alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-2080
LAWRENCE VERLINE WILDER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION; EQUIFAX CREDIT INFORMATION SERVICES, INCORPORATED, Defendants - Appellees.

No. 97-2376
LAWRENCE VERLINE WILDER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION, Defendant - Appellee, and EQUIFAX CREDIT INFORMATION SERVICES, INCORPORATED, Defendant.2 Appeals from the United States District Court for the District ofMaryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA97-1969-S) Submitted: December 18, 1997 Decided: Janury 7, 1998 Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lawrence Verline Wilder, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Moss Wood, IV,NEUBERGER, QUINN, GIELEN, RUBIN & GIBBER, P.A., Baltimore, Maryland; Michael N. Russo, Jr., FERGUSON, SCHETELICH, HEFFERNAN & MURDOCK, P.A., Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).3 PER CURIAM: In No. 97-2080, Appellant appeals the district court's order denying his motion for recusal and the district court's marginal order denying his motion to amend his complaint and for appointment of counsel. Although Appellant's appeal of the district court's order denying his motions was interlocutory when filed, it is now ripe because the district court entered final judgment prior to this court's review of the appeal. See Equipment Finance Group, Inc. v. Traverse Computer Brokers , 973 F.2d 345, 347 (4th Cir. 1992). In No. 97-2376, Appellant appeals the district court's order denying his motion for summary judgment, granting Appellee's motion for summary judgment, and dismissing Appellant's complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinionand find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Wilder v. Toyota Motor Credit, No. CA97-1969-S (D. Md. Aug. 6, 1997; Sept. 24, 1997). We dispense withoral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 83 (Monday, April 29, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18774-18775]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10496]



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


DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

April 23, 1996.
    The Department of the Treasury has submitted the following public 
information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Copies of 
the submission(s) may be obtained by calling the Treasury Bureau 
Clearance Officer listed. Comments regarding this information 
collection should be addressed to the OMB reviewer listed and to the 
Treasury Department Clearance Officer, Department of the Treasury, Room 
2110, 1425 New York Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220.
    Special Request: In order to conduct the survey described below by 
the May 10, 1996 start-up date, the Department of Treasury is 
requesting Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review and approve 
this information collection by April 29, 1996. To obtain a copy of this 
survey, please contact the IRS Clearance Officer at the address listed 
below.

Internal Revenue Service (IRS)

    OMB Number: 1545-1432.
    Project Number: M:SP:V 96-012-G.
    Type of Review: Revision.
    Title: Internal Revenue Service Notice Redesign Survey/Experimental 
Design.
    Description: The IRS Notice Redesign Team has been charged with 
redesigning all of IRS's notices, to make them easier to understand and 
less burdensome to taxpayers. Elements of their redesign efforts are 
the direct result of input already received from taxpayers in previous 
qualitative studies conducted by Value Tracking.
    The Core Business System for Value Tracking has developed a survey 
instrument to rate the level of satisfaction of the redesigned notices. 
In addition, Value Tracking is proposing to conduct an experimental 
design to compare relative satisfaction levels of the old notices with 
the new ones.
    Respondents: Individuals or households.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 5,340.
    Estimated Burden Hours Per Respondent:
      Advance Letter--2 minutes.
Initial Mailing
--Intro Letter--2 minutes.
--Questionnaire--5 minutes.

      Postcard Reminder--1 minute.
Second Mailing
--Intro Letter--2 minutes.
--Questionnaire--5 minutes.


