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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-6660

TYRONE HOLLEY,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

THEODIS BECK,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr., Chief

District Judge. (CA-00-567-1)

Submitted: August 23, 2001 Decided: August 30, 2001

Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tyrone Holley, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III,

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North

Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Tyrone Holley appeals the district court’s order denying

relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 &

Supp. 2001). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s

opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the

district court. Holley v. Beck, No. CA-00-567-1 (M.D.N.C. filed

Mar. 26, 2001; entered Mar. 27, 2001). We decline to consider the

claims that Holley asserts for the first time on appeal. See Muth

v. United States, 1 F.3d 246, 250 (4th Cir. 1993). 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
Order entered May 30, 2014

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 13
- 01700
- CV ORCA ASSETS, G.P., L .L.C., Appellant

V. JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., ET AL . , Appellee s On Appeal from the 44th Judicial District Court

Dallas Cou nty, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC
- 12
- 05303



### O RDER
We GRANT appellant’s May 29, 2014 third motion for an extension of time to file a brief. Appellant shall file its brief on or before JUNE 16, 2014 . We caution appellant that no further extension of tim e will be granted absent extraordinary circumstances.

/s/ ADA BROWN JUSTICE
EXHIBIT 31
 CERTIFICATION
      a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under my supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is
made known to me by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this report is being prepared;b)
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such
internal control over financial reporting to be designed under my supervision, to
provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the
preparation of financial statements for external purposes;c)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report my conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report
based on such evaluation; andd)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter
(the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting; and
  a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely
affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; andb)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves persons who have a
significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.
  Date: May 11, 2009
    By:
    /s/ Lee Ann AndersonLee Ann AndersonVice President and Senior Trust Officer,
Compass Bank
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                         Independent Auditors' Consent
                         -----------------------------


Board of Directors
DATA RACE, Inc.

We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (No. 
33-55616 and No.33-75800) on Form S-8 of DATA RACE, Inc. of our report dated 
August 16, 1996, relating to the balance sheets of DATA RACE, Inc. as of June 
30, 1996 and 1995, and the related statements of operations, shareholders' 
equity and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended June 
30, 1996 annual report on form 10-K of DATA RACE, Inc.

Our report refers to a change in the method of accounting for income taxes in 
1994.


                                             KPMG Peat Marwick LLP

San Antonio, Texas
October 7, 1996
#### In the Matter of Stanley Feldman, Appellant, v New York City Board/Department of Education, Respondent.

[975 NYS2d 58]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert E. Torres, J.), entered August 21, 2012, dismissing the proceeding and confirming an arbitration award, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered March 7, 2012, which denied the CFLR article 75 petition seeking to vacate and annul the hearing officer’s award imposing a $1,500 fine for violations of Chancellor’s Regulation A-421, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the judgment.

*546Adequate evidence in the record supported the hearing officer’s determination that petitioner violated Chancellor’s Regulation A-421 when he made statements such as “hey, baby,” “how you doing baby?,” and “you good baby” on multiple occasions to his underage female student *(see Lackow v Department of Educ. [or “Board”] of City of NY.,*51 AD3d 563 [1st Dept 2008]). Although petitioner asserts that the complaining witness’s testimony was inconsistent with respect to the specific comments at issue, the hearing officer explicitly found the student credible and found petitioner to be not credible, and such determinations are “largely unreviewable” *(see id.).*

The hearing officer declined to impose respondent’s requested penalty of termination, in favor of a $1,500 fine to be withdrawn in equal installments from petitioner’s paychecks over a twelve month period. Under the circumstances here, we conclude that the penalty is not so excessive and disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness *(see Matter of Principe v New York City Dept. of Educ.,*94 AD3d 431, 433, 434 [1st Dept 2012], *affd*20 NY3d 963 [2012]).

We have considered the remainder of petitioner’s arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Gonzalez, P.J., Tom, Renwick, Freedman and Clark, JJ.
ADDENDUM 1
1

UNCLASSIFIED

UNCLASSIFIED

Updated Addendum to the 2022-2023 NIU Catalog

The National Intelligence University (NIU) produced a second Catalog Addendum on June 1, 

2023, to supplement the 2022-2023 NIU Catalog. Material in this addendum supersedes 

information in the Catalog. You should read this when you first receive it and then keep it on 

hand for easy reference in the future.

MASTER OF SCIENCE OF STRATEGIC INTELLIGENCE

This replaces the course requirements for the Russia/Eurasia Concentration as presented on page 

70. 

The Russia/Eurasia Concentration includes the following courses (12 credit hours overall): 

• RSI 632 Russia: Geostrategic Intelligence Issues

• RSI 636 Russian Intelligence

• RSI 637 Russian Foreign Policy

One additional course (student’s choice): 

• RSI 630P Russian Military Issues

• RSI 635 The Near Abroad

This replaces the course requirements for the Certificate in Intelligence: Russia/Eurasia as 

presented on page 82.

