alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-6522

MICHAEL LERCH, Petitioner – Appellant,

v. GEORGE M. HINKLE, Warden, Greensville Correctional Center, Respondent – Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. M. Hannah Lauck, Magistrate Judge. (3:08-cv-00305-MHL)

Submitted: September 3, 2009 Decided: November 18, 2009

Before MICHAEL and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael Lerch, Appellant Pro Se. Josephine Frances Whalen, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.PER CURIAM: Michael Lerch seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. * The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). 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) (2006). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district

court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000);

Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Lerch 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

* The parties consented to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2006).

23 contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 208 (Thursday, October 28, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66419-66420]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-27298]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 7217]


Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations: ``Object of Devotion: Medieval English Alabaster 
Sculpture From the Victoria and Albert Museum''

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: 
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 
1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 
Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, and Delegation of Authority No. 
236-3 of August 28, 2000, I hereby determine that the objects to be 
included in the exhibition ``Object of Devotion: Medieval English 
Alabaster Sculpture from the Victoria and Albert Museum,'' imported 
from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, are of 
cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant to loan 
agreements with the foreign owners or custodians. I also determine that 
the exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at the Society of the 
Four Arts, Palm Beach, FL, from on or about December 2, 2010, until on 
or about January 16, 2011; at Bowdoin College Museum of Art, Brunswick, 
ME, from on or about February 5 until on or about May 15, 2011; at 
Tyler Museum of Art, Tyler, TX, from on or about September 3 until on 
or about November 13, 2011; at Princeton University Art Museum, 
Princeton, NJ, from on or about December 3, 2011, until on or about 
February 12, 2012; at Kalamazoo Institute of Arts, Kalamazoo, MI, from 
on or about March 3, until on or about May 13, 2012; and at Museum of 
Art,

[[Page 66420]]

Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, from on or about June 2 to on or 
about November 11, 2012, and at possible additional exhibitions or 
venues yet to be determined, is in the national interest. Public Notice 
of these Determinations is ordered to be published in the Federal 
Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a 
list of the exhibit objects, contact Carol B. Epstein, Attorney-
Adviser, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State 
(telephone: 202/632-6473). The address is U.S. Department of State, SA-
5, L/PD, Fifth Floor, Washington, DC 20522-0505.

    Dated: October 21, 2010.
Ann Stock,
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, 
Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2010-27298 Filed 10-27-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM ITEM 1 -
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                          22,452
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   91,106
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (1,220)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               128,816
<PP&E>                                         729,720
<DEPRECIATION>                                (85,437)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 792,955
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           46,821
<BONDS>                                        340,718
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           793
<OTHER-SE>                                     346,148
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   792,955
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               367,342
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  244,316
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (3,672)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              17,408
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                109,290
<INCOME-TAX>                                    40,055
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             69,235
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    69,235
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .87
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .87
        

</TABLE>
December 17, 1999

















Gerard R. Bilodeau


Glens Falls National Bank & Trust Company





Dear Gerry:





	We hereby agree with you that, if there is a "change in control" of Arrow and you are
not offered a position with the surviving or resulting company at a base salary at least equal to your
base salary immediately prior to the change in control (your "Base Salary") or if you are offered a
position which requires you to relocate more than 50 miles, you will be entitled to receive, upon
termination of your employment, a lump sum payment in cash equal to two years' Base Salary, plus
continuing coverage for two years after the termination of your employment, under Arrow's group
medical, dental and term life insurance arrangements that are in effect at the time of such "change in
control", including any cost-sharing arrangements.  A "change in control" of Arrow is described on
Exhibit A attached to this letter.





	To receive the above benefits, you must remain with Arrow at least until the change
in control is completed.  If you are offered a continuing position but at a reduced salary or which
requires you to relocate more than 50 miles, and you elect to accept that offer, your right to terminate
your employment and collect the benefits hereunder will expire six (6) months after the change in
control.





	This letter agreement will continue until December 31, 2000, or your earlier retirement
or termination of employment.