[[Page 18775]]


    Frequency of Response: Other.
    Estimated Total Reporting Burden: 860 hours.
    Clearance Officer: Garrick Shear (202) 622-3869, Internal Revenue 
Service, Room 5571, 1111 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 
20224.
    OMB Reviewer: Milo Sunderhauf (202) 395-7340, Office of Management 
and Budget, Room 10226, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 
20503.
Lois K. Holland,
Departmental Reports Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 96-10496 Filed 4-26-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 83 (Monday, April 29, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18755-18756]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10481]



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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--International Pharmaceutical Aerosol Consortium 
for Toxicology Testing of HFA-134a (IPACT-I)

    Notice is hereby given that, on April 15, 1996, pursuant to Section 
6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 
15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), the International Pharmaceutical 
Aerosol Consortium for

[[Page 18756]]

Toxicology Testing of HFA-134a (``IMPACT-I'') has filed written 
notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal 
Trade Commission disclosing the addition of a new member. 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, Astra AB, 
Sodertalje, Sweden, became a new member of IPACT-I on February 2, 1996.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned 
activity of IPACT-I. Membership in this ground research project remains 
open, and IPACT-I intends to file additional written notification 
disclosing all changes in membership.
    On August 7, 1990, IPACT-I 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 
September 6, 1990 (55 FR 36710).
    The last notification was filed with the Department on May 25, 
1995. A notice has not yet been published in the Federal Register.
Constance K. Robinson,
Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 96-10481 Filed 4-26-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 81 (Thursday, April 25, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 18411]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10153]



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


DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Lodging of Consent Decree Pursuant to the Resource Conservation 
and Recovery Act

    In accordance with Departmental policy, 28 CFR 50.7, notice is 
hereby given that on April 5, 1996 a proposed consent decree in United 
States of America v. Cambridge Plating Company, Inc., Civil Action No. 
96-10722 RCL, has been lodged with the United States District Court for 
the District of Massachusetts. The United States' complaint, filed at 
the same time as the consent decree, sought penalties and injunctive 
relief under the Resources Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. 
Sec. 6901, et seq. The consent decree provides that the defendant will 
pay $40,000 in civil penalties to the United States over three and one 
half years and also provides for injunctive relief. The decree further 
requires defendant to perform two Supplemental Environmental Projects.
    The Department of Justice will receive comments relating to the 
proposed consent decree for a period of thirty (30) days from the date 
of this publication. Comment should be addressed to the Assistant 
Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division, 
Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. 20530, and should refer to 
United States v. Cambridge Plating Company, Inc., D. J. Ref. 90-7-1-
680A.
    The proposed consent decree may be examined at the office of the 
United States Attorney, 1107 John W. McCormack Federal Building, U.S. 
Post Office and Courthouse, Boston, Ma. 02109 and at the Region I 
office of the Environmental Protection Agency, One Congress St., 
Boston, Ma. 02203. The proposed consent decree may also be examined at 
the Consent Decree Library, 1120 G St., N.W., 4th Floor, Washington, 
D.C. 20005, 202-624-0892. A copy of the proposed consent decree may be 
obtained in person or by mail from the Consent Library, 1120 G St., 
N.W., 4th Floor, Washington, D.C. 20005. In requesting a copy, please 
enclose a check in the amount of $8.00 (25 cents per page reproduction 
cost) payable to the ``Consent Decree Library.''
Joel M. Gross,
Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment & Natural 
Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 96-10153 Filed 4-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-01-M
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________ No. 95-50698 USDC No. W-95-CV-77

__________________
JOHN WHITSON, Petitioner-Appellant,

versus GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION, Respondent-Appellee.

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

- - - - - - - - - - February 22, 1996 Before WIENER, PARKER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Appellant requests that this court issue a certificate of probable cause (CPC) and allow him to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP). A CPC is required to appeal in a habeas corpus proceeding only "where the detention complained of arises out of process issued by a state court." See 28 U.S.C. § 2253. In this case, the issuance of a CPC is unnecessary to establish appellate jurisdiction because the detention complained of does not arise out of process issued by a state court. Id. CPC should be DENIED as unnecessary.No. 95-50698 -2- To qualify for IFP, Whitson must show that he has a nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Carson v. Polley , 689 F.2d 562, 586 (5th Cir. 1982). Appellant contends that his due process rights were violated by prison officials because: 1) they refused to remove unspecified erroneous information from his prison file; 2) he was wrongly denied parole; and 3) he lost good time credits due to a prison directive that directed that forfeited good time credits would no longer be restored to certain classes of prisoners. We find no nonfrivolous issue for appeal for essentially the reasons stated by the district court. Accordingly, Whitson's motion to proceed IFP is DENIED and his appeal is DISMISSED.
EXHIBIT 32

                           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 Aldabra Acquisition
Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2006
(the "Report"), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof, I Jason Weiss, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 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, as amended; and

         2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
Company.

