alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-40853 Summary Calendar

MICHAEL ANDERSON GILBERT, Petitioner-Appellant,

versus MICHAEL PURDY, Warden; U.S. PAROLE COMMISSION, Respondents-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. C-97-CV-276

- - - - - - - - - - August 6, 1999 Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Michael Anderson Gilbert, federal prisoner # 52595-080, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition for abuse of the writ of habeas corpus. Gilbert argues that the parole commission improperly imposed parole conditions that he participate in a drug aftercare program and abstain from alcohol. Gilbert filed two previous petitions under § 2241, but did not challenge the parole provisions in either of these petitions.No. 98-40853 -2-

He now appeals the dismissal of his third § 2241 petition in which he challenges the parole provisions. A second or successive habeas petition that raises a claim for the first time is generally regarded as an abuse of the writ, unless the petitioner can show cause for his failure to raise the claim and prejudice from the errors which form the basis of his complaint; or that a refusal to hear the claim will result in a fundamental miscarriage of justice. McCleskey v. Zant , 499 U.S. 467, 493-95 (1991). Gilbert has failed to demonstrate sufficient cause for his failure to challenge the parole conditions in his earlier § 2241 petitions. Accordingly, the district court’s dismissal of Gilbert’s petition for abuse of the writ is AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 32.1

SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, I, Stephen
Pelletier, Chief Executive Officer and President of Prudential Annuities Life Assurance Corporation (the Company), hereby certify that the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 (the
Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.

Dated: March 16, 2009



/s/ Stephen PelletierName:

Stephen PelletierTitle:

Chief Executive Officer and President


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not
being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
<PAGE>   1



                                                                      EXHIBIT 23











INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
33-52092 on Form S-8, 333-29881 on Form S-8 and 333-14463 on Form S-3 of
ShoLodge, Inc. of our reports dated April 1, 1998, appearing in this Annual
Report on Form 10-K of ShoLodge, Inc. for the year ended December 28, 1997.




/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Nashville, Tennessee
April 10, 1998
Order entered May 22, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-12-01599-CV

VICTOR MALDONADO, Appellant

V.

SUMEER HOMES, INC., PALMER DRYWALL, LLC, AND ISC BUILDING 

MATERIALS, INC., Appellees

ORDER 

The Court GRANTS appellant’s May 17, 2013 unopposed motion for extension of time 

to file letter brief regarding jurisdiction and ORDERS appellant’s letter brief filed concurrently 

with the motion filed as of the date of this order. 

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS 

JUSTICE
# Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed July 24, 2024

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

________________ No. 3D23

- 1816 Lower Tribunal No. 2022

- AP

- 1

- M

________________ 

### Richard Harper , Petitioner,

vs. 

### City of Key Colony Beach , Respondent.

On Petition for Writ of Certiorari from the Circuit Court for M onro e County, Appellate Division, Timothy J. Koenig , Judge. Andrew M. Tobin, P.A., and Andrew M. Tobin , for petitioner. Johnson, Anselmo, Murdoch, Burke, Piper & Hochman, P.A., and Jeffrey L. Hochman (Fort Lauderdale) , for respondent.

Before LOGUE, C.J., and EMAS and LINDSEY , JJ. PER CURIAM.2 Denied. See Haines City Cmty . Dev. v. Heggs , 658 So. 2d 523, 530 (Fla. 1995) ( “As a case travels up the judicial ladder, review should consistently become narrower, not broader.” ); Dep’t of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles v. Saxlehner , 96 So. 3d 1002, 1005 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012) ( “ Becaus e this case involves second

- tier certiorari, our scope and standard of review is quite limited

. . . . A district court of appeal may not utilize second

tier review to correct simple legal error. To permit such a broad scope of review would, in essence, per mit a second appeal, nullifying the narrowing scope of review described in Haines

. ”) (citation omitted). See also Custer Med. Ctr. v. United Auto. Ins. Co. , 62 So. 3d 1086, 1092 (Fla. 2010) (“ [W]hen a district court considers a petition for second

- tier cer tiorari review, the ‘inquiry is limited to whether the circuit court afforded procedural due process and whether the circuit court applied the correct law,’ or, as otherwise stated, departed from the essential requirements of law.” ) (quoting Haines , 658 So

. 2d at 530) ; State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. CEDA Health of Hialeah, LLC , 300 So. 3d 748, 750

- 51 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020 ) (“ Our analysis is limited ‘ by the narrow scope of second

- tier certiorari review of a circuit court acting in its appellate capacity. ’ ”) (quoting State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. CC Chiropractic, LLC , 245 So. 3d 755, 758 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) ).
EXHIBIT 21