	Please indicate your acceptance of this proposal by signing below on the enclosed
copy, and return the letter to me.  Upon my receipt of your executed copy, this letter will constitute
a binding agreement between us, governed by New York law.





		Very truly yours,




















ACCEPTED AND AGREED TO this ______ day of _____________, 1999.





______________________________


          (Signature of Officer)
Exhibit 23

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration  Statements on Form
S-8 (Nos. 333-51242 and 333-113224) of Pacific Financial Corporation ("Pacific")
of our  report,  dated  April 28,  2005,  with  respect to Pacific  management's
assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting
and the effectiveness of Pacific's internal control over financial  reporting as
of December 31, 2004,  included in this Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report on Form
10-K/A of Pacific.


/s/ McGladrey & Pullen LLP

Tacoma, Washington
April 29, 2005
EXHIBIT 32.2

                            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 on Form 10-Q of WNC  California
Housing Tax Credits III, L.P. (the "Partnership") for the period ended September
30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"),  and pursuant to 18 U.S.C., section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
section  906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  I,  Thomas  J.  Riha,  Senior
Vice-President  and Chief Financial Officer of WNC & Associates,  Inc.,  general
partner of the Partnership, hereby certify that:

1.   The Report fully complies with the  requirements  of section 13(a) or 15(d)
     of the  Securities  Exchange  Act of 1934,  except to the extent  that such
     provisions require the audit report of Local Limited Partnership  financial
     statements  to  refer  to the  auditing  standards  of the  Public  Company
     Accounting   Oversight  Board  for  the   Partnership's   annual  financial
     statements; and

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




/s/Thomas J. Riha.
------------------
Thomas J. Riha
Senior Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc.

September 23, 2008
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-8457

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee,

v. MARC STEVEN CRAIG, Defendant – Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg, District Judge. (1:91-cr-00158-RDP-1; 1:08-cv-00241-LHT)

Submitted: February 19, 2009 Decided: February 27, 2009

Before WILKINSON, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Marc Steven Craig, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Marc Steven Craig seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 2000 & Supp. 2008) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). 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) (2006). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district

court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000);

Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Craig 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 adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>

</LEGEND>
<CIK>                        0001093429
<NAME>                       Orion Research Group, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     US DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   Year
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         0
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1,600
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   (1,600)
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                0
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   0
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0



</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 21.1


                      SUBSIDIARIES OF STONEPATH GROUP, INC.

Name of Subsidiary                          State of Incorporation

Net Value, Inc.                             Delaware

Stonepath Operations, Inc.                  Delaware

Stonepath Logistics Domestic                Delaware
   Services, Inc.

Stonepath Logistics International           Delaware
   Services, Inc.

M.G.R., Inc.                                Minneapolis

Distribution Services, Inc.                 Minneapolis

Contract Air, Inc.                          Minneapolis

Global Transportation Services, Inc.        Washington

Global Container Line, Inc.                 Washington

United American Acquisitions and            Michigan
   Management, Inc.

Transport Specialists, Inc.                 Virginia

Stonepath Holdings (Hong Kong) Limited      Hong Kong
<PAGE>
EXHIBIT 32.1


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


     In connection with the Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report of Redhook
Ale Brewery, Incorporated (the "Company") on Form 10-Q/A for the period ending
September 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"), I, Paul S. Shipman, President and Chief Executive
Officer 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:

     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.

      A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the
Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its
staff upon request.


Date: March 31, 2006


                                             BY:   /s/  Paul S. Shipman
                                                ------------------------------
                                                   Paul S. Shipman
                                                   Chief Executive Officer
II 

Calendar No. 352

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1643

[Report No. 108–178] 

To exempt certain coastal barrier property from financial assistance and 

flood insurance limitations under the Coastal Barriers Resources Act 

and the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 23, 2003

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

referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

OCTOBER 29, 2003

Reported by Mr. INHOFE, with amendments 

[Omit the part struck through and insert the part printed in italic] 

A BILL

To exempt certain coastal barrier property from financial 

assistance and flood insurance limitations under the 

Coastal Barriers Resources Act and the National Flood 

Insurance Act of 1968.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•S 1643 RS 

