alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20
- 6370

JONATHAN ALLEN , Petitioner

- Appellant ,

v.
WARDEN D. L. YOUNG , Respondent

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia , at Beckley

. Frank W. Volk , District Judge. ( 5:18

- cv
- 01306 )

Submitted : August 25, 2020 Decided: August 28, 2020

Before KING and AGEE , Circuit Judges , and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Jonathan Allen , Appellant Pro Se

.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Jonathan Allen , a federal prisoner, appeals the district court ’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on Allen’s 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition challenging his prison disciplinary proceeding

. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Allen v. Young , No. 5:18

- cv
- 01306 (S.D.W. Va. Dec. 16, 2019 ). We deny as unnecessary Allen’s motion for a certificate of appealability and dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
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 GMS Capital Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10–Q for the period ended September 30, 2012, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Stephane Solis, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of his knowledge, 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.  /s/ Stephane SolisStephane Solis
Chief Executive Officer  Dated: December 14, 2012
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1000

FRANK THOMAS BROWN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus THEODORE THORNTON; BALTIMORE CITY PUBLIC SCHOOLS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-01- 3263-L) Submitted: February 5, 2002 Decided: February 28, 2002 Before WILKINS and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Frank Thomas Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Brian K. Williams, Assistant General Counsel, WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Frank T. Brown appeals the district court’s order denying hismotion for appointment of counsel filed in his employment discrimination action. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the order is not appealable. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1994), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders. 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (1994); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp. , 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order here appealed is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. We dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. 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
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 86 (Wednesday, May 5, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 24392]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-10453]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Parts 1b and 157

[Docket No. RM10-21-000; Order No. 734]


Transferring Certain Enforcement Hotline Matters to the Dispute 
Resolution Service: Correction

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Final Rule: correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is correcting a final 
rule that appeared in the Federal Register of April 26, 2010, 75 FR 
21503.
    The document transferred certain enforcement hotline matters to the 
Commission's Dispute Resolution Service. This document corrects various 
Part references on the first page of the rule and in the amendatory 
language.

DATES: Effective May 1, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stuart Fischer, Office of Enforcement, 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-8517.
    Nils Nichols, Office of Administrative Litigation/Dispute 
Resolution Service, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First 
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-8638.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In FR Document 2010-9125, published April 
26, 2010 (75 FR 21403), make the following corrections:
    1. On page 21503, column 2, the part heading is corrected to read: 
``18 CFR Parts 1b and 157''.
    2. On page 21505, column 2, the words of issuance are corrected to 
read as follows:
    ``In consideration of the foregoing, the Commission amends parts 1b 
and 157, Chapter 1, Title 18, Code of Federal Regulations, to read as 
follows:''
    3. On page 21505, column 3, amendatory instruction 1 is corrected 
to read as follows:
    ``1. The authority citation for part 157 continues to read as 
follows:''

 Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-10453 Filed 5-4-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<CIK> 0000741562
<NAME> FIRST LIBERTY BANK CORP.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                          15,438
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           2,752
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                10,207
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    126,390
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          65,249
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            66,127
<LOANS>                                        372,879
<ALLOWANCE>                                      4,571
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 609,100
<DEPOSITS>                                     498,174
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              3,795
<LONG-TERM>                                     50,702
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,993
<OTHER-SE>                                      54,436
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 609,100
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 15,131
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                6,107
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                21,238
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               9,895
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              11,309
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            9,929
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      270
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  39
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  7,974
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,527
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       2,527
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,636
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.03
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.55
<LOANS-NON>                                      1,778
<LOANS-PAST>                                       457
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                     0
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                    0
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-1820

SAMUEL B. DAVIS., JR.,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

CITY OF NEWPORT NEWS, VIRGINIA; ESTATE OF GLADYS LOUISE 

BARCLAY, Successor in Interest to Louise Barclay Davis,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Newport News. Rebecca Beach Smith, 

District Judge. (4:10-cv-00033-TEM)

Submitted: October 14, 2010 Decided: October 20, 2010

Before MOTZ, KING, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Samuel B. Davis, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Marc Ericson Darnell, 

KAUFMAN & CANOLES, PC, Newport News, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Samuel B. Davis, Jr., appeals the district court’s 

order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint as time 

barred. The district court concluded that Davis’s complaint was 

analogous to a Virginia state law claim of personal injury, 

applied Virginia’s two-year statute of limitations for a 

personal injury claim, and dismissed as time barred. The court 

also noted it may lack jurisdiction in light of the nature of 

the relief Davis seeks. 

After reviewing the record, we conclude that the 

district court lacked jurisdiction over Davis’s complaint 

because of the nature of the relief sought. Davis essentially 

asked the district court to set aside unfavorable state court 

judgments. Davis has not identified any grant of federal 

jurisdiction allowing the district court to do so, and we 

conclude that the district court did not err in dismissing the 

complaint.

