alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 198 (Friday, October 10, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 60368]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-24233]


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

POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings

Name of Agency: Postal Regulatory Commission.

Time and Date: October 16, 2008 at 10 a.m.

Place: Commission conference room, 901 New York Avenue, NW., Suite 200, 
Washington, DC 20268-0001.

Status: Open.

Matters To Be Considered: Selection of vice-chairman.

Contact Person for More Information: Stephen L. Sharfman, general 
counsel, Postal Regulatory Commission, 202-789-6820.

    Dated: October 7, 2008.
Steven W. Williams,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-24233 Filed 10-8-08; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-6828

COLON ALSTON, JR.,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

TILLERY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION; JOHN R.

WILLIAMS; MR. GAYLOR; MRS. BROWN; MR. BABB,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District

Judge. (CA-00-162-5-BR)

Submitted: November 30, 2000 Decided: December 8, 2000

Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Colon Alston, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Colon Alston, Jr., a North Carolina inmate, appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West

Supp. 2000) complaint under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915A (West Supp. 2000).

We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and

find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the

appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Alston v.

Tillery Corr. Inst., No. CA-00-162-5-BR (E.D.N.C. Apr. 20, 2000).

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court

and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, Stephen R. Fry, President and Director of Energroup Technologies Corporation, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Energroup Technologies Corporation. 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this Quarterly Report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this Quarterly Report; 

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this Quarterly Report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this Quarterly Report; 

 

4. The Registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the Registrant and we have: 

 

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the Registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this Quarterly Report is being prepared; 

 

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this Quarterly Report (the “Evaluation Date”); and 

 

c) presented in this Quarterly Report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date; 

 

5. The Registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the Registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of Registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function); 

 

a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the Registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the Registrant’s auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and 

 

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the Registrant’s internal controls; and 

 

6. The Registrant’s other certifying officer and I have indicated in this Quarterly Report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses. 

 

 

| *Date:*** | *11/06/06*** | * * | *By:***  | */s/Stephen R. Fry***                      |
|-----------|--------------|----------|----------|--------------------------------------------|
| * *  | * *     | * * | * * | *Stephen R. Fry, President and Director*** |
EXHIBIT
23.1 - CONSENT OF SCHAUER TAYLOR, P.C.





CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM








We hereby consent to the incorporation
of our report, dated March 17, 2008, relating to the consolidated financial
statements of Florida Community Banks, Inc. and Subsidiary for the three years
ended December 31, 2007 included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and
incorporated herein by reference in the previously filed Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007.











/s/ Douglas B. Schauer,
CPA


/s/
Schauer Taylor, P.C.





Birmingham,
Alabama


April 15,
2009
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02337-REB-MJW FTR - Courtroom A-502

Date: March 06, 2012 Courtroom Deputy, Ellen E. Miller

Parties

TYRON DUANTE SMALL,

#150307

Plaintiff(s),

Counsel

Pro Se

v.

JOHN DOE DETECTIVE ONE, and

JOHN DOE OFFICER TWO,

Defendant(s).

- - - 

- - -

COURTROOM MINUTES / MINUTE ORDER

HEARING: TELEPHONIC STATUS CONFERENCE

Court in Session: 10:12 a.m.

Court calls case. Appearances of Pro Se Plaintiff and counsel for dismissed defendant

Colorado Springs Police Department, Martha McKinney.

Discussion is held regarding the incorrect service of process as to John Doe Detective One and

John Doe Officer Two.

Plaintiff makes an oral motion to withdraw his Motion for Summary Judgment. With no

objections,

It is ORDERED: Plaintiff’s ORAL MOTION TO WITHDRAW his Motion for Summary

Judgment [Docket No. 30] is granted. Therefore, 

It is ORDERED: Plaintiff’s MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [Docket No. 30, Filed

February 15, 2010] is WITHDRAWN for reasons as set forth on the

record. The motion is withdrawn without prejudice, and leave is granted

to Plaintiff to re-file at an appropriate future date.

Plaintiff shall provide the court with the names and addresses of the individual defendants.

It is ORDERED: A SHOW CAUSE HEARING is set APRIL 12, 2012 at 2:00 p.m.

in Courtroom A-502, Fifth floor, Alfred A. Arraj United States Courthouse,

901 19th Street, Denver, Colorado 80294. A written ORDER TO SHOW

CAUSE shall issue.

