alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
OPINION ON REHEARING UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6719

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DAVID EARL BEASLEY, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (CR-94-122-F, CA-98-810-5-F) Submitted: April 27, 2001 Decided: May 7, 2001 Before MOTZ and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.David Earl Beasley, Appellant Pro Se. Fenita Morris Shepard, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* We previously granted Beasley’s petition for rehearing and placed his appeal in abeyance for United States v. Jones , No. 00-7249. We recently held, however, in United States v. Sanders , F.3d , 2001 WL 369719 (4th Cir. Apr. 13, 2001) (No. 00- 6281), that the new rule announced in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530U.S. 466 (2000), is not retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review. Accordingly, the Apprendi claim Beasley asserted for the first time in his petition for rehearing in this appeal isnot cognizable. We therefore remove this appeal from abeyance because we conclude Sanders is dispositive of Beasley’s Apprendi claim. 2 PER CURIAM: David Earl Beasley appeals the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and findno reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal substantially on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Beasley , Nos. CR-94-122- F; CA-98-810-5-F (E.D.N.C. Sept. 28, 1999). * 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
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Election Commission

# AGENCY:

Federal Election Commission.

# DATE AND TIME: 

Tuesday December 9, 2014 at 10:00 a.m.

# PLACE: 

999 E Street NW., Washington, DC.

# STATUS: 

This meeting will be closed to the public.

# ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED:

Compliance matters pursuant to 2 U.S.C. § 437g.

Matters concerning participation in civil actions or proceedings or arbitration.

* * * * *

# PERSON TO CONTACT FOR INFORMATION: 

Judith Ingram, Press Officer, Telephone: (202) 694-1220.

Shelley E. Garr,

Deputy Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 2014-28590 Filed 12-2-14; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 6715-01-P
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4487 

To suspend temporarily the duty on 1,2 Pentanediol. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 2, 2004 

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina introduced the following bill; which was 

referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on 1,2 Pentanediol. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SUSPENSION OF DUTY ON 1,2 PENTANEDIOL. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following: 

‘‘ 9902.34.33 1,2 Pentanediol (CAS No. 

5343–02–0) (provided for in 

subheading 2905.39.90) ...... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2007 ’’. 

7 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

8 subsection (a) applies to articles entered, or withdrawn 
2 

•HR 4487 IH 

1 from warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day 

2 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

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

No. 97-30199 Conference Calendar

WADE P. JACKSON, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus JOHNNY SCOTT, Captain, Defendant-Appellee.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana

USDC No. 94-CV-336-B

-------------------- February 16, 2000 Before EMILIO M. GARZA, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Wade P. Jackson, Louisiana prisoner No. 113076, has filed a motion for permission to file a supplemental brief and a “Motion for Written Verification and Answers.” The motions are DENIED. Jackson argues that the district court erred by entering summary judgment in favor of the defendant without allowing Jackson to complete discovery of his medical records. Jackson has failed to show that the district court abused its discretion by entering summary judgment without ordering further discovery. Richardson v. Henry , 902 F.2d 414, 417 (5th Cir. 1990).For the first time on appeal, Jackson argues that the

defendant sprayed a “whole can” of mace into his cell and that he has suffered permanent injuries as a result. These allegations were not presented to the district court and they involve factual matters that cannot be decided by this court for the first time on appeal. Robertson v. Plano City of Texas , 70 F.3d 21, 23 (5th Cir. 1995); United States v. Vital , 68 F.3d 114, 119 (5th Cir. 1995).
AFFIRMED; MOTIONS DENIED.
Exhibit 99.5

Report of Independent Accountants

To the Board of Directors of Chase Bank USA, N.A.,
Transferor and Servicer

We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying Management
Report on Internal Control over Servicing of Securitized Credit Card
Receivables, that Chase Bank USA, NA (the "Bank", formerly known as "Chase
Manhattan Bank USA, N.A."), as servicer of the Chase Credit Card Master Trust
(the "Trust"), maintained effective internal control over servicing of
securitized credit card receivables as of December 31, 2004, in compliance with
the Chase Credit Card Master Trust Fourth Amended and Restated Pooling and
Servicing Agreement dated as of October 15, 2004, based upon the criteria for
effective internal control established in "Internal Control - Integrated
Framework" issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission. The Bank's management is responsible for maintaining effective
internal control over servicing of securitized credit card receivables. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on management's assertion based on our
examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards
established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and,
accordingly, included obtaining an understanding of internal control over
servicing of the securitized credit card receivables, testing and evaluating the
design and operating effectiveness of internal control, and performing such
other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe
that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

Because of inherent limitations in any internal control, misstatements due to
error or fraud may occur and not be detected. Also, projections of any
evaluation of internal control over servicing of securitized credit card
receivables to future periods are subject to the risk that the internal control
may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of
compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

In our opinion, management's assertion that Chase Bank USA, NA, as servicer of
the Chase Credit Card Master Trust, maintained effective internal control over
servicing of securitized credit card receivables as of December 31, 2004, in
compliance with the Chase Credit Card Master Trust Fourth Amended and Restated
Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of October 15, 2004, is fairly stated,
in all material respects, based upon the criteria for effective internal control
established in "Internal Control - Integrated Framework" issued by the Committee
of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.



/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
------------------------------

March 29, 2005
EXHIBIT 23.1

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to the  incorporation by reference in (1) the Registration  Statement
on Form S-8, File No. 333-43837 and (2) the Registration  Statement on Form S-8,
File No.  333-43839  of our report dated  February 13, 1998 on the  consolidated
financial  statements of Siebert Financial Corp. and subsidiary  included in its
Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 1997.



Richard A. Eisner & Company, LLP

New York, New York
March 30, 1998
**Exhibit32.B**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THESABANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of MercantileBankshares Corporation (the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2005,(the “Report”) as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, I, TerryL. Troupe, the Chief Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to and for thepurposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 206 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(3)   The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934;

and

 

(4)   Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/ Terry L. Troupe     |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
| Terry L. Troupe         |
| Chief Financial Officer |
|                    |
| Date: March 10,  2006   |

 

----
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1



                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation by
reference in this registration statement on Form S-3 of our report dated March
17, 1998, included in Harken Energy Corporation's Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 1997, and to all references to our Firm included in this
registration statement.




                                            ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP


Dallas, Texas
May 27, 1998
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 9, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

___________________

No. 02-31169

Summary Calendar

___________________

IRMA J. JOHNSON,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

SEARS ROEBUCK & COMPANY,

Defendant-Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Louisiana

01-CV-2714

_________________________________________________________________

Before BARKSDALE, DEMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Irma Johnson appeals the summary judgment awarded Sears

Roebuck & Company against her employment discrimination claim

(employee's religious practice) under Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e

et seq., and the denial of her motion for sanctions, pursuant to

FED. R. CIV. P. 37(a)(4)(A), for Sears’ conduct regarding discovery.

A summary judgment is reviewed de novo. E.g. Weber v. Roadway

Express, Inc., 199 F.3d 270, 272 (5th Cir. 2000). “Summary

judgment shall be entered in favor of the moving party, if the
2

record, taken as a whole, shows that there is no genuine issue as

to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to

judgment as a matter of law.” Id. The denial of Rule 37 sanctions

is reviewed only for abuse of discretion. E.g., Tollett v. City of

Kemah, 285 F.3d 357, 363 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 123 S. Ct. 105

(2002).

Johnson was not hired as a stocker by Sears because of her

refusal, based on her religious beliefs, to wear pants. The

district court held that Sears could not reasonably accommodate

Johnson’s beliefs without undue hardship on its business. See 42

U.S.C. § 2000e(j). Having reviewed the record and the parties’

briefs, the summary judgment was properly granted, essentially for

the reasons stated by the district court. 

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying

Johnson’s Rule 37 (a)(4)(A) sanctions motion.

AFFIRMED
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 421 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 421

 To reauthorize the United States Institute for Environmental Conflict 
                  Resolution, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 28, 2003

Mr. Kolbe (for himself, Mr. Pastor, Mr. Udall of Colorado, Mr. Udall of 
    New Mexico, Mr. George Miller of California, and Mr. Grijalva) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
   Education and the Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on 
 Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, 
 in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
                jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To reauthorize the United States Institute for Environmental Conflict 
                  Resolution, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

     This Act may be cited as the ``Environmental Policy and Conflict 
Resolution Advancement Act of 2003''.

SEC. 2. ENVIRONMENTAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION FUND.

     Section 13 of the Morris K. Udall Scholarship and Excellence in 
National Environmental and Native American Public Policy Act of 1992 
(20 U.S.C. 5609) is amended by striking subsection (b) and inserting 
the following:
    ``(b) Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund.--There is authorized 
to be appropriated to the Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund 
established by section 10 $4,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 
through 2008, of which--
            ``(1) $3,000,000 shall be used to pay operations costs 
        (including not more than $1,000 for official reception and 
        representation expenses); and
            ``(2) $1,000,000 shall be used for grants or other 
        appropriate arrangements to pay the costs of services provided 
        in a neutral manner relating to, and to support the 
        participation of non-Federal entities (such as State and local 
        governments, tribal governments, nongovernmental organizations, 
        and individuals) in, environmental conflict resolution 
        proceedings involving Federal agencies.''.
                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 228 (Wednesday, November 26, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 70524]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-28024]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL15-15-000]


PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.; Notice of Initiation of Proceeding 
and Refund Effective Date

    On November 20, 2014, the Commission issued an Order to Show Cause 
in Docket No. EL15-15-000, initiating a proceeding pursuant to section 
206 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C. 824e (2012), directing 
PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. to either revise its Open Access 
Transmission Tariff to provide that a generation or non-generation 
resource owner will no longer receive reactive power capability 
payments after it has deactivated its unit and to clarify the treatment 
of reactive power capability payments for units transferred out of a 
fleet; or show cause why it should not be required to do so. PJM 
Interconnection, L.L.C., 149 FERC ] 61,132 (2014).
    The refund effective date in Docket No. EL15-15-000, established 
pursuant to section 206(b) of the FPA, will be the date of publication 
of this notice in the Federal Register.

    Dated: November 20, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-28024 Filed 11-25-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
1 13-3144-cv Sirob Imports, Inc. v. Peerless Ins. Co.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECO ND CIRCUIT

SUMMARY ORDER

RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AF TER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERM ITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROC EDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT = S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPEND IX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATAB ASE (WITH THE NOTATION

A SUMMARY ORDER @ ). A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL.

At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seco nd Circuit, held at 1 the Thurgood Marshall United Stat es Courthouse, 40 Foley Sq uare, in the City of New 2 York, on the 6 th day of March, tw o thousand fourteen. 3 4 PRESENT: REENA RAGGI, 5 DENNY CHIN, 6 Circuit Judges, 7 MAE A. D’AGOSTINO, 8 District Judge

. * 9

---------------------------- ---------------------------- -------------- 10 SIROB IMPORTS, INC., 11 Plaintiff-Appellant

, 12 13 v. No. 13-3144-cv 14 15 PEERLESS INSURANCE COMPANY, 16 Defendant-Appellee

. 17

---------------------------- ---------------------------- -------------- 18 APPEARING FOR APPELLANT: MITCHELL J. WINN, Esq., Garden City, 19 New York. 20 21 APPEARING FOR APPELLEES: SCOTT D. STORM, Mura & Storm, 22 PLLC, Buffalo, New York. 23 24

* The Honorable Mae A. D’Agostino, of the Un ited States District Court for the Northern District of New York , sitting by designation.2 Appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District 1

of New York (Arthur D. Spatt, Judge ). 2

UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERE D, ADJUDGED, 3

AND DECREED that the judgment entere d on August 2, 2 013, is AFFIRMED. 4

The parties having agreed at oral argumen t that the case is now moot in light of 5

Executive Plaza, LLC v. Peerle ss Insurance Co., — N.Y.2d —, — N.Y.S.2d —, 2014 WL 6

551251, 2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 00898 (Feb. 13, 2014), the district court’s judgment of 7

dismissal without prej udice is AFFIRMED. 8

FOR THE COURT: 9 CATHERINE O’HAGAN WOLF E, Clerk of Court 10 11
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-11281

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

DARRELL L. MOREHOUSE, JR.,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:94-CR-424-G

- - - - - - - - - -

September 21, 1998

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Darrell L. Morehouse, Jr. appeals the district court’s

revocation of his supervised release. Morehouse admitted that he

refused to participate in mental health testing, but he argues that

the portion of the testing that required him to view pornographic

materials violates his First Amendment religious rights and the

Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

We have reviewed the briefs, but we are constrained from

reaching the merits of Morehouse's appeal by his failure to carry
No. 97-11281

-2-

his burden of providing the court with a complete record. FED. R.

APP. P. 10(b).

APPEAL DISMISSED.
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 236 (Tuesday, December 9, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 73146]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-28786]


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

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS


Advisory Committee: National Academic Affiliations Council; 
Notice of Meeting

    The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) gives notice under Public 
Law 92-463 (Federal Advisory Committee Act) that a meeting of the 
National Academic Affiliations Council will be held via conference call 
on January 6, 2015, from 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. EST. The purpose of the 
Council is to advise the Secretary on matters affecting partnerships 
between VA and its academic affiliates. The Council will discuss the 
status of the Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act of 2014's 
Graduate Medical Education Expansion Plan and receive an update from 
the Council's fall meeting recommendations. The Council will receive 
public comments from 3:45 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. EST.
    Interested persons may attend and/or present oral statements to the 
Council. The dial in number to attend the conference call is: 1-800-
767-1750. At the prompt, enter access code 02939 then press #. 
Individuals seeking to present oral statements are invited to submit a 
1-2 page summary of their comments at the time of the meeting for 
inclusion in the official meeting record. Oral presentations will be 
limited to five minutes or less, depending on the number of 
participants. Interested parties may also provide written comments for 
review by the Council prior to the meeting or at any time, via email 
to, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#06516f6a6a6f676b284b67746d7546706728616970"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="396e5055555058541774584b524a794f58175e564f">[email protected]</span></a>, or by mail to William J. Marks M.D., MS-HCM, 
Chief of Health Professions Education, Office of Academic Affiliations 
(10A2D), 810 Vermont Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20420. Any member of 
the public wishing to attend or seeking additional information should 
contact Dr. Marks via email or by phone at (415) 750-2100.

    Dated: December 4, 2014.
Rebecca Schiller,
Federal Advisory Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2014-28786 Filed 12-8-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>