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

No. 22

- 6137

MARK FRENCH , Petitioner

- Appellant ,

v. OFFICER MICHAEL BIVENS; MARYLAND ATTORNEY GENERAL , Respondents

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Baltimore

. Catherine C. Blake, Senior District Judge. ( 1:21

- cv - 02736

- CCB )

Submitted : August 23, 2022 Decided: August 25, 2022

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, HEYTENS , Circuit Judge , and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Mark French , Appellant Pro Se

.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 22-6137 Doc: 5 Filed: 08/25/2022 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM:
Mark French seeks to appeal the distr ict court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as an unauthorized, successive § 2254 petitio n. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). When , as here, the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Gonzalez v. Thaler , 565 U.S. 134, 140

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

. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that French has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. * We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequa tely presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

* To the extent that French wishes to obtain authorization from this court to file a successive § 2254 petition, he may file such a motion directly in this court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 22 4 4. USCA4 Appeal: 22-6137 Doc: 5 Filed: 08/25/2022 Pg: 2 of 2
#### LYNWOOD JOHNSON v. THOMAS HERBERT RHODES.

(Filed 11 November, 1959.)

1. Automobiles § 41g—

Plaintiff’s evidence to tbe effect that be was traveling on a servient street, stopped before entering tbe intersection witb tbe dominant street, looked in each direction and, seeing no traffic approaching, proceeded into tbe intersection, and after be bad traveled more than half tbe intersection was struck by defendant’s vehicle which entered the intersection along the dominant street ait a speed of 40 to 50 m.p.h. in a 35 m.p.h. zone *held*sufficient to take the issue of negligence to the jury.

Appeal by defendant from *Sharp, S. J.,*March 23, 1959 Term, of Ware.

Plaintiff was 'awarded damages for personal injuries sustained in a collision of an automobile 'owned and operated by defendant in a southwardly direction on West Street in Raleigh with an automobile owned and operated by plaintiff in a westward direction on Hargett Street.

Vehicles traveling on Hargett Street are required to stop before entering its intersection with West Street.

To support his claim for damages plaintiff alleged excessive speed and failure to keep a proper lookout by defendant.

Defendant denied negligence on his part and, as a further defense pleaded excessive and unlawful speed by plaintiff and a failure to stop before entering the intersection as contributory negligence barring recovery.

*Bunn, Hatch, Little & Bunn for plaintiff, appellee.*

*Teague, Johnson and Patterson, Howard F. Twiggs, and Wright T. Dixon for defendant, appellant.*

PeR Cukiam.

Defendant’s motion to nonsuit, made at the conclusion of the evidence, was overruled. The only question presented by this appeal is the correctness of the •ruling on that motion.

The parties stipulated the speed limit was 35 m.p.h. Plaintiff’s testimony fixed defendant’s speed at 40-50 m.p.m. Plaintiff testified that he -stopped before entering the intersection, moved a child from the front seat to the back seat, and, after looking in each direction and seeing no traffic on West Street, proceeded into the intersection at a speed of 5-10 m.p.-h. His vision on West Street at the intersection was limited to 150 to 200 feet. The streets are 40 feet wide. Plaintiff, according to his version, had traveled more than half the intersection *216and was 12 feat from the west curb line of West Street when struck by defendant.

Defendant’s evidence contradicted plaintiff’s testimony and painted an entirely different picture.

What the true facts were was a question to be determined by the jury, not by the court.

No error.
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 23

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (No.
333-57339 (as amended), 333-62859 and 333-39485 (as amended)) pertaining to (i)
the 1995 Non-Employee Director Stock Option Plan and Outstanding Options of
Mariner Health Group, Inc.; (ii) the Paragon Health Network, Inc. Employee Stock
Purchase Plan, and (iii) the Paragon Health Network, Inc. Long-Term Incentive
Plan; GranCare, Inc. 401(k) Savings Plan; GranCare, Inc. 1996 Stock Incentive
Plan; GranCare, Inc. 1996 Replacement Stock Option Plan; GranCare, Inc. Outside
Directors' Stock Incentive Plan; and Evergreen Healthcare, Inc. Employees'
401(k) Profit Sharing Plan, of our report dated January 19, 2000, with respect
to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Mariner Post-Acute
Network, Inc. included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended
September 30, 1999.