Case 1:11-cv-02337-MJW Document 33 Filed 03/06/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

The Clerk of the Court is directed to add the name, address, and telephone number of the

contact at the Colorado State Penitentiary as follows, as provided by case manager Darla

Jimenez during this conference:

Office of Legal Aid 

Attn: Dennis Burbank

For: Tyron Duante Small 

Registration No. 150307

Colorado State Penitentiary (CSP)

P. O. Box 777

Cañon City, CO 81215-0777

(719( 269-5120

At this time, counsel Martha McKinney for the dismissed defendant Colorado Springs Police

Department is excused from attending future hearings.

Hearing concluded.

Court in recess: 10:33 a.m.

Total In-Court Time 00:21 

To order a transcript of this proceedings, contact Avery Wood Reports (303) 825-6119 or Toll Free 1-800-962-3345. 

Case 1:11-cv-02337-MJW Document 33 Filed 03/06/12 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
#### ORIOLO v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Florida.

January Term 1954.

Certiorari dismissed without opinion.
216 La. 765

#### PAN AMERICAN PRODUCTION CO. et al. v. STATE MINERAL BOARD et al.

No. 39658.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 9, 1949.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 13, 1950.

Liskow & Lewis, Lake Charles, • for plaintiff-appellant.

Bolivar E. Kemp, Jr., Atty. Gen., Carroll Buck, 1st Asst. Atty. Gen., John L.. Madden, Asst. Atty. Gen., for defendant-appellee.

McCALEB, Justice.

This case was consolidated for all purposes with the suit of The Texas Company v. State Mineral Board et al., 216 La. 742, 44 So.2d 841. The decision in that matter controls here.

The'judgment appealed from is affirmed,.
#### MARKOWITZ v. MARKOWITZ.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June Term 1953.

Dismissed without opinion.
FILED 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT AUG 1 9 2010 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy 

Courts for the District of Columbli 

ANTONIO COLBERT, ) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Plaintiff, 

v. Civil Action No. 10 1399 

F.B.I., 

Defendant. 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

This matter is before the Court upon consideration ofplaintiffs application to proceed in 

forma pauperis and his pro se complaint. The application will be granted, and the complaint 

will be dismissed. 

Plaintiff alleges that he has "made several attempts to file cases ... involving police 

misconduct[,]" and has instead been subjected to harassment by the FBI's security staff. CompI. 

at 2. He appears to demand that the FBI monitor its employees' calls "because these people think 

they [are] god[']s gift to the Earth." Id. In addition, he demands an award of$10,000. Id. 

The Court has reviewed plaintiffs complaint, keeping in mind that complaints filed by 

pro se litigants are held to less stringent standards than those applied to formal pleadings drafted 

by lawyers. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519,520 (1972). Even pro se litigants, however, 

must comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Jarrell v. Tisch, 656 F. Supp. 237, 239 

(D.D.C. 1987). Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires that a complaint 

contain a short and plain statement of the grounds upon which the court's jurisdiction depends, a 

short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, and a demand 

for judgment for the relief the pleader seeks. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). The purpose of the minimum 

\. 
standard of Rule 8 is to give fair notice to the defendants of the claim being asserted, sufficient to 

prepare a responsive answer, to prepare an adequate defense and to determine whether the 

doctrine of res judicata applies. Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977). 

Plaintiffs complaint does not contain a short and plain statement of the grounds upon 

which the Court's jurisdiction depends or a claim that plaintiff is entitled to the relief he seeks. 

For these reasons, the complaint will be dismissed for its failure to comply with Rule 8(a). An 

Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately. 

DATE: ~ ,(7--J 020 (0
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02628-BNB

WORDEN BOURN,

CHARLES GREENLEE, and

ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED,

Plaintiffs,

v.

GEO GROUP INC.,

HUDSON CORRECTIONAL FACILITY,

WARDEN JOE DRIVER,

ASSOCIATE WARDEN RON MURRAY,

STATE OF ALASKA DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS,

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SAM EDWARDS, and

Others to be Named,

Defendants.

MINUTE ORDER

ORDER ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE BOYD N. BOLAND

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs’ “Request for Compel Payment of

Filing Fee” and “Request for Hoffa Account Statement Be Provided to Court” (Doc. Nos.