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district 

court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and 

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before the court and oral argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

AFFIRMED
Order entered April 18, 2022

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-21-01077-CR

DUSTIN MICHAEL ENGELKE, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 15th Judicial District Court

Grayson County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 072395

ORDER

Before the Court is court reporter Misty Skinner’s April 14, 2022 request for 

additional time to file the reporter’s record. We GRANT the request and ORDER 

the reporter’s record filed by May 4, 2022.

/s/ LANA MYERS 

JUSTICE
To the Board of Directors of
Nuveen Flagship Municipal Trust:
In planning and performing our audit of the financial
statements of NUVEEN FLAGSHIP MUNICIPAL TRUST
(a Massachusetts business trust, comprising the Nuveen
Intermediate Duration Municipal Bond Fund, Nuveen
Insured Municipal Bond Fund, Nuveen Flagship All-
American Municipal Bond Fund, Nuveen Flagship
Intermediate Municipal Bond Fund,  Nuveen Flagship
Limited Term Municipal Bond Fund and Nuveen High
Yield Municipal Bond Fund) for the year ended April 30,
2000, we considered its internal control, including control
activities for safeguarding securities, in order to determine
our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our
opinion on the financial statements and to comply with the
requirements of Form N-SAR, and not to provide
assurance on internal control.
The management of Nuveen Flagship Municipal Trust is
responsible for establishing and maintaining internal
control.  In fulfilling this responsibility, estimates and
judgments by management are required to assess the
expected benefits and related costs of controls. Generally,
controls that are relevant to an audit pertain to the entity's
objective of preparing financial statements for external
purposes that are fairly presented in conformity with
generally accepted accounting principles.  Those controls
include the safeguarding of assets against unauthorized
acquisition, use or disposition.
Because of inherent limitations in internal control, errors or
fraud may occur and not be detected.  Also, projection of
any evaluation of internal control to future periods is
subject to the risk that it may become inadequate because
of changes in conditions or that the effectiveness of the
design and operation may deteriorate.
Our consideration of internal control would not
necessarily disclose all matters in internal control  that
might be material weaknesses under standards established
by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.
A material weakness is a condition in which the design or
operation of the internal control components does not
reduce to a relatively low level the risk that misstatements
caused by error or fraud in amounts that would be
material in relation to the financial statements being
audited may occur and not be detected by employees in
the normal course of performing their assigned functions.
However, we noted no matters involving internal control,
including controls for safeguarding securities, that we
consider to be material weaknesses as defined above as of
April 30, 2000.
This report is intended solely for the information and use
of management and the Board of Directors of Nuveen
Flagship Municipal Trust and the Securities and Exchange
Commission.


	  ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP
/s/     ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP


Chicago, Illinois
June 20, 2000
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 Form 10-Q of Farm Lands of Guinea, Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, in his capacity as an officer of the company, certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.







Date: August 16, 2011/s/ Mark KeeganMark KeeganPresident and Chief Executive Officer(principal executive officer)/s/ Michael BartonMichael BartonChief Financial Officer(principal financial and accounting officer)





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 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.
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">Eugene M. Wilson, Appellant, <br><br>against<br><br>Bart Silverman, D.M.D., and Michael Graffeo, Respondents.</font></b></div><br><br><p>Appeal, on the ground of inadequacy, from a judgment of the Justice Court of the Town of Clarkstown, Rockland County (Scott B. Ugell, J.), entered October 16, 2014. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $32.</p><p>ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.</p><p>In this small claims action, plaintiff seeks to recover the principal sum of $500 as the alleged value of a gold crowned tooth that was extracted from his mouth and was not returned to him upon his request. After a nonjury trial, the Justice Court awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $32. Plaintiff appeals on the ground of inadequacy.</p><p>In a small claims action, our review is limited to a determination of whether "substantial justice has . . . been done between the parties according to the rules and principles of substantive law" (UJCA 1807; <i>see</i> UJCA 1804; <i>Ross v Friedman</i>, 269 AD2d 584 [2000]; <i>Williams v Roper</i>, 269 AD2d 125, 126 [2000]). The determination of a trier of fact as to issues of credibility is given substantial deference, as a trial court's opportunity to observe and evaluate the testimony and demeanor of the witnesses affords it a better perspective from which to assess their credibility (<i>see Vizzari v State of New York</i>, 184 AD2d 564 [1992]; <i>Kincade v Kincade</i>, 178 AD2d 510, 511 [1991]). This deference applies with greater force to judgments rendered in the Small Claims Part of the court (<i>see Williams v Roper</i>, 269 AD2d at 126). In the case at bar, the record establishes that although plaintiff failed to establish his damages, defendants conceded that the precious metal on the tooth was worth approximately $32. Consequently, the court's award of $32 in favor of plaintiff provided the parties with substantial justice (<i>see</i> UJCA 1804, 1807).</p><p>Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.</p><p>Brands, J.P., Marano and Tolbert, JJ., concur.</p><br>Decision Date: October 21, 2016<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_2_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
CHIEF JUSTICE

ROGELIO VALDEZ

JUSTICES

NELDA V. RODRIGUEZ

DORI CONTRERAS GARZA

GINA M. BENAVIDES

GREGORY T. PERKES

NORA L. LONGORIA

CLERK

CECILE FOY GSANGER NUECES COUNTY COURTH OUSE

901 LEOPARD, 10TH FL OOR

CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS 78401

361

- 888

- 0416 (TEL)

361

- 888

- 0794 (FAX)

HIDALGO COUNTY

ADMINISTRATION BLDG.

