board has found classes of information that were not included in its previous notice and on November 22, 2006, republished NWTRB-1 with the corrections added. The Board further found that expanding the records in NWTRB-2 would make it more useful and requested comments from the public from November 22, 2006, until January 15, 2007. No comments were received during this period. Accordingly, the Board plans to proceed with the proposed changes on February 28, 2007.

Dated: February 23, 2007.

William D. Barnard, 

Executive Director, U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board.

[FR Doc. 07-885 Filed 2-27-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6820-AM-M
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs. 3:93cr3010/LAC

JORGE MALAGON, SR. 

ORDER

The defendant has filed a notice of appeal of this court’s order denying his motion

for a writ of error coram nobis. (Doc. 64 & 66). It does not appear that a certificate of

appealability is required under the circumstances of this case. See Finkelstein v. Spitzer,

455 F.3d 131, 132 (2 Cir. 2006) (citing United States v. Baptiste, 223 F.3d 188, 189 n.1 nd

(3 Cir. 2000)); United States v. Guerra, 187 Fed. Appx. 414, 415 (5 Cir. 2006); cf.

rd th

Galatolo v. United States, 196 Fed. Appx. 854 (11 Cir. 2006) (denying certificate of th

appealability where § 1651 motion was construed as impermissible second or successive

§ 2255 motion); United States v. Sullivan, 2005 WL 2090236 (11 Cir. 2005) (same). th

Therefore, to the extent that defendant’s notice of appeal is properly construed as a

request for a certificate of appealability, defendant’s request is denied as unnecessary. 1

See Guerra, 187 Fed.Appx. at 415.

Defendant has filed an “affidavit accompanying motion for leave to proceed in forma

pauperis,” which the court construes as a motion for leave to so proceed. The court finds

that the appeal is not taken in good faith and he is not otherwise entitled to so proceed.

Fed.R.App.P. 24(a)(3). Defendant shall therefore pay the $455.00 filing fee within thirty

See Edwards v. United States, 114 F.3d 1083 (11 Cir. 1997) (district courts must treat notices of

1 TH

appeal in Section 2255 actions as applications for certificates of appealability).

Case 3:93-cr-03010-LC Document 73 Filed 05/18/11 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

days.

DONE AND ORDERED this 18 day of May, 2011. th

s/L.A. Collier 

LACEY A. COLLIER

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case No: 3:93cr3010/LAC

Case 3:93-cr-03010-LC Document 73 Filed 05/18/11 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 32.1

                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 Quarterly  Report of Pacific  Bepure  Industry Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q,  for the fiscal  quarter ended March 31, 2011, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
I, Haiting Li, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18
U.S.C.ss.1350,  as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

     (1)  The Report fully  complies with the  requirements  of section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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: May 20, 2011                       By: /s/ Haiting Li
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Haiting Li
                                            Chief Executive Officer
                                            (Principal Executive Officer)
Document No. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

VS CASE NO. 3:01cr78-003LAC

EVION WITHERSPOON

REFERRAL AND ORDER

Referred to Judge Lacey Collier on February 4, 2008

Motion/Pleadings: MOTION FOR REDUCTION OF SENTENCE BASED ON 

RETROACTIVE GUIDELINE AMENDMENT, EFFECTIVE MARCH 03, 2008, 

CONCERNING COCAINE BASE (“CRACK”) THAT HAVE THE EFFECT OF LOWERING 

GUIDELINE RANGE 

Filed by DEFENDANT PRO SE on 2/4/2008 Doc.# 178

RESPONSES:

on Doc.#

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 5th day of

February, 2008, that:

(a) The relief requested is DENIED.

(b) Without prejudice. The retroactive application does not become effective

until 3 March 2008. 

 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-00078-LC Document 180 Filed 02/05/08 Page 1 of 1
# C_2010093EN.01001401.xml

| 13.4.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 93/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.4.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 93/14

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5717 — The Stanley Works/The Black & Decker Corporation)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2010/C 93/07

On 12 March 2010, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32010M5717. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32010M5717. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
SIXTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

Case No. 6D23-2923

Lower Tribunal No. CF20-008001-XX

_____________________________

TEVIN JAMAR DAVIS,

Appellant, 

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Polk County.

Wm. Bruce Smith, Judge.

April 30, 2024

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

TRAVER, C.J., and STARGEL, J., and LAMBERT, B.D., Associate Judge, concur.

Howard L. “Rex” Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Kimberly Nolen Hopkins, 

Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Wendy Buffington, Assistant 

Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING 

AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF TIMELY FILED
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-2296

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ROBERT I. REAMER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District ofMaryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA98-2626-CCB) Submitted: February 24, 2000 Decided: March 1, 2000 Before MOTZ and KING, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert I. Reamer, Appellant Pro Se. William Sears Estabrook, III, Marion Elizabeth Erickson, Teresa Thomas Milton, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).1 In this court, Reamer seeks to present additional evidence and arguments that were not presented to the district court. This court cannot consider materials outside the record, see First Nat’l Bank v. Fockler , 649 F.2d 213, 215-16 (4th Cir. 1981), and ordinarily does not consider issues raised for the first time on appeal. See Grossman v. Commissioner , 182 F.3d 275, 281 (4th Cir. 1999). Therefore, we decline to consider the extraneous evidence and issues. 2 Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on June 30, 1999, the district court’s records show that it was entered on the docket sheet on July 1, 1999. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date the order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date of the district court’s decision. See Wilson v. Murray , 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986). 2 PER CURIAM: Robert Reamer appeals from the district court’s order grantingthe government’s motion for summary judgment and reducing to judgment the assessed tax liability against Reamer for the tax years 1981, 1982, and 1983. We have reviewed the record1 and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Reamer , No. CA-98-2626-CCB (D. Md. July 1, 1999). 2 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
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.                  