18 & 19) filed on November 8, 2011. In Doc. No. 18, Plaintiffs request a court order to

compel the Alaska Department of Corrections to process Plaintiffs’ requests to have the

filing fee sent to the Court. In Doc. No. 19, Plaintiff, Charles Greenlee, requests an

order to compel the Alaska Department of Corrections to provide a certified inmate

account statement. The requests are DENIED.

Plaintiffs are directed to show this Minute Order to the appropriate prison official. 

If their requests for a certified 6-month account statement and/or money order is again

denied, the prison official is directed to provide documentation regarding the reason for

the denial. 

Plaintiffs will be allowed thirty (30) days from the date of this minute order to

comply with the instructions set forth in this minute order. No further extensions of time

will be granted without just cause.

Dated: November 14, 2011

Case 1:11-cv-02628-LTB Document 20 Filed 11/14/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
Case 1:11-cv-02628-LTB Document 20 Filed 11/14/11 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 199 (Tuesday, October 14, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60713-60714]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-24250]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[F-14876-M, F-14876-N; AK-964-1410-KC-P]


Alaska Native Claims Selection

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of decision approving lands for conveyance.

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

SUMMARY: As required by 43 CFR 2650.7(d), notice is hereby given that 
an appealable decision approving lands for conveyance pursuant to the 
Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act will be issued to NANA Regional 
Corporation, Inc., Successor in Interest to Kivalina Sinuakmeut 
Corporation. The lands are in the vicinity of Kivalina, Alaska, and are 
located in:

Kateel River Meridian, Alaska

T. 29 N., R. 24 W.,
    Secs. 3 to 10, inclusive;
    Secs. 13 to 23, inclusive;
    Secs. 28 to 33, inclusive.

    Containing approximately 14,663 acres.


    The subsurface estate in these lands will be conveyed to NANA 
Regional Corporation, Inc. when the surface estate is conveyed to NANA 
Regional Corporation, Inc., Successor in Interest to Kivalina 
Sinuakmeut Corporation. Notice of the decision will also be published 
four times in the Arctic Sounder.

[[Page 60714]]


DATES: The time limits for filing an appeal are:
    1. Any party claiming a property interest which is adversely 
affected by the decision shall have until November 13, 2008 to file an 
appeal.
    2. Parties receiving service of the decision by certified mail 
shall have 30 days from the date of receipt to file an appeal.
    Parties who do not file an appeal in accordance with the 
requirements of 43 CFR Part 4, Subpart E, shall be deemed to have 
waived their rights.

ADDRESSES: A copy of the decision may be obtained from: Bureau of Land 
Management, Alaska State Office, 222 West Seventh Avenue, <greek-i>13, 
Anchorage, Alaska 99513-7504.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Bureau of Land Management by phone 
at 907-271-5960, or by e-mail at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#cbaaa0e5a9a7a6e5a8a4a5bdaeb2aaa5a8ae8baaa0e5a9a7a6e5aca4bd"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="cbaaa0e5a9a7a6e5a8a4a5bdaeb2aaa5a8ae8baaa0e5a9a7a6e5aca4bd">[email protected]</span></a>. Persons 
who use a telecommunication device (TTD) may call the Federal 
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8330, 24 hours a day, 
seven days a week, to contact the Bureau of Land Management.

Michael Bilancione,
Land Transfer Resolution Specialist, Land Transfer Adjudication I.
[FR Doc. E8-24250 Filed 10-10-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-JA-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-7560
MCDONALD WILLIAMS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus D. A. HEDGEPETH; DETECTIVE SKINNER; R. BLACKWELL, Defendants - Appellees, and VANCE COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (CA-96-783-5-CT-BR) Submitted: March 17, 1998 Decided: March 31, 1998 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.2 McDonald Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Keith David Burns, FAISON & FLETCHER, Durham, North Carolina; Gary S. Parsons, David Scott Wisz, BAILEY & DIXON, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).3 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court order granting summaryjudgment to Appellee Blackwell and denying his motion for appointment of counsel. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdictionbecause neither order is appealable. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1994), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders. See 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (1994); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp. , 337 U.S. 541 (1949). In this case, claims remain pending in the district court against other defendants. Because the district court has not certified its order granting summary judgment as final under Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b) and because neither of the orders fall within the collateral order doctrine, we lack jurisdiction to consider the appeal either from the award of summary judgment to Blackwell or the denial of the motion for appointment of counsel. See Baird v. Palmer, 114 F.3d 39, 43 (4th Cir. 1997); Miller v. Simmons , 814 F.2d 962, 964 (4th Cir. 1987). Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal. We deny Appellees' motions for dismissal and Appellant's motions to stay and amend the appeal, to examine the record, and for appointment of counsel as moot. 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
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1765 

