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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

DONNIE LEON THOMAS,

Petitioner,

v. Case No.: 3:11cv137/MCR/EMT

KENNETH S. TUCKER,

Respondent.

_____________________________/

ORDER

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

Recommendation dated July 20, 2012 (doc. 42). Plaintiff has been furnished a copy of the

Report and Recommendation and has 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 petition for writ of habeas corpus is DENIED.

3. A certificate of appealability is DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 30th day of August, 2012.

s/ M. Casey Rodgers 

M. CASEY RODGERS

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:11-cv-00137-MCR-EMT Document 47 Filed 08/30/12 Page 1 of 1
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6751

SAMUEL DEWITT MCCOTTER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus WILLIE SCOTT, Respondent - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (CA-98-76-5-BO) Submitted: November 10, 1998 Decided: November 30, 1998 Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Samuel Dewitt McCotter, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Samuel Dewitt McCotter seeks to appeal the district court’s order properly construing his motion as one filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998) and dismissing it. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. McCotter also seeks review of the transfer of his motion from the Northern District of Georgia to the Eastern District of North Carolina. We are without jurisdiction to consider a transferorder entered by a district court not within our territorial jurisdiction. See Linnell v. Sloan , 636 F.2d 65, 67 (4th Cir. 1980); Preston Corp. v. Raese , 335 F.2d 827, 828 (4th Cir. 1964). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. McCotter v. Scott , No. CA-98-76-5-BO (E.D.N.C. May 8, 1998). 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
**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 National Holdings Corporation (the
“Company”) on Form 10-K for fiscal year ended September 30, 2006 as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
      Robert H. Daskal, 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, to 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.








/s/
      Robert H. Daskal


Robert
      H.
      Daskal


Chief
      Financial Officer


December
      7, 2006
<PAGE>

                                                                      Exhibit 11



                  Western Pennsylvania Adventure Capital Fund
          Schedule of Computation of Earnings (Loss) Per Common Share
                                For the Periods


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                             January 1, 2001            January 1, 2000           January 1, 1999
                                                 Through                    Through                   Through
                                            December 31, 2001          December 31, 2000         December 31, 1999
<S>                                         <C>                        <C>                       <C>
Net Income (Loss)                                     $(1,544,681)            $  335,286               $  100,378
                                                      ===========             ==========               ==========
Weighted Average Number of
Common Shares Outstanding                               4,219,549              4,116,031                2,295,493
                                                      ===========             ==========               ==========

Earnings (Loss) per Common Share                      $     (0.37)            $     0.08               $     0.04
                                                      ===========             ==========               ==========
</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 4.15.2**

*Ministry of the Russian Federation for Communications*

**Amendment No. 2****to License No. 4879 (registration series A 001498)****dated August 30, 1996**

To add an additional clause to the Conditions For Carrying Out Activities Under License No. 4879:

“The Licensee shall effect payments out of income received for the rendered communication and information services, to the account of the Ministry of the Russian Federation for Communications and Informatization, pursuant to the standards established under Decree No. 380 of the Government of the Russian Federation as of April 28, 2000.

Transfer of cash funds shall be effected on a monthly basis subject to the actual income received for the communication and informatization services rendered in the preceding month, no later than the 20th day of the subsequent month. The amount to be transferred shall be confirmed each quarter upon the provision of accounting reports to the tax agencies.

With a view to effecting control over the completeness of cash transfers to the account of the Ministry of the Russian Federation for Communications and Information, the licensee shall, upon written request of the management of the department for control over communications and information in the relevant political subdivision of the Russian Federation, provide the corresponding accounting report form which reflects the income from the provided communications and information services.

This requirement shall be an inalienable part of the license issued earlier.”