Ernst & Young LLP

January 19, 2000
Atlanta, Georgia
| 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:           November      4, 2008 |                                  |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------|
|                                                                                         | /s/  John      R. Plachetka |
|                                                                                         | John      R. Plachetka, Pharm.D.      |
|                                                                                         | Chief      Executive Officer          |

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-01-1997             FEB-01-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             NOV-03-1996             FEB-04-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-01-1997             FEB-01-1997
<CASH>                                           5,075                   5,075
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,905                   4,905
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                     42,741                  42,741
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                54,779                  54,779
<PP&E>                                         152,900                 152,900
<DEPRECIATION>                                  54,417                  54,417
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 157,998                 157,998
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           37,669                  37,669
<BONDS>                                         27,526                  27,526
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                        78,819                  78,819
<OTHER-SE>                                           0                       0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   157,998                 157,998
<SALES>                                         96,243                 371,302
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                96,243                 371,302
<CGS>                                           74,039                 284,134
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   74,039                 284,134
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 800                   2,777
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    573                   4,732
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (518)                   1,139
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,091                   3,593
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,091                   3,593
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.13                    0.42
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.13                    0.42
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 44 (Tuesday, March 7, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 12549]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-5469]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. GT95-24-000]


Colorado Interstate Gas Company; Filing of Refund Report

March 1, 1995.
    Take notice that on February 24, 1995, Colorado Interstate Gas 
Company (CIG), filed a refund report in Docket Nos. GP83-11, RI 83-9, 
et al. CIG states that the filing and refunds were made to comply with 
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Orders or 
December 1, 1993 and May 19, 1994. CIG states that these amounts were 
paid by CIG on December 14, 1994.
    CIG states that the refund report summarizes the Kansas ad valorem 
tax refund amounts related to tax bills rendered for production on or 
after June 28, 1988 pursuant to the Commission's December 1, 1993 and 
May 19, 1994 Orders. Lump-sum cash refunds were made by CIG to its 
former jurisdictional sales customers within 30 days of receipt from 
the producers. As provided for in the Orders, no additional interest 
was required to be paid.
    CIG states that copies of CIG's filing have been served on CIG's 
former jurisdictional sales customers, interested state commissions, 
and all parties to the proceedings.
    Any person desiring to protest said filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 825 North Capital 
Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, in accordance with Rule 211 of 
the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR Section 
385.211). All such protests should be filed on or before March 8, 1995. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants 
parties to the proceeding. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-5469 Filed 3-6-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CEO AND CFO 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 American Lawyer Media, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
William L. Pollak, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Eric F.
Lundberg, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies,
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 result of operations of the
Company.

  /s/ WILLIAM L. POLLAK
-------------------------------------
William L. Pollak
President and Chief Executive Officer
November 12, 2004

  /s/ ERIC F. LUNDBERG
------------------------------------
Eric F. Lundberg
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
November 12, 2004

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

September 26, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number USTR-2018-0025-1575

Illinois Tool Works: 

I am pleased to notify you that the United States Trade Representative has determined to 

grant the above-referenced exclusion request submitted pursuant to the notice published at 83 FR 

32181 (‘July 11 notice’). The exclusion determination is set out in a formal notice which has 

been submitted to Office of the Federal Register for publication (‘the exclusion notice’). A prepublication version of the exclusion notice has been posted on the USTR website, at 

https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/%2434_Billion_Exclusions_Gr

anted_September_2019.pdf. 

An exclusion in response to your request has been granted by excluding from the 

additional tariffs products covered by a specially drafted description contained in the annex to 

the exclusion notice. The scope of the exclusion is governed by the scope of the 10-digit HTSUS 

subheadings and product descriptions in the annex to the product exclusion notice, and not by the 

product descriptions set out in any particular request for exclusion. 

In accordance with the July 11 notice, the exclusion applies as of the July 6, 2018 

effective date of the tariff action, and will extend for one year after the exclusion notice is 

published in the Federal Register. As stated in the exclusion notice, U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection will issue additional instructions on entry guidance and implementation

Sincerely,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel
#### CITY OF ELIZABETH CITY v. A. L. AYDLETT.

(Filed 19 December, 1930.)

Appeal by plaintiff from *Granmer, J.,*23 April, 1930, at Columbia. From PasquotaNK.

Civil action to restrain tbe defendant from interfering with tbe streets, sidewalks, shade trees, lamp posts, etc., around and near tbe site of defendant’s gasoline filling or gasoline storage station, which be is seeking to erect in tbe corporate limits of Elizabeth City.

From a judgment sustaining tbe temporary' restraining order as to a shade tree and a lamp post, but otherwise dissolving it, tbe plaintiff appeals.

*J. B. Leigh and Thompson <& Wilson for plaintiff.*

*M. B. Simpson and McM-ullan & LeBoy for defendant.*

Pee Cueiam.

Tbe disposition of tbis appeal is controlled by tbe decision in another case between tbe same parties involving tbe same filling station, *ante,*58.

Error.
Exhibit 4.46





Exhibit 4.46




Notice of Termination of the Exclusive Consultancy Service Agreement




July 13, 2010




	 	 	 
	To:

	 	Primalights III Agriculture Development Co., Ltd.
	 