To amend title 10, United Stated Code, to expedite the prompt return 

of the remains of deceased members of the Armed Forces to their 

loved ones for burial. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 11, 2007 

Mr. BROWN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To amend title 10, United Stated Code, to expedite the 

prompt return of the remains of deceased members of 

the Armed Forces to their loved ones for burial. 

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

3 SECTION 1. TRANSPORTATION OF REMAINS OF DECEASED 

4 MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES AND CER5 TAIN OTHER PERSONS. 

6 Section 1482(a)(8) of title 10, United States Code, 

7 is amended by adding at the end the following new sen8 tence: ‘‘When transportation of the remains includes 

9 transportation by aircraft, the Secretary concerned shall 


ccoleman on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

•S 1765 IS

1 provide, to the maximum extent possible, for delivery of 

2 the remains by air to the commercial, general aviation, or 

3 military airport nearest to the place selected by the des4 ignee or, if such a selection is not made, nearest to the 

5 cemetery selected by the Secretary.’’. 

Æ 


ccoleman on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
S. 171

One Hundred Tenth Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday,

the third day of January, two thousand and eight

An Act

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 301 Commerce

Street in Commerce, Oklahoma, as the ‘‘Mickey Mantle Post Office Building’’.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. MICKEY MANTLE POST OFFICE BUILDING.

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal

Service located at 301 Commerce Street in Commerce, Oklahoma,

shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Mickey Mantle Post Office

Building’’.

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation,

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference

to the ‘‘Mickey Mantle Post Office Building’’.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1345 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1345

 To affirm that Federal employees are protected from discrimination on 
 the basis of sexual orientation and to repudiate any assertion to the 
                               contrary.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 9, 2007

  Mr. Akaka (for himself, Mr. Lieberman, Ms. Collins, Mr. Levin, Mr. 
 Leahy, Mr. Feingold, and Mrs. Clinton) introduced the following bill; 
which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 
                        and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To affirm that Federal employees are protected from discrimination on 
 the basis of sexual orientation and to repudiate any assertion to the 
                               contrary.

    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 ``Clarification of Federal Employment 
Protections Act''.

SEC. 2. DISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF SEXUAL ORIENTATION PROHIBITED.

    (a) Repudiation.--In order to dispel any public confusion, Congress 
repudiates any assertion that Federal employees are not protected from 
discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
    (b) Affirmation.--It is the sense of Congress that, in the absence 
of the amendment made by subsection (c), discrimination against Federal 
employees and applicants for Federal employment on the basis of sexual 
orientation is prohibited by section 2302(b)(10) of title 5, United 
States Code.
    (c) Amendment.--Section 2302(b)(1) of title 5, United States Code, 
is amended--
            (1) by striking ``or'' at the end of subparagraph (D);
            (2) by inserting ``or'' at the end of subparagraph (E); and
            (3) by adding at the end the following:
                    ``(F) on the basis of sexual orientation.''.
                                 <all>
```
219 La. 613

#### CITY OF SHREVEPORT v. J. E. O’DANIEL.

No. 40360.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 29, 1951.

J. Bennett'Johnston, Shreveport, for appellant.

. James T. Adams, Shreveport, for appel-lee.

LE BLANC, Justice.

For the reasons assigned in the opinion this day handed down in the consolidated cases of City of Shreveport v. Moore, and City of Shreveport v. O’Daniel, 219 La. 604, 53 So.2d 783.

It is ordered that the appeal in this case bearing No. *40,360*of the docket of this Court be and the same is hereby dismissed.
#### BUSH v. CITY OF MIAMI BEACH.

Supreme Court of Florida.

January Term 1954.

Certiorari denied without opinion.