The Russia/Eurasia Certificate includes the following courses (12 credit hours overall):

• RSI 632 Russia: Geostrategic Intelligence Issues

• RSI 636 Russian Intelligence

• RSI 637 Russian Foreign Policy

One additional course (student’s choice): 

• RSI 630P Russian Military Issues

• RSI 635 The Near Abroad

MASTER OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY INTELLIGENCE

MST 676P course titled “Fundamentals of Space Operations” is added to the list of 

course requirements for the Emerging Technologies and Geostrategic Resources 

Concentration and Certificate on pages 77 and 90, respectively.

The correct title for MST 676P: Fundamentals of Space Operations is amended on page 125.
2

UNCLASSIFIED

UNCLASSIFIED

MST 677 course titled “Foreign Space Capabilities” is added to the list of course requirements 

for the Emerging Technologies and Geostrategic Resources Concentration and Certificate on 

pages 77 and 90, respectively.

MST 694P: Algorithmic Warfare (dual-listed) is added to the list of course requirements for the 

Cyber Intelligence Concentration and Certificate on pages 75 and 88, respectively.

The correct title for MST 659P: Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) is 

amended on page 90.

The following MST 677 Course Description is added on page 125:

This course focuses on foreign space systems and architectures, including adversary, competitor, 

foreign commercial, and allied systems. The Course reviews foreign military, scientific, and 

economic policies as they apply to the space domain. The course will analyze and 

compare/contrast adversary space operations and doctrine with their U.S. counterparts. The 

Course will examine mission sharing across commercial and allied architectures and assess the 

risks associated with each. A review of technology trends and their impact on both capability 

development and policy and doctrine will be conducted. Prospective impacts of revolutionary 

technology such as quantum technologies and artificial intelligence will also be discussed.
Order entered September 22, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-00939-CV

JACK LAGOS, Appellant

V.

PLANO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BOARD, INC., PHIL DYER AND SALLY 

BANE, Appellees

On Appeal from the 429th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 429-00663-2013

ORDER

By order entered September 10, 2014, we granted appellant’s motion to extend time to 

file his notice of appeal. Following entry of that order, we became aware that appellant’s 

counsel, who filed the motion on appellant’s behalf, is not eligible to practice law. On 

September 12, 2014, we directed counsel to file, no later than September 18, 2014, a letter 

clarifying his eligibility to practice law. Instead of the requested letter, a motion to withdraw and 

substitute counsel was filed. Also filed was a September 18, 2014 motion to extend time to file 

notice of appeal signed by substituted counsel. We GRANT appellant’s motion to withdraw and 

DIRECT the Clerk of the Court to remove Raul Loya as counsel for appellant and substitute 

Souran Ashjari in his place. We further VACATE our September 10, 2014 order and GRANT 
appellant’s September 18th motion to extend time to file notice of appeal. Appellant’s July 18, 

2014 notice of appeal shall be treated as timely filed for jurisdictional purposes. 

We DENY appellees’ September 10, 2014 motion to dismiss appeal. 

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS 

JUSTICE
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 13 (Thursday, January 22, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 4050]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-1188]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[CO-922-09-1310-FI; COC69437]


Notice of Proposed Reinstatement of Terminated Oil and Gas Lease

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Reinstatement of Terminated Oil and Gas 
Lease.

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

SUMMARY: Under the provisions of 30 U.S.C. 188(d) and (e), and 43 CFR 
3108.2-3(a) and (b)(1), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) received a 
petition for reinstatement of oil and gas lease COC69437 from Westcliff 
Resources, LLC, for lands in Rio Blanco County, Colorado. The petition 
was filed on time and was accompanied by all the rentals due since the 
date the lease terminated under the law.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bureau of Land Management, Milada 
Krasilinec, Land Law Examiner, Branch of Fluid Minerals Adjudication, 
at 303-239-3767.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The lessee has agreed to the amended lease 
terms for rentals and royalties at rates of $5.00 per acre or fraction 
thereof, per year and 16\2/3\ percent, respectively. The lessee has 
paid the required $500 administrative fee and $163 to reimburse the 
Department for the cost of this Federal Register notice. The lessee has 
met all the requirements for reinstatement of the lease as set out in 
Section 31(d) and (e) of the Mineral Lands Leasing Act of 1920 (30 
U.S.C. 188), and the Bureau of Land Management is proposing to 
reinstate lease COC69437 effective August 1, 2008, under the original 
terms and conditions of the lease and the increased rental and royalty 
rates cited above.

    Dated: January 14, 2009.
Milada Krasilinec,
Land Law Examiner.
[FR Doc. E9-1188 Filed 1-21-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-JB-P
Exhibit 31
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Lee Ann Anderson, certify that:
     1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of San Juan BasinRoyalty Trust, for which TexasBank acts as Trustee;
     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, distributable income and changes in trust corpus ofthe registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
     4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controlsand procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) forthe registrant and I have:
 a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under mysupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known tome by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report my conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, asof the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
     5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internalcontrol over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors:
 a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves persons whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.
 