 

| **First Deputy Minister****of the Russian Federation for****Communications and Information** |   | [Signature]       |   | Yu.A. Pavlenko     |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|-------------------|--------|--------------------|
|                                                                                         |   |              |   |               |
|                                                                                         |   |              |   | January 25, 2001   |
|                                                                                         |   |              |   |               |
| **Head of the Department****of the Organization****of Licensing Activity**                   |   | [Signature][Seal] |   | B.V. Vorobiev |

12
#### Alvin Dwight PETTIT, Maudine Rice Cooper, Charles B. Marshall, Jr., William H. Proctor, Ernest W. McIntosh, Jr., Jesse S. Waker and Bernard Bettis, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Appellants, v. Vincent L. GINERICH, Chairman, Charles H. Dorsey, Member and Dorothy H. Thompson, Member, all constituting the Maryland State Board of Law Examiners, Court of Appeals Building, Rowe Boulevard, Annapolis, Maryland, Appellees.

No. 77-1599.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Argued May 2, 1978.

Decided Sept. 18, 1978.

William H. Proctor, York, Pa. (James L. Foster, Baltimore, Md., Harris & Proctor, York, Pa., on brief), for appellants.

Steven P. Resnick, Asst. Atty. Gen., Baltimore, Md. (Francis B. Burch, Atty. Gen., of Maryland, Baltimore, Md., on brief), for appellees.

Before RUSSELL and WIDENER, Circuit Judges, and FIELD, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

This action, brought on behalf of seven black plaintiffs, and the members of the class whom they seek to represent, alleges that they are being, and have been, deprived of rights, privileges and immunities secured to them by the Constitution and laws of the United States, because they have failed the Bar Examination and been denied admission to practice law. After extensive discovery, the District Court allowed class certification, and upon defendants’ motion granted summary judgment for the defendants, holding that the Maryland State Bar examination did not discriminate against the plaintiffs on the basis of their race and was rationally related to the State’s interest in insuring the competence of the members of its Bar. The plaintiffs have appealed on the ground that summary judgment was improperly granted.

We have considered the record, briefs and oral arguments of counsel in this case, and we affirm on the District Court’s comprehensive findings of fact and conclusions of law, *Pettit v. Gingerich,*427 F.Supp. 282 (D.Md. filed February 22, 1977); and on our opinion in *Richardson v. McFadden*(4th Cir. 1977) 563 F.2d 1130.
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 Reserve System

# FOR MORE INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT:

Michelle Smith, Director, or Dave Skidmore, Assistant to the Board, Office of Board Members at 202-452-2955. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    You may call 202-452-3206 for a recorded announcement of this meeting; or you may contact the Board's Web site at                     *http://www.federalreserve.gov*                     for an electronic announcement. (The Web site also includes procedural and other information about the open meeting.)                 

Dated: July 8, 2008. 

Robert deV. Frierson, 

Deputy Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 08-1429 Filed 7-9-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

MARK BLACKMAN, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v. Case No. 3:11cv146/LAC

MIDWEST ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES,

INC., et al.

Defendants.

_______________________________/

ORDER OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT

THIS CAUSE having come before the Court on a Motion for Default Judgment (doc.

360) filed by Plaintiffs against Defendant Midwest Environmental Resources, Inc., who has

failed to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint. Default was entered on July 19,

2011. 

The Court being duly and sufficiently advised, it is hereby ORDERED:

1. The Motion for Default Judgment against Defendants is hereby GRANTED.

Case 3:11-cv-00146-LC-CJK Document 365 Filed 10/16/13 Page 1 of 3
2. JUDGMENT IS HEREBY ENTERED against Defendant Midwest

Environmental Resources, Inc., in the following amounts:

A. Damages (as they pertain to each Plaintiff):

1. Mark Blackman $3,635.10

2. Tracy Boyd $3,463.82

3. Lisa Bryant $1,451.27

4. Krystal Bullard $637.70

5. Gabe W. Charley $1,922.30

6. Alexander Ferguson $3,335.35

7. Arnold Green $2,222.03

8. William L. Harden $2,607.42

9. Challor Johnson $1,365.63

10. James Johnston $1,322.82

11. Lenzell King, Sr. $1,194.35

12. Steve Kitchen, III $2,992.79

13. Steve Kitchen, Jr. $2,179.22

14. Kendra Leashore $0.00

15. Kaolana Lyons $0.00

16. Felicia McCants $1,965.11

17. Iesha McCants $1,622.55

18. Marcel McCants $851.79

19. Kejuan McCants $0.00

20. James McCracken $3,292.54

21. Herbert McNeil $3,420.99

22. Leroy McPherson $466.42

23. Freelan Patterson $3,635.10

24. Seveyon V. Porter $1,451.27

25. Erskine Posey $1,579.74

26. Ellory Reed $3,292.54

27. Jennette Roberts $3,378.18

28. Darian Robinson $0.00

29. Frank Rogers $2,179.22

30. Terrell Rubin $1,708.19

31. Arthur Sorey $1,023.07

32. James Smart $337.95

33. Jennifer Stallworth $1,279.99

34. Mark Stallworth $1,279.99

Case No. 3:11cv146/LAC Page 2 of 3

Case 3:11-cv-00146-LC-CJK Document 365 Filed 10/16/13 Page 2 of 3
35. Reginald Stallworth $0.00

36. Katie Teague $0.00

37. Pamela Waldrup $3,463.82

TOTAL $59,991.34

B. Attorneys' Fees and Costs

Wiggins, Childs, Quinn & Pantazis $154,912.01

Henry Brewster, LLC $ 68,253.93

Total Attorneys' Fees and Costs: $223.165.94

3. As judgment or settlement now has been attained as to all Defendants, the Clerk

is directed to close the case. 

ORDERED on this 16th day of October, 2013.

s/L.A. Collier

Lacey A. Collier

Senior United States District Judge

Case No. 3:11cv146/LAC Page 3 of 3

Case 3:11-cv-00146-LC-CJK Document 365 Filed 10/16/13 Page 3 of 3
* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, e xcept under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and col lateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judg ments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and condi tions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

** Honorable Robin J. Cauthron, District Judge, UnitedStates District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma, sitting by de signation. 

## F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### MAR 31 1997 

### PATRICK FISHER Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
KATHLEEN J. BOYER,

Plaintiff-Appellant,
v. JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,

Defendant-Appellee. No. 96-3123 (D.C. No. 94-4078-SAC) (D. Kan.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before BRORBY and KELLY, Circuit Judges, and CAUTHRON, ** District Judge. After examining the briefs and appellate record, th is panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materiallyassist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The c ase is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.-2-

In this action alleging an unlawful constructive di scharge from public employment, plaintiff appeals the district court’s decision dismissing her state law claim, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), and granting defendant s ummary judgment on her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c). Reviewing the district court’s decisions de novo, see McCarter v. West , 105 F.3d 1335, 1336 (10th Cir. 1997) (summary judgment); Yoder v. Honeywell Inc. , 104 F.3d 1215, 1224 (10th Cir. 1997) (Rule 12 (b)(6)), we AFFIRM for substant ially the reasons stated in the district court’s memorandum and order dated March 5 , 1996, Boyer v. Board of County Comm’rs , 922 F. Supp. 476 (D. Kan. 1996).

Entered for the Court
Wade Brorby Circuit Judge
```

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 12 (Thursday, January 17, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 3269]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 08-144]

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

JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES

Meeting of the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Rules of 
Evidence

AGENCY: Judicial Conference of the United States Advisory Committee on 
Rules of Evidence.

ACTION: Notice of open meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Advisory Committee on Rules of Evidence will hold a two-
day meeting. The meeting will be open to public observation but not 
participation.

Dates: May 1-2, 2008.

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

ADDRESSES: Millennium Bostonian Hotel, 26 North Street-Faneuil Hall 
Marketplace, Boston, MA 02109.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John K. Rabiej, Chief, Rules Committee 
Support Office, Administrative Office of the United States Courts, 
Washington, DC 20544, telephone (202) 502-1820.

    Dated: January 11, 2008.
John K. Rabiej,
Chief, Rules Committee Support Office.
[FR Doc. 08-144 Filed 1-16-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 2210-55-M
```
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 215 (Wednesday, November 7, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 62866]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-5553]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium, 
Inc.