By: /s/ Jason Weiss                    Dated:  August 14, 2006
    -------------------------------
     Jason Weiss
     Chief Executive Officer
     (Principal Executive and Accounting and Financial Officer)


                                      E-2
<PAGE>

                                   EXHIBIT 23

<PAGE>


                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We hereby consent to incorporation by reference in the previously filed
Registration Statement on Forms S-8 File Nos. 333-69420 and 333-69416,
respectively and Form S-3 (File No. 33-71692) of Dimeco, Inc. of our report
dated February 7, 2003, relating to the consolidated statements of financial
condition of Dimeco, Inc. and subsidiary as of December 31, 2002 and 2001, and
the related consolidated statements of income, changes in stockholders' equity,
and cash flows for the three years in the period ended December 31, 2002, which
report appears in the December 31, 2002 Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Dimeco,
Inc.

                                                        /s/ S.R. Snodgrass, A.C.

Wexford, Pennsylvania
March 24, 2003
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

**INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ CONSENT**

We consent to the incorporation byreference in Registration Statements No. 333-105645, 333-103325, 333-51282, and 333-38532, of Nuance Communications, Inc. (the“Company”) on Form S-8, of our report dated March 24, 2004, relating to theconsolidated financial statements of the Company as of and for the year endedDecember 31, 2003 (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includesexplanatory paragraphs relating to (i) the adoption of Statement of FinancialAccounting Standards No. 142 in 2002, (ii) the revision of 2002 pro forma stock based compensation informationand, (iii) certain reclassifications and disclosuresof financial statement amounts related to the 2001 consolidatedfinancial statements that were audited by other auditors who have ceasedoperations and for which we have expressed no opinion or other form of assuranceother than with respect to such reclassifications and disclosures) appearing inthis Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31,2003. 

/s/  DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP 

San Jose, California 

March 24, 2004
EXHIBIT 32.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 In connection with the Quarterly Report of W. S. INDUSTRIES, INC. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending May 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, James F. Dempsey, President and Chief Executive Officer, respectively, of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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.  Date: July 14, 2010  By: /s/ James F. Dempsey  -------------------------------  James F. Dempsey Chief Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20-1789

JAMES D. JACOBS,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

RICHLAND COUNTY; RICHLAND COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT; 

LEON LOTT, individually and in his official capacity as Richland County Sheriff; 

DEPUTY JAMES GILBERT, individually and each in his Official capacity as 

Richland County Deputy Sheriff; DEPUTY RANDY DAVIS, individually and each 

in his Official capacity as Richland County Deputy Sheriff; DEPUTY JUSTIN 

MOODY, individually and each in his Official capacity as Richland County Deputy 

Sheriff,

 Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at 

Columbia. Sherri A. Lydon, District Judge. (3:18-cv-03216-SAL)

Submitted: July 23, 2021 Decided: August 13, 2021

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John Dwight Hudson, HUDSON LAW OFFICES, Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, for 

Appellant. Andrew F. Lindemann, LINDEMANN & DAVIS, P.A., Columbia, South 

Carolina; Robert D. Garfield, CROWE LAFAVE, LLC, Columbia, South Carolina, for 

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

James D. Jacobs appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of 

the magistrate judge and granting Appellees’ Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(c) motion for judgment on 

the pleadings in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. We have reviewed the record and find no 

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. 

Jacobs v. Richland Cnty., No. 3:18-cv-03216-SAL (D.S.C. June 23, 2020). We 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
exv4w2



 





Exhibit 4.2









 









 





HANSEN MEDICAL, INC.




