alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 139 (Wednesday, July 22, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 36229]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-17331]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2008-N-0606]


Agency Information Collection Activities; Announcement of Office 
of Management and Budget Approval; Export of Food and Drug 
Administration Regulated Products: Export Certificates

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION:  Notice.

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

SUMMARY:  The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a 
collection of information entitled ``Export of Food and Drug 
Administration Regulated Products: Export Certificates'' has been 
approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Jonna Capezzuto, Office of 
Information Management (HFA-710), Food and Drug Administration, 5600 
Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, 301-796-3794.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of March 3, 2009 (74 
FR 9247), the agency announced that the proposed information collection 
had been submitted to OMB for review and clearance under 44 U.S.C. 
3507. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not 
required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays 
a currently valid OMB control number. OMB has now approved the 
information collection and has assigned OMB control number 0910-0498. 
The approval expires on October 31, 2010. A copy of the supporting 
statement for this information collection is available on the Internet 
at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.

    Dated: July 15, 2009.
Jeffrey Shuren,
Associate Commissioner for Policy and Planning.
[FR Doc. E9-17331 Filed 7-21-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-S
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6034

KEITH JAMES SEARS,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

SUSAN WHITE,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever, III,

Chief District Judge. (5:14-hc-02230-D)

Submitted: April 21, 2016 Decided: April 26, 2016

Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Keith James Sears, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Keith James Sears seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order denying the various postjudgment motions Sears filed in 

his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) proceeding. The order is not 

appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a 

certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A)

(2012). 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) (2012). When the district court denies 

relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by 

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the 

district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is 

debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 

(2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). 

When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the 

prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural 

ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable 

claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. 

at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that 

Sears has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, although 

we grant Sears’ motion to amend his informal brief, we deny a 

certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed on appeal in 

forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We also deny Sears’ 
3

motion for appointment of counsel. We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 

presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           5,043
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  1,019,425
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,024,468
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,024,468
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           91,935
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     932,533
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,024,468
<SALES>                                             37
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    37
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     37
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        37
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
No. 885.

#### Hickman, Administrator, *v.*Taylor et al., trading as Taylor & Anderson Towing & Lighterage Co., et al.

May 27, 1946.

*Abraham E. Freedman*and *Charles Lakatos*for petitioner.

*Lee Pressman*and *Frank Donner*filed a brief for the United Railroad Workers, as *amicus curiae,*in support of the petition.

The petition for rehearing is granted. The order of April 22 denying the petition for writ of certiorari, 327 U. S. 808, is vacated and the petition for writ of certiorari is granted.
#### Hamilton, Trustee, *v.*Walsh and others.

*(Circuit Court, D. Rhode Island.*

April 16, 1885.)

Injunction to Stay 'Proceedings in State Court—Rev. St. § 720.

While an action of replevin, instituted by ÍL, was pending in the state court, he filed a bill in equity in the United States court to reform, the chattel mortgage under which he claimed the property. Judgment was rendered against him in the state court, and suit brought oh the replevin bond, whereupon he filed a supplemental'bill in the United States court, praying an injunction. On motion for a preliminary injunction to stay proceedings in the suit on the bond until final decree on the bill, *held,*the injunction could not be granted.

On Motion for Preliminary Injunction.

*Wilson & Jenckes,*for complainant.

*Wm. H. Baker,*for respondent.

Carpenter, J.

The complainant commenced an action of replevin in the state court of Ehode Island, wherein he based his title to the property replevied on a certain chattel mortgage. The respondent denied that the mortgage had the effect to convey the property in dispute, and the decision of the suit depended on the interpretation which should he given to the terms of the mortgage. While that suit was pending, the complainant filed his bill in this court, in which he prays a reformation of the terms of the mortgage. The suit in the state court then proceeded to final judgment for the defendant, and he thereupon commenced suit on the replevin bond in the state court. The complainant now files his supplementary bill in this court, in which he alleges the commencement and prosecution of the suit on the replevin bond, and prays an injunction; and he now moves for a preliminary injunction to restrain the respondent from prosecuting the suit on the bond until final decree on the bill for reforming the mortgage.

' The statute, in terms, prohibits the granting of an injunction to stay proceedings in a state court, except when authorized in bankruptcy proceedings. Rev. St. § 720. This statute has been held, however, to apply only to cases where the proceedings are first commenced in the state court. *Fisk*v. *Union Pac. R. Co.*10 Blatchf. 518; *French*v. *Hay,*22 Wall. 250; *Dietzsch*v. *Huidekoper,*103 U. S. 494. The complainant points out that the suit on the bond has been commenced since his original bill was filed in this court; and he claims that, upon the rendering of final judgment on the replevin writ, the state court ceased to have jurisdiction of the subject-matter, and that the proceeding in that court was at an end. I cannot, agree with this view of the case. The action on the 'bond is for the purpose of enforcing, or perhaps more properly of securing, the fruits of the judgment in the replevin suit, and is the appropriate process for that purpose. It takes the place of the levy of a writ of execution in an action on the case; and it must for this purpose be taken to be part of the original proceeding in the state court.

The motion is denied.
N OTE : This o rder is non precedential.


# United States **Court of Appeals**  **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________
PHILLIP LEE GOSS, Petitioner

,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Respondent

.

______________________

2014

- 3124

______________________
Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection Board in No. DC1221140141 -W- 1.

______________________

ON MOTION

______________________

O R D E R

Phillip Lee Goss moves for leave to proceed in forma pauperis.

Upon consideration thereof,

I T I S O RDERED T HAT : The motion is granted. Case: 14-3124 Document: 7 Page: 1 Filed: 07/01/2014G OSS v. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 2

F OR THE C OURT

/s/ Daniel E. O’Toole Daniel E. O’Toole Clerk of Court

s24 Case: 14-3124 Document: 7 Page: 2 Filed: 07/01/2014
**UNITED STATES**SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION**WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

**FORM 10-K

ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the Fiscal Year Ended**December 31, 2003
 **                                                                           
Commission
Registrant; State of Incorporation
IRS Employer
File Number
Address; and Telephone Number
Identification No.   
001-07530**WISCONSIN GAS COMPANY
39-0476515 
(A Wisconsin Corporation)  
231 West Michigan Street  
P.O. Box 2046  
Milwaukee, WI 53201  
(414) 221-2345  **                                                                        

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12 (b) of the Act:       None****************
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from balance
sheet at March 31, 1998 and the statement of operations for the three months
ended March 31, 1998 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                              JAN-1-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                       2,124,110
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  151,061
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,417,669
<PP&E>                                       5,673,114
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,960,231
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,813,973
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,663,361
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        301
<COMMON>                                         8,807
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,799,762
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,813,973
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               114,034
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,560,723
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 224
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,446,689)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,446,689)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,446,689)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (2.69)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.69)
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1



Certification of the Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

As Adopted Under Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



Pursuant to section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, the undersigned President and Chief Executive Officer of Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. (the Company), hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended
June 29, 2005 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                  
|------------------
|/s/ Peter L. Lynch
|Peter L. Lynch    
|                  
|October 25, 2005
##### 



EXHIBIT 32(a) CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Charles T. Munger, Chairman of the Board (Chief Executive Officer) of
Wesco Financial Corporation (the Company), certify, pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of
my knowledge:  (1)
    
    the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December
31, 2003 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or
78o(d)); and(2)
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company. Dated: March 10, 2004 /s/ Charles T. MungerCharles T. MungerChairman of the Board
(Chief Executive Officer)
EXHIBIT 32.1

                                CERTIFICATION OF
                             CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                           OF VALENCE TECHNOLOGY, INC.

     This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and accompanies the quarterly report on Form 10-Q
(the "Form 10-Q") for the quarter ended June 30, 2003 of Valence Technology,
Inc. (the "Issuer").

     I, Stephan B. Godevais, the Chief Executive Officer of the Issuer, certify
that to the best of my knowledge:

     (i)  the Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
          or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
          78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

     (ii) the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
          of the Issuer.

Dated:  November 14, 2003.
                                           /s/ Stephan B. Godevais
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Name: Stephan B. Godevais




<PAGE>

                                CERTIFICATION OF
                           PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
                           OF VALENCE TECHNOLOGY, INC.


     This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and accompanies the quarterly report on Form 10-Q
(the "Form 10-Q") for the quarter ended June 30, 2003 of Valence Technology,
Inc. (the "Issuer").

     I, Kevin W. Mischnick, the Vice President of Finance (the Principal
Financial Officer) of the Issuer, certify that to the best of my knowledge:

     (i)  the Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
          or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
          78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

     (ii) the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
          of the Issuer.