1 SECTION 1. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE; FLOOD INSURANCE. 

2 The limitations on Federal expenditures or financial 

3 assistance in section 6 section 5 of the Coastal Barrier 

4 Resources Act (16 U.S.C. 3504) and the limitations on 

5 flood insurance coverage in section 1321(a) of the Na6 tional Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4028(a)) 

7 shall not apply to lots 15, 16, 25, and 29 within the Jer8 emy Cay Subdivision on Edisto Island, South Carolina, de9 picted on the map reference map entitled ‘‘John H. Chafee 

10 Coastal Barrier Resources System Edisto Complex M09/

11 M09P’’ dated January 24, 2003. 

Calendar No. 352

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1643

[Report No. 108–178] 

A BILL

To exempt certain coastal barrier property from financial assistance and flood insurance limitations 

under the Coastal Barriers Resources Act and the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968. 

OCTOBER 29, 2003

Reported with amendments
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 213 (Thursday, November 4, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 68008]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-27791]


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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Business and Operations Advisory Committee

ACTION: Change in Notice of Meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The National Science Foundation published a Notice of Meeting 
in the Federal Register on Monday, October 25, page 65528. The topics 
listed in the agenda have been changed.
    Date/Time: November 16, 2010; 1 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. (EST).
    November 17, 2010; 8 a.m. to 12 p.m. (EST).
    Place: Arlington Hilton, Gallery II Conference Room, Arlington, VA.
    Type of Meeting: OPEN.
    Contact Person: Patty Balanga, National Science Foundation, 4201 
Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230, (703) 292-8100.
    Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice concerning issues related to 
the oversight, integrity, development and enhancement of NSF's business 
operations.

Agenda

November 16, 2010

    Welcome/Introductions; BFA Update; The Changing Workplace: 
Challenges in a Federal Context (Overview and Panel Discussion); 
Committee Discussion: Prepare for Meeting with NSF Deputy Director; 
Discussion with Deputy Director; Open Government.

November 17, 2010

    The Changing Workplace: Challenges in a Federal Context (Discussion 
Continued); International Facilities Subcommittee; Committee 
Expectations/Closing Discussions.

    Dated: October 29, 2010.
Susanne Bolton,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2010-27791 Filed 11-3-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 209 (Friday, October 29, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 66811]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-27493]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the 
Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities 
and Exchange Commission will hold an Open Meeting on November 3, 2010 
at 10 a.m., in the Auditorium, Room L-002.
    The subject matter of the Open Meeting will be:
    1. The Commission will consider whether to adopt new Rule 15c3-5, 
Risk Management Controls for Brokers or Dealers with Market Access, 
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The new rule would require 
brokers or dealers with access to trading directly on an exchange or 
alternative trading system (``ATS''), including those providing 
sponsored or direct market access to customers or other persons, to 
implement risk management controls and supervisory procedures 
reasonably designed to manage the financial, regulatory, and other 
risks of this business activity. Among other things, new Rule 15c3-5 
would effectively prohibit broker-dealers from providing ``unfiltered'' 
or ``naked'' sponsored access to any exchange or ATS.
    2. The Commission will consider whether to propose a new rule under 
Section 763(g) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer 
Protection Act, Public Law 111-203, to prohibit fraud, manipulation, 
and deception in connection with security-based swaps.
    3. The Commission will consider whether to propose rules and forms 
to implement Section 21F of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 
(``Exchange Act'') entitled ``Securities Whistleblower Incentives and 
Protection.'' Section 21F, as added by Section 922 of the Dodd-Frank 
Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, provides that the 
Commission shall pay awards, under regulations prescribed by the 
Commission and subject to certain limitations, to eligible 
whistleblowers who voluntarily provide the Commission with original 
information about a violation of the Federal securities laws that leads 
to the successful enforcement of a covered judicial or administrative 
action, or a related action.
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in 
the scheduling of meeting items.
    For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have 
been added, deleted or postponed, please contact:
    The Office of the Secretary at (202) 551-5400.

    Dated: October 27, 2010.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-27493 Filed 10-27-10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P