     The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this certificate, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations:





	 	 	 	 	 
	TEN COM

	 	–
	 	as tenants in common
	TEN ENT

	 	–
	 	as tenants by the entireties
	JT TEN

	 	–
	 	as joint tenants with right
	 

	 	 	 	of survivorship and not as
	 

	 	 	 	tenants in common









	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	UNIF GIFT MIN ACT –

	 	 	 	Custodian	 	 
	 

	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	(Cust)
	 	 	 	(Minor)
	 

	 	under Uniform Gifts to Minors	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	Act	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	(State)	 	 






	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	UNIF TRF MIN ACT –

	 	 	 	Custodian (until age
	 	 	 	 	)	 
	 

	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	(Cust)	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 





	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	under Uniform Transfers
	 

	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	(Minor)	 	 






	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	to Minors Act	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	(State)











Additional
abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list.




	 	 	 	 	 
	For Value received,

	 	 	 	hereby sell, assign and transfer unto
	 

	 	 	 	 





	 	 	 	 
	PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER

	 	 	 
	          IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE
	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 





	 	 	 
	 
	(PLEASE PRINT OR TYPEWRITE NAME AND ADDRESS, INCLUDING ZIP CODE, OF ASSIGNEE)

	 
	 	 
	 
	 
	 	 
	 
	 

	 	Shares
	 	 
	of the Common Stock represented by the within Certificate, and do(es) hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint
	 	 
	 
	 	 
	 

	 	Attorney
	 	 
	to transfer the said stock on the books of the within named Corporation with full power of substitution in the premises.
	 	 






	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Dated

	 	 	 	r	 	 
	 

	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	r	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	NOTICE:
	 	THE SIGNATURE(S) TO THIS ASSIGNMENT MUST CORRESPOND
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	WITH THE NAME(S) AS WRITTEN UPON THE FACE OF THE
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	CERTIFICATE IN EVERY PARTICULAR WITHOUT ALTERATION OR
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	ENLARGEMENT OR ANY CHANGE WHATEVER.






SIGNATURES
GUARANTEED:




	 	 	 	 	 
	By
	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 
	 

	 	THE SIGNATURE(S) MUST
BE GUARANTEED BY AN ELIGIBLE GUARANTOR INSTITUTION (BANKS,
STOCKBROKERS, SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS AND CREDIT UNIONS WITH MEMBERSHIP IN AN APPROVED SIGNATURE GUARANTEE MEDALLION PROGRAM), PURSUANT TO S.E.C. RULE 17 Ad-15.
**Exhibit 32.2**

** **

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the annual report of The SCO Group, Inc. (the “Company”)on Form 10-K, for the period ended October 31, 2005, as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Bert B. Young, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-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. |

 

 
| By:    | /s/ Bert B. Young       |   |
|--------|-------------------------|--------|
|   | Bert B. Young           |
|   | Chief Financial Officer |
|   |                    |
| Date:  | January 27, 2006   |

 

----
EXHIBIT 32.1.

                  Certification of Principal Executive Officer
                           Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350
                 (Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

 I, Anthony Brandon Escobar, Chief Executive Officer of Trafalgar Resources,
Inc. (the "Registrant") do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes- Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the
best of my knowledge, based upon a review of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB
for the period ended June 30, 2006 of the Registrant, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"):

(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
     Registrant.

By: /s/ Anthony Brandon Escobar
Anthony Brandon Escobar
Chief Executive Officer

August 7, 2006
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 * A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Trafalgar Resources, Inc. and will be retained by Trafalgar
Resources, Inc. and furnished to the Securities Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.




<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

                  Certification of Principal Executive Officer
                           Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350
                 (Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

 I, Anthony Coletti, Chief Accounting Officer of Trafalgar Resources, Inc. (the
"Registrant") do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of
my knowledge, based upon a review of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the
period ended June 30, 2006 of the Registrant, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"):

(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
     Registrant.

 By: /s/ Anthony Coletti
 Anthony Coletti
 Chief Accounting Officer

 August 7, 2006
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 * A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Trafalgar Resources, Inc. and will be retained by Trafalgar
Resources, Inc. and furnished to the Securities Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.