100 E. CANO, 5TH FLO OR

EDINBURG, TEXAS 7853 9

956

- 318

- 2405 (TEL)

956

- 318

- 2403 (FAX)

www.txcourts.gov/13thcoa 

# Court of Appeals

Thirteenth District of Texas

July 13, 2015

Mr. Robert J. Wortham

Criminal District Attorney

1085 Pearl Street, Suite 300

Beaumont, TX 77701

* DELIVERED VIA E

- MAIL *

Hon. Kevin Sekaly

- Cribbs

Attorney at Law

7705 Calder Avenue

Beaumont, TX 77706

* DELIVERED VIA E

- MAIL * Hon. Wayln G. Thompson

Assistant District Attorney

Jefferson County Courthouse

1001 Pearl Street, 3rd Floor

Beaumont, TX 77701

* DELIVERED VIA E

- MAIL *

Hon. D. Ann Manes

Asst. Crim. District Attorney

1085 Pearl Street, Ste. 300

Beaumont, TX 77701

* DELIVERED VIA E

- MAIL *

Re: Cause No. 13

- 14

- 00380

- CR

Tr.Ct.No. 12

- 14114

Style: Lawrence James Jr. v. The State of Texas

Appellant ’s motion for extension of time to file brief in the above cause was this

day GRANTED by this Court. The time has been e x tended to Monday, August 10,

2015

.

Very truly yours,

Cecile Foy Gsanger, Clerk

CFG:ch
Exhibit 32.1

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION1350

 

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEYACT OF 2002

 

 

In connection with the annual report of PremierHolding Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014, as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission (the “Report”), the undersigned principal executive and financial officer of Premier herebycertifies 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 complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2) The information containedin the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

Date: April 15, 2015

 

*/s/ Randall Letcavage*

Randall Letcavage

Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer

(Principal Executive Officer and Principal Finance and AccountingOfficer)
**SECTION
906 CERTIFICATION:**
 
 
 Exhibit
      32.2
 
 
 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO
 18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350
 ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO
 SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  
 Certification
of CFO
 
 In
connection with the Annual Report of Sentry Technology Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report"), I,
Peter J. Mundy, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
Section 18 U.S.C. 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) and 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.
 
 
 By:
    /s/ PETER J. MUNDYPeter J. MundyVice President and Chief Financial OfficerApril 12, 2005
 
 A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
by Section 906, 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.
 
 This
certification accompanies this Report on Form 10-KSB pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by
such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"). Such
certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing
under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the
extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.
II

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1670

To revise the boundary of Fort Matanzas National Monument, and for other

purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 30, 1999

Mr. GRAHAM (for himself and Mr. MACK) introduced the following bill; which

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural

Resources

A BILL

To revise the boundary of Fort Matanzas National

Monument, and for other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. DEFINITIONS.

4 In this Act:

5 (1) MAP.—The term ‘‘Map’’ means the map en6 titled ‘‘Fort Matanzas National Monument’’, num7 bered 347/80,004 and dated February, 1991.

8 (2) MONUMENT.—The term ‘‘Monument’’

9 means the Fort Matanzas National Monument in

10 Florida.
2

S 1670 IS

1 (3) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means

2 the Secretary of the Interior.

3 SEC. 2. REVISION OF BOUNDARY.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—The boundary of the Monument

5 is revised to include an area totaling approximately 70

6 acres, as generally depicted on the Map.

7 (b) AVAILABILITY OF MAP.—The Map shall be on file

8 and available for public inspection in the office of the Di9 rector of the National Park Service.

10 SEC. 3. ACQUISITION OF ADDITIONAL LAND.

11 The Secretary may acquire any land, water, or inter12 ests in land that are located within the revised boundary

13 of the Monument by—

14 (1) donation;

15 (2) purchase with donated or appropriated

16 funds;

17 (3) transfer from any other Federal agency; or

18 (4) exchange.

19 SEC. 4. ADMINISTRATION.

20 Subject to applicable laws, all land and interests in

21 land held by the United States that are included in the

22 revised boundary under section 2 shall be administered by

23 the Secretary as part of the Monument.
3

S 1670 IS

1 SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

2 There are authorized to be appropriated such sums

3 as are necessary to carry out this Act.

Æ