 

In giving the certifications in paragraphs 4 and 5 above, I have relied to theextent I consider reasonable on information provided to me by BurlingtonResources Oil & Gas Company LP.      TEXASBANK, AS TRUSTEE FOR THE
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2


                            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 of Hanover Direct, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q, as amended, for the period ended June 29, 2002 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Edward M. Lambert, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial
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, to the best of
my knowledge:

         (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

         Signed at the City of Edgewater, in the State of New Jersey, this 19th
day of August, 2002.

                                                       /s/ Edward M. Lambert

                                                       -------------------------
                                                       Edward M. Lambert
Opinion issued November 7 , 2017

In The 

## Court of Appeals

For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01

- 17

- 00670

- CV

——————————— ALBERT T. VAN HUFF , Appellant

V.
TRACI M. VAN HUFF , Appellee

O n Appeal from the 309th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2008

- 34216

MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P.
10.3(a)(2), 42.1(a)(1). No opinion has issued. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.1(c).
Further, although appellant failed to includ e a certificate of conference in h is
motion, appellant’s motion includes a certificate of service, more than ten days2

have passed since the motion was filed, and no party has responded to the motion.

See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 10.1(a)(5), 10.3(a).
Accordingly, w e grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

.
P. 42.1(a)(1). We dismiss all other pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Keyes and Caughey.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Gary Lavel THOMAS, a.k.a. Sticks, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 08-15204

Non-Argument Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

May 6, 2009.

Rosemary T. Cakmis, Donna Lee Elm, Federal Public Defender, Orlando, FL, for Defendant-Appellant.

Roberta Josephina Bodnar, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Orlando, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Before BLACK, BARKETT and KRAVITCH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Gary Lavel Thomas appeals the sentence imposed by the district court following the grant of his *pro se*motion for a reduced sentence, 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). After a thorough review of the record, we affirm.

Thomas pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute crack cocaine and was sentenced to 262 months’ *864imprisonment. He subsequently filed a motion for a reduction in sentence, § 3582(c), based on Amendment 706 to the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, which reduced the base offense levels applicable to crack cocaine offenses. The district court granted the motion, reduced the offense level by 2 and determined the new guidelines range to be 210 to 262 months’ imprisonment. The court sentenced Thomas to 210 months’ imprisonment.

“We review *de novo*a district court’s conclusions about the scope of its legal authority under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2).” *United States v. James,*548 F.3d 983, 984 (11th Cir.2008).

Thomas argues that the district court erred in its application of § 3582(c)(2) when it resentenced him without consideration of *United States v. Booker,*543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), and refused to sentence him below the minimum of the amended guideline range.

A district court may modify a term of imprisonment in the case of a defendant who was sentenced based on a sentencing range that subsequently has been lowered by the Sentencing Commission. 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Any reduction, however, must be “consistent with applicable policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission.” *Id.*The applicable policy statements, found in § 1B1.10, state that “the court shall not reduce the defendant’s term of imprisonment under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) and this policy statement to a term that is less than the minimum of the amended guideline range.” U.S.S.G. § lB1.10(b)(2)(A).

Thomas’s arguments are foreclosed by precedent. This court recently held that *Booker*does not apply to § 3582(c)(2) proceedings, and thus, the district court is bound by the limitations imposed by § 1B1.10 and does not have the authority to sentence below the amended guideline range. *United States v. Melvin,*556 F.3d 1190, 1192-93 (11th Cir.2009), *petition for cert. filed,*(U.S. Feb. 10, 2009) (No. 08-8664); *see also United States v. Webb,*565 F.3d 789, 793-94 (11th Cir.2009). Accordingly, we affirm. ‘

AFFIRMED.
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 of Arête Industries, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,


John Herzog, Interim Chief Financial 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 result of operations of the Company.














Dated:  August 22, 2011            By:  /s/ John Herzog


John Herzog, Interim Chief Financial Officer





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Arête Industries, Inc. and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
<PAGE>   1

EXHIBIT 23.01
<PAGE>   2

                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.01

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(Form S-8 No. 33-54138) pertaining to The Life Re Corporation Stock Investment
Plan, the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 33-80251) pertaining to The Life
Re Corporation Stock Option Plan, the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No.
33-80737) pertaining The Life Re Corporation 1993 Non-Employee Directors Stock
Option Plan and in the Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-35031)
pertaining to the registration of shares of common stock in connection with
certain employees' restricted stock grant of our report dated February 12, 1998,
(except for Notes 9 and 10, as to which the date is March 17, 1998) with respect
to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Life Re Corporation
included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1997.

                                          ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Stamford, Connecticut
March 27, 1998