Dated:  November 14, 2003.
                                           /s/ Kevin W. Mischnick
                                           ------------------------------------
                                           Name:  Kevin W. Mischnick
<PAGE>


                                                                      Exhibit 23

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-3, No.  33-45865) and the  Post-effective  Amendment No. 2 to the Registration
Statement  (Form  S-3,  No.  33-58066),  each  pertaining  to  the  issuance  of
debentures,  the  Post-effective  Amendment No. 1 to the Registration  Statement
(Form S-3,  No.  33-58120),  pertaining  to the  issuance of common  stock,  the
Registration  Statement (Form S-3, No. 33-65203),  pertaining to the issuance of
notes and debentures,  the  Post-effective  Amendment No. 2 to the  Registration
Statement  (Form  S-8,  No.  33-10715),  Post-effective  Amendment  No. 1 to the
Registration Statements (Form S-8, Nos. 33-30995 and 33-45194),  each pertaining
to stock option plans of Witco  Corporation,  the  Registration  Statement (Form
S-8, No. 33-48806), pertaining to an employee benefit plan of Witco Corporation,
the  Registration  Statement  (Form S-8, No.  33-60755),  pertaining to the 1995
Stock Option Plan for Employees of Witco Corporation and its  Subsidiaries,  and
the Post-effective  Amendment No. 1 to the Registration Statement (Form S-8, No.
333-05509),  pertaining  to the 1995 Stock  Option Plan for  Employees  of Witco
Corporation and its  Subsidiaries,  of our report dated January 31, 1997 (except
Note  19,  as to  which  the  date  is  March  4,  1997),  with  respect  to the
consolidated   financial  statements  and  schedule  of  Witco  Corporation  and
Subsidiary  Companies  for the year ended  December  31,  1996  included in this
Annual Report (Form 10-K).

                                            /S/  ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Stamford, Connecticut
March 20, 1997



<PAGE>
* 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. 96-11184

UDC No. 5:96-CV-1

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JON RICHARD O’KANE,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

- - - - - - - - - -

January 23, 1998

Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jon Richard O’Kane, federal prisoner #23739-077, has filed a

motion to reinstate appeal and to direct the Clerk to establish a

briefing schedule. This court construes the motion as a motion

for reconsideration of single-judge order denying O’Kane a

certificate of appealability (COA) to appeal the dismissal of his

28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate and the panel order denying

reconsideration. To the extent that O’Kane moves this court to

rescind the orders denying him a COA, the motion is GRANTED. In
No. 96-11184

-2-

light of Lindh v. Murphy, 117 S. Ct. 2059, 2068 (1997), O’Kane

was not required to obtain a COA to bring his appeal from the

denial of his § 2255 motion, which was filed in January 1996.

Insofar as O’Kane moves this court to set a briefing

schedule, however, his motion is DENIED. Further briefing is

unnecessary in light of the comprehensive brief which O’Kane has

filed. See Fed. R. App. P. 28. For essentially the same reasons

set forth by the magistrate judge and adopted by the district

court in its order of dismissal, see United States v. O’Kane, 

No. 5:96-CV-001-C, (N.D. Tex. July 15, 1996), we conclude that

O’Kane’s substantive and other claims are meritless. 

Accordingly, the denial of § 2255 relief is AFFIRMED.

ORDER DENYING COA RESCINDED; MOTION TO SET BRIEFING SCHEDULE

DENIED; JUDGMENT AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<LEGEND>
        THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONSOLIDATED
        STATEMENTS OF INCOME, CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS, AND CONSOLIDATED
        STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS, AND QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
        SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>  1,000
       
<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                          OCT-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                            SEP-30-1998
<BOOK-VALUE>                            PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                   196,897
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                      22
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                       26,719
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                      3,730
<OTHER-ASSETS>                               23,895
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              251,263
<COMMON>                                     24,757
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                         0
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                          70,020
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>               94,777
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             0
<PREFERRED>                                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                         64,604
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                         0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                    0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                     0
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                         0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                  0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>               91,882
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>               251,263
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                   144,206
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                          7,967
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                  118,320
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                  126,287
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                      17,919
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                              257
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>               18,176
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                      5,190
<NET-INCOME>                                 12,986
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                       0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                12,986
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                     13,960
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                     4,625
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                       30,668
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0
        



</TABLE>