                                  SUBSIDIARIES

        Company                              State of Incorporation/Organization
        -------                              -----------------------------------
Agro Dynamics Canada, Inc.                                Canada
Agro Dynamics, Inc.                                      Delaware
Agro Power Development, Inc.                             Delaware
Cogentrix Greenhouse Investments, Inc.                   Delaware
Cogentrix of Buffalo, Inc.                               Delaware
Cogentrix of Fort Davis I, Inc.                          Delaware
Cogentrix of Marfa, Inc.                                 Delaware
Cogentrix of Pocono, Inc.                                Delaware
EcoScience Produce Systems Corp.                         Delaware
Keystone Village Farms, LLC                              Delaware
New Amsterdam Joint Venture, LLC                         Delaware
New Amsterdam Management, Co.                            Delaware*
Pocono Village Farms, LP                                 Delaware
Village Farms International Finance Association          Delaware
Village Farms Mediterranean, Inc.                        Delaware
Village Farms of Buffalo, LP                             Delaware
Village Farms of Colorado, Inc.                          Delaware
Village Farms of Delaware, LLC                           Delaware
Village Farms of Marfa, LP                               Delaware
Village Farms of Texas, LP                               Delaware
Village Farms of Virginia, Inc.                          Delaware
Village Farms of Wheatfield, LLC                         Delaware
Village Farms fo Presidio, LP**                            
Village Farms, Inc.                                      Delaware
Village Farms, LLC                                       Delaware
Village Farms of Morocco, S.A.                           Morocco** 

*    86% owned
**   50% owned
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
33-54398, 333-07515, 333-43547, 333-56697, 333-32118, 333-62714 and 333-116431
on Form S-8 and No. 333-96369 on Form S-3 of Metretek Technologies, Inc. (f.k.a.
Marcum Natural Gas Services, Inc.) of our report dated March 8, 2005 (which
report expresses an unqualified opinion) on the consolidated financial
statements of Metretek Technologies, Inc., and our report dated February 4, 2005
(which report expresses an unqualified opinion) on the financial statements of
Marcum Midstream 1995-2 Business Trust, appearing in this Annual Report on Form
10-K of Metretek Technologies, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2004.


/s/ Hein & Associates LLP

Hein & Associates LLP
Denver, Colorado
March 17, 2005
### I N THE UNI TED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FI F TH CI RCUI T

No. 12-41436 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

v. JOSE ADAN OLVERA-ROJAS, Defendant-Appellant

A ppeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:12-CR-1270-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Jose Adan Olvera-Rojas raises

an argument t hat he concedes is foreclosed b y United States v. Rodriguez , 711 F.3d 541, 562 n .28 (5th Cir. 2013) (en banc), p etition for cert. filed (June 6, 2013) (No. 1 2-10695), in which t his court concluded t ha t t he g eneric, contemporary definition of “ sex u al abuse of a minor” does not i nclude the age-differential requirement that Olvera-Rojas asserts is required. The appellant’s motion for U n i t e d S t a te s C o u r t o f A p p e al s

F i f t h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D Aug ust 20, 2013 Ly l e W . Cay ce Clerk

* Purs uant to 5 T H C I R

. R

. 47. 5, the court has d eterm ined that this op inion should not be p ublis hed and is not p reced ent excep t und er the lim ited circum s tances s et forth in 5 T H C I R

. R. 47. 5. 4. Case: 12-41436 Document: 00512346993 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/20/2013No. 12-41436

s u m m a r y d i s p o s i t i o n i s G R A N T E D , a n d t h e j u d g m e n

t o f t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t i s A F F I R M E D

.

2 Case: 12-41436 Document: 00512346993 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/20/2013
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4000 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4000

   To require the establishment of cybersecurity information sharing 
 agreements between the Department of Homeland Security and Congress, 
                        and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 5, 2022

  Mr. Portman (for himself, Ms. Klobuchar, Mr. Blunt, and Mr. Peters) 
introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 
        Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To require the establishment of cybersecurity information sharing 
 agreements between the Department of Homeland Security and Congress, 
                        and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Intragovernmental Cybersecurity 
Information Sharing Act''.

SEC. 2. REQUIREMENT FOR INFORMATION SHARING AGREEMENTS.