###### Federal Housing Finance Board

# Time and Date: 

The open meeting of the Board of Directors is scheduled to begin at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, April 9, 2008. The closed portion of the meeting will follow immediately the open portion of the meeting.

# Place: 

Board Room, First Floor, Federal Housing Finance Board, 1625 Eye Street, NW., Washington, DC 20006.

# Status: 

The first portion of the meeting will be open to the public. The final portion of the meeting will be closed to the public.

# Matter To Be Considered At The Open Portion: 

Affordable Housing Program Amendments.

# Matter To Be Considered At The Closed Portion: 

Periodic Update of Examination Program Development and Supervisory Findings.

# Contact Person For More Information: 

                        Shelia Willis, Paralegal Specialist, Office of General Counsel, at 202-408-2876 or                         *williss@fhfb.gov.*

Dated: April 2, 2008. 

By the Federal Housing Finance Board.

Neil R. Crowley, 

Acting General Counsel.

[FR Doc. 08-1108 Filed 4-3-08 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6725-01-P
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:*                         National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; Partnerships to Improve Diagnosis and Treatment of Selected Drug-Resistant Healthcare-Association Infections.                    

*Date:*                         March 13, 2007.                    

*Time:*                         8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         Gaithersburg Marriott Washingtonian Center, 9751 Washingtonian Boulevard, Salon G of the Grant Ballroom, Gaithersburg, MD 20878.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Alec Ritchie, Ph.D, Scientific Review Administrator, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institutes of Health/NIAID/DHHS, 6700 B Rockledge Drive, MSC 7616, Bethesda, MD 20892-7616, 301-435-1614,                         *aritchie@niaid.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: February 20, 2007.

Anna Snouffer,

Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 07-927 Filed 2-28-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-7731
CLARENCE HUELL, Petitioner - Appellant,
v. STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA HUMAN AFFAIRS COMMISSION; HENRY MCMASTER, Attorney General, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenv ille. Henry F. Floyd, District Judge. (6:06-cv-02562-HFF) Submitted: April 24, 2008 Decided: April 28, 2008 Before KING and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Clarence Huell, Appellant Pro Se. Samuel Creighton Waters, Donald John Zelenka, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.* For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack , 487 U.S. 266 (1988). - 2 - PER CURIAM: Clarence Huell seeks to appeal the district court’s orders accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition and denying his subsequent Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. Parties are accorded thirty days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). This appeal period is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Dir., Dep’t of Corr. , 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson , 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). The district court’s final order denying Huell’s timely filed Rule 59(e) motion was entered on the docket on October 16, 2007. The notice of appeal wasfiled on November 19, 2007. * Because Huell failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal- 3 - contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

v.

CRAIG A. ALFORD

PETITION OF: FREDERICK MARK 

CUTAIO, ESQUIRE

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 9 MM 2023

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 4

th day of May, 2023, in consideration of the Petition to Withdraw 

as Counsel, this matter is REMANDED to the Court of Common Pleas of Monroe County 

to determine whether to permit Attorney Frederick Mark Cutaio to withdraw. In the event 

Attorney Cutaio is allowed to withdraw, the court shall resolve any related questions, 

including whether to appoint new counsel. 

The Court of Common Pleas of Monroe County is DIRECTED to enter its order on 

remand within 90 days and to promptly notify this Court of its determination.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

JOANSELLA STEVENS,

a/k/a/ LISA YOUNG,

Petitioner, 

vs. CASE NO. 5:11-cv-52/RS-EMT

KENNETH S. TUCKER, 

Respondent. 

_________________________________________ /

UORDER

Before me is the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 35). No 

objections have been filed. 

IT IS ORDERED: 

1. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted and 

incorporated by reference in this Order. 

2. This case is DISMISSED without prejudice for Petitioner’s failure to comply 

with an order of the court.

3. The clerk is directed to close the file. 

ORDERED on April 23, 2012.

 /S/ Richard Smoak

 RICHARD SMOAK

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 5:11-cv-00052-RS-EMT Document 37 Filed 04/23/12 Page 1 of 1
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

In the

United States Court of Appeals

For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 21-13722

Non-Argument Calendar

____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MIKEL WAYNE NUNNALLY, 

Defendant-Appellant.

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Florida

D.C. Docket No. 6:21-cr-00007-PGB-GJK-1

____________________

USCA11 Case: 21-13722 Date Filed: 06/13/2022 Page: 1 of 2
2 Opinion of the Court 21-13722

Before JORDAN, NEWSOM, and LUCK, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:

Stephen Langs, appointed counsel for Mikel Nunnally in this 

direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. 

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of 

the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to 

withdraw is GRANTED, and Nunnally’s convictions and sentences

are AFFIRMED.

USCA11 Case: 21-13722 Date Filed: 06/13/2022 Page: 2 of 2
**Exhibit
        23.1**
 
 
 
 **GRUBER
          & COMPANY, LLC**
 **400
          Lake Saint Louis Blvd.**
 **Lake
          Saint Louis, MO, United States**
 **Phone:
          (636) 561-5639**
  
 
 
 
 
 **Consent
        of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**
 
 
 We
        consent to the use of our report dated February 1, 2007, relating to the
        financial statements of The Blackhawk Fund (“Blackhawk”) which include the
        statements of operations, stockholders' deficit and cash flows for the year
        ended December 31, 2006 appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of
        Blackhawk as of December 31, 2006.
  
 /s/ 
        Gruber & Company, LLC
 Lake St.
        Louis, Missouri
 
 March
        15,
        2007