	 

	 	Address: Primalights III Agriculture Development Co., Ltd.

Middle Area of Highway 73, Zhuang Er Shang Village,
	 

	 	Huang Ling Rural Area, Xiaodian District, Taiyuan City
	 
	 	 
	 

	 	Tel: 0351- 7870123
	 
	 	 
	 

	 	Fax: 0351- 7123671






Ladies and Gentlmen,




We refer to the Exclusive Consultancy Service Agreement (hereinafter referred to as the
“Service Agreement”) dated as of June 8, 2007, among Aero-Biotech Science & Technology Co.
Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Aero-Biotech”), a wholly foreign owned enterprise
registered and established in Beijing, People’s Republic of China, under the laws of the People’s
Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as “China”, excluding Hong Kong Special
Administrative Region, Macao Special Administrative Region and Taiwan), and Primalights III
Agriculture Development Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “P3A”), a limited liability
company registered and established in Taiyuan City, Shanxi Province, China, under the laws of
China.



Pursuant to Article 6.1 of the Service Agreement, Aero-Biotech reserve the right to terminate the
Service Agreement with thirty (30) days written notice to P3A. Aero-Biotech hereby confer to P3A,
this notice to terminate the Service Agreement. Pursuant to Article 6.2 of the Service Agreement,
all rights and obligations between Aero-Biotech and P3A under Article 4 (Confidentiality Clause),
Article 7 (Governing Jurisdiction) and Article 8 (Conflict Resolution) of the Service Agreement
remain in effect.



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Very truly yours,
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Aero-Biotech Science & Technology Co. Ltd.
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Signature:	 	/s/ Xie Tao	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	Name:
	 	Xie Tao	 	 
	 

	 	Title:
	 	Chief Executive Officer	 	 






Official Seal:
1 The Honorable Brian S. M iller, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 09-1269

___________ Teresa Polite, * * Appellant, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Eastern v. * District of Arkansas. * Arkansas Department of Correction, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: January 4, 2010 Filed: January 12, 2010

___________ Before MURPHY, COLLOTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Teresa Polite appeals the district court’s 1 dismissal without prejudice of her civil rights action for failure to comply w ith a court order. Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the action. SeeFed. R. Civ. P. 37(b )(2), 41(b); Doe v. Cassel , 403 F.3d 986, 990 (8th Cir. 2005) (per curiam) (Rule 41(b) dismissal); Ha irston v. Alert Safety Light Prods., Inc. , 307 F.3d 717, 718-19 (8th Cir. 2002) (Rule 37(b) di smissal). We also decline to consider-2- the arguments raised for the first time on appeal. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule  contains summary  financial  information  extracted from the Form
10-Q for the thirteen  week period  ended  December 27, 1998 and is qualified in
its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             SEP-26-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                SEP-28-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                  DEC-27-1998
<CASH>                                               3,638  
<SECURITIES>                                             0  
<RECEIVABLES>                                      114,635  
<ALLOWANCES>                                         2,596  
<INVENTORY>                                        153,766  
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   321,458  
<PP&E>                                             467,273  
<DEPRECIATION>                                      52,968  
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     903,726  
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              171,222  
<BONDS>                                            621,884  
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               32,601  
<PREFERRED>                                         15,000  
<COMMON>                                             2,173  
<OTHER-SE>                                           6,016  
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       903,726  
<SALES>                                            272,803  
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   272,803  
<CGS>                                              246,351  
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      246,351  
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0  
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        19   
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  16,784  
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    (14,764)  
<INCOME-TAX>                                        (5,590) 
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 (8,445)    
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0  
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0  
<CHANGES>                                                0  
<NET-INCOME>                                        (8,445) 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                            0  
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            0  
                                                 


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 45 (Wednesday, March 8, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 12753]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-5596]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP94-93-006]


K N Interstate Gas Transmission Co.; Notice of Revised Compliance 
Filing

March 2, 1995.
    Take notice that on February 27, 1995, K N Interstate Gas 
Transmission Co. (KNI) tendered for filing revised tariff sheets in 
compliance with the Commission's February 10, 1995 Letter Order in the 
referenced proceeding. KNI states that the tariff sheets reflect 
revised pagination and correction of a typographical error.
    KNI states that copies of the filing were served upon each person 
designated on the official service list compiled by the Secretary in 
this proceeding.
    Any person desiring to protest said filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 825 North Capitol Street 
NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Section 385.211 of the 
Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests should be filed 
on or before March 9, 1995. Protests will be considered by the 
Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will 
not serve to make any protestants parties to the proceeding. Copies of 
this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for 
public inspection in the Public Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-5596 Filed 3-7-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M