    (a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in 
consultation with other appropriate Executive agencies (as defined in 
section 105 of title 5, United States Code, including the Executive 
Office of the President) and officials, shall enter into 1 or more 
cybersecurity information sharing agreements with the Sergeant at Arms 
and Doorkeeper of the Senate and the Chief Administrative Officer of 
the House of Representatives to ensure robust collaboration between the 
executive branch and Congress on Federal cybersecurity.
    (b) Elements.--The parties to a cybersecurity information sharing 
agreement under subsection (a) shall jointly develop such elements of 
the agreement as the parties find appropriate, which may include--
            (1) direct and timely sharing of technical indicators and 
        contextual information on cyber threats and vulnerabilities;
            (2) direct and timely sharing of classified and 
        unclassified reports on cyber threats and activities; and
            (3) seating of cybersecurity personnel of the Senate or the 
        House of Representatives at cybersecurity operations centers.
    (c) Briefing to Congress.--Not later than 210 days after the date 
of enactment of this Act, and periodically thereafter, the Secretary of 
Homeland Security shall brief the Committee on Homeland Security and 
Governmental Affairs and the Committee on Rules and Administration of 
the Senate and the Committee on Homeland Security and the Committee on 
House Administration of the House of Representatives on the status of 
the implementation of the agreements required under subsection (a).
                                 <all>
```
**EXHIBIT32.2**

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly report of bebestores, inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (the “Report”), I, Walter Parks, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based on myknowledge:

(1)         The Report fully complies with the requirements ofsection 13(a)  or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and

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

 
| Dated: February 8, 2007 |   | /s/ Walter Parks            |   |
|-------------------------|--------|-----------------------------|--------|
|                    |   | Walter Parks                |
|                    |   | Chief Operating Officer and |
|                    |   | Chief Financial Officer     |

 

----
II 

Calendar No. 541 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3685 

[Report No. 117–190] 

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special resource study 

to determine the suitability and feasibility of establishing the John P. 

Parker House in Ripley, Ohio, as a unit of the National Park System. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 17, 2022 

Mr. BROWN (for himself and Mr. PORTMAN) introduced the following bill; 

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

OCTOBER 18, 2022 

Reported under authority of the order of the Senate of October 14, 2022, by 

Mr. MANCHIN, without amendment 

A BILL 

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special 

resource study to determine the suitability and feasibility 

of establishing the John P. Parker House in Ripley, 

Ohio, as a unit of the National Park System. 

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


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3685 RS

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘John P. Parker House 

3 Study Act’’. 

4 SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 

5 In this Act: 

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

7 the Secretary of the Interior. 

8 (2) STUDY AREA.—The term ‘‘study area’’ 

9 means the John P. Parker House in Ripley, Ohio, 

10 which was recognized as a National Historic Land11 mark in 1997. 

12 SEC. 3. SPECIAL RESOURCE STUDY OF JOHN P. PARKER 

13 HOUSE. 

14 (a) STUDY.—The Secretary shall conduct a special 

15 resource study of the study area to determine the suit16 ability and feasibility of establishing the John P. Parker 

17 House in Ripley, Ohio, as a unit of the National Park Sys18 tem. 

19 (b) STUDY REQUIREMENTS.—The Secretary shall 

20 conduct the study in accordance with section 100507 of 

21 title 54, United States Code. 

22 (c) REPORT.—Not later than 18 months after the 

23 date on which funds are made available to carry out this 

24 Act, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Nat25 ural Resources of the House of Representatives and the 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 3685 RS

1 Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Sen2 ate a report that describes— 

3 (1) the results of the study; and 

4 (2) any recommendations of the Secretary. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
Calendar No. 541 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3685 

[Report No. 117–190] 

A BILL 

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct 

National Park System. Parker House in Ripley, Ohio, as a unit of the ability and feasibility of establishing the John P. a special resource study to determine the suitOCTOBER 18, 2022 

Reported under authority of the order of the Senate of 

October 14, 2022, without amendment 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Crop Genetics and Breeding Research: Tifton, GA
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    Southeast Biomass Research Center
                    Forage & Turf ResearchSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Southeast Area Tifton, Georgia Crop Genetics and Breeding Research Research





- ARS National Programs
- Search for a scientific manuscript
- Search for a research project
- ARS Software
- Programs and Projects
- Collaborations
- Subjects of Investigation
- Publications

Research Projects Subjects of Investigation at this LocationEach ARS research project has related subjects of investigation.  Listed below are the subjects of investigation currently conducted at this location.
Clicking on a subject of investigation will list the research projects within that  subject of investigation.Subjects of Investigation
                            Corn (for sweetcorn use 1480)
                                Grain sorghum
                                Peanut
                                Summer annual grasses (includes forage sorghums, sudangrass, sorghum)
                                Turf (includes bentgrass, bermudagrass, bluegrass, dichondra, fescue)
                                Upland cotton
                                Warm season perennial grasses (includes dallisgrass, bluestems)


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

November 13, 2018

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-2128

Advanced Impact Technology, Inc:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June

20. 

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request failed to show that this particular product is available 

only from China.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

November 13, 2018

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-2067

Ardagh Group:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20. 

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request failed to show that this particular product is available 

only from China.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn