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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-7831

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

DRAKO O SULLIVAN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior

District Judge. (6:01-cr-00898-HMH-1; 6:13-cv-02656-HMH)

Submitted: March 25, 2014 Decided: March 28, 2014

Before GREGORY, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Drako Olandis Sullivan, Appellant Pro Se. Andrew Burke Moorman, 

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville, South 

Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Drako O. Sullivan seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order construing his self-styled “Motion to Correct Criminal 

Judgment” as an unauthorized, successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) 

motion, and dismissing it for lack of jurisdiction. The order 

is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a 

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (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 motion 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 Sullivan 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 
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### Dudgeon v. Watson.

*(Circuit Court, S. D. New York.*

March 7, 1885.)

1. Equity- Pleading—Complainant non Compos Mentis—Plea.

A ploa alleging that complainant “ was at the time of the commencement of the suit *non com/pos mentis*and incapable to sue,” but failing to allege that he has been so found by inquisition or that any committee has been appointed, is had.

2. Same—Phaotice—Motion to Sthike Bill ebom Pii.es—Stay.

The proper practice in such a case is by an application to the court to strike the bill from the flies because filed without authority, or to apply for a stay of proceedings until a committee or next friend may be appointed.

In Equity.

*Edivard Weimore,*for complainant.

*Jas. McKeen,*for defendant.

Wallace, J.

The plea of the defendant alleging that complainant “was at the time of the commencement of the suit *non compos mantis*and incapable to sue,” does not allege that he has been so found by inquisition or that any committee has been 'appointed. In the absence of such an allegation there is no authority for such a plea. Mitf. PL (4th Ed.) 229; Mitf. *&*T. 320. The proper practice in such a case is by an application to the court to strike the bill from the files because if has been filed without authority, owing to the mental incapacity of the complainant, or to apply for a stay of proceedings until a committee or next friend may be appointed. *Wartnaby*v. *Wartnaby,*1 Jac. 377; *Attorney General*v. *Tyler,*2 Eden, 230; *Norcom*v. *Rogers,*16 N. J. Eq. 484. The court can then ascertain whether there is any reasonable foundation for suspending the progress of the suit. It would be intolerable to permit a defendant whenever so disposed to challenge the mental capacity of a complainant by a plea, and the practice might lead to grave abuses. The defendant has no interest in such an inquiry beyond being protected from a vexatious suit. Any person may volunteer to act as a next friend and bring a suit for an insane person when no committee has been appointed, and the court will entertain it and decide its merits. *Jones*v. *Lloyd,*43 Law J. (Oh.) 826, against the objections of the defendant. The person thus officiously constituting himself the protector of the lunatic does so at his risk and may be compelled to pay the defendant’s costs, and must establish the propriety of his act if called to account by a committee subsequently appointed. The solicitor whofiles a bill assumes the same responsibility.

The plea is overruled.
EXHIBIT 99.4

CONSENT OF INTERNAL QUALIFIED RESERVES EVALUATOR

I
consent to the incorporation by reference in this annual report on Form 40-F of Talisman Energy Inc., which is being filed with the United States Securities and
Exchange Commission, of my Report on Reserves Data dated March 9, 2009, included in the 2008 Annual Information Form of Talisman Energy Inc. (the "AIF"), and to the references to
my name in the AIF.

I
also consent to the incorporation by reference in the following Registration Statements:





|                |  | By: | /s/MICHAEL ADAMS                     
|--------------- |  | --- | -------------------------------------
|Calgary, Canada |  |     | Michael Adams                        
|March 9, 2009   |  |     | Internal Qualified Reserves Evaluator

1

---



QuickLinks
ACCEPTED 09-17-00449-CV NINTH COURT OF APPEALS BEAUMONT, TEXAS 12/11/2017 3:23 PM CAROL ANNE HARLEY

CLERK
Exhibit 23.1





CONSENT OF MSPC Certified Public Accountants and Advisors, P.C.





CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM








We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement of Dialysis Corporation of America on Form S-8, Registration No. 333-122455, pertaining to certain stock options under the 1999 Stock Incentive Plan of Dialysis Corporation of America, which 1999 Plan expired on April 20, 2009 and the options rolled into the Dialysis Corporation of America 2009 Omnibus Incentive Plan, of our report dated March 15, 2010, relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial schedule of Dialysis Corporation of America included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K, for the year ended December 31, 2009.





MSPC


Certified Public Accountants and Advisors P.C.





March 15, 2010


Cranford, New Jersey
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C.
§1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the
Annual Report of Universal Hospital Services, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John A. Gappa,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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.



|                                               
|-----------------------------------------------
|/s/ John A. Gappa                              
|John A. Gappa                                  
|Senior Vice President & Chief Financial Officer
|May 17, 2004
exv10w1w2





EXHIBIT 10.1.2


WESTERN REFINING, INC.


AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO

EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


               This Amendment No. 1 to Employment Agreement (the “Amendment”) is effective December 31, 2008
(the “Effective Date”) by and between Western Refining GP, LLC (“Western”) and Paul L. Foster
(“Executive”) and confirms the following Amendment No. 1 to Employment Agreement:



	 	1.	 	The following paragraph shall be added to the end of the “Change in Control”
definition set forth under Section 1.1:




               Notwithstanding any other provision set forth in the Agreement, for purposes of any amount or
award that is subject to Code Section 409A, a “Change in Control” as defined above will not be
treated as a change in control unless it also is a change in control as defined in the regulations
issued under Code Section 409A.




	 	2.	 	Except as expressly modified by this Amendment, the terms and conditions of the
Agreement remain in full force and effect.




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	WESTERN REFINING GP, LLC
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	By:	 	/s/ Lowry Barfield
 
	 	 
	 
	 	Name:	 	Lowry Barfield	 	 
	 
	 	Title:	 	Senior Vice President — Legal,	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	General Counsel and Secretary	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	EXECUTIVE
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	By:	 	/s/ Paul L. Foster
 
	 	 
	 
	 	Name:	 	Paul L. Foster	 	 
	 
	 	Title:	 	Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                             535
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       85
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        164
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   784
<PP&E>                                            4310
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    5094
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             1172
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                          7421
<OTHER-SE>                                      (3519)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      5094
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      767
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  54
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (821)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (821)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (821)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.14)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2 CFO CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES  OXLEY ACT OF 2002 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 March 31, 2004 of Cinemark USA, Inc. (the Issuer). I, Robert Copple, the Chief Financial Officer of 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: May 12, 2004 /s/ Robert Copple  
 Subscribed and sworn to before me this 12th day of May 2004. /s/ Carol Waldman  
 My commission expires: 06/07/04 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 162 (Wednesday, August 23, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 39982]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-17854]



[[Page 39982]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

[Docket B-53-2015]


Foreign-Trade Zone 119--Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota; 
Application for Additional Production Authority; The Coleman Company, 
Inc.; Subzone 119I; Opening of Comment Period on Submission Containing 
New Evidence

    The Foreign-Trade Zones (FTZ) Board is inviting public comment on a 
submission containing new evidence pertaining to the application of The 
Coleman Company, Inc. (