    Notice is hereby given that, on October 12, 2007, pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Network Centric Operations 
Industry Consortium, Inc. has filed written notifications 
simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade 
Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were 
filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the 
recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified 
circumstances. Specifically, Telindus, Heverlee, BELGIUM; Advanced 
Virtual Engine Test Cell, Inc., Springfield, OH; Chandler/May, Inc., 
Huntsville, AL; and Australian Department of Defence, Canberra, ACT, 
AUSTRALIA have been added as parties to this venture. Also, Gallium 
Visual Systems Inc., Ottawa, Ontario CANADA; and EFW Incorporated, Fort 
Worth, TX have withdrawn as parties to this venture. In addition, 
MilSOFT Yazilim Teknolojileri A.S. has changed its name to MilSOFT ICT-
Iletisim Teknolojileri A.S., Ankara, TURKEY.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership on planned 
activity of the group research project. Membership in this group 
research project remains open, and Network Centric Operations Industry 
Consortium, Inc. intends to file additional written notifications 
disclosing all changes in membership.
    On November 19, 2004, Network Centric Operations Industry 
Consortium, Inc. filed its original notification pursuant to Section 
6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the 
Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on February 2, 
2005 (70 FR 5486).
    The last notification was filed with the Department on July 25, 
2007. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to 
Section 6(b) of the Act on August 24, 2007 (72 FR 48680).

Patricia A. Brink,
Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 07-5553 Filed 11-6-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

ROSALIND STUBBS, 

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No. 4:11cv160-WS/WCS 

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE

Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant.

 /

REPORT AND R ECOMMENDATION

This cause is before the Court upon referral from the clerk. In an order filed July

7, 2011, Plaintiff was directed to file a memorandum in support of his position by August

31, 2011. Doc. 9. Because Plaintiff failed to file a response to that order, a show

cause order was entered on September 12, 2011, allowing Plaintiff one final opportunity

to file his memorandum within 15 days. Plaintiff was warned of dismissal if he failed to

respond. Doc. 10. To date, Plaintiff has failed to file a response. 

A trial court has inherent power to dismiss a case sua sponte for failure to

prosecute. See Link v. Wabash R.R., 370 U.S. 626, 82 S.Ct. 1386, 8 L.Ed.2d 734

(1962). Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) authorizes a district court to dismiss an action for failure to

obey a court order. Moon v. Newsome, 863 F.2d 835, 838 and cases cited (11th Cir.)

Case 4:11-cv-00160-WS-WCS Document 11 Filed 10/07/11 Page 1 of 2
cert. denied, 493 U.S. 863 (1989). Because Plaintiff has failed to prosecute his case,

his complaint should be dismissed.

It is therefore respectfully RECOMMENDED that this case be DISMISSED

WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to prosecute.

IN CHAMBERS at Tallahassee, Florida, on October 7, 2011. 

s/ William C. Sherrill, Jr. 

WILLIAM C. SHERRILL, JR.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and

recommendations within 14 days after being served with a copy of this report and

recommendation. A party may respond to another party's objections within 14 days after being

served with a copy thereof. Failure to file specific objections limits the scope of review of

proposed factual findings and recommendations.

Case No. 4:11cv160-WS/WCS

Case 4:11-cv-00160-WS-WCS Document 11 Filed 10/07/11 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 on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended December 31, 2010 of Auburn Bancorp, Inc. (the “Company”) as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Allen T. Sterling, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:




(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.




The foregoing certification shall not be deemed to be filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or otherwise subject to liability under that section.  This certification shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Exchange Act except to the extent this Exhibit 32.1 is expressly and specifically incorporated by reference in any such filing.




Date: February 8, 2011

/s/ Allen T. SterlingName:  Allen T. SterlingTitle:    President and Chief Executive Officer

(Principal Executive Officer)




A signed original of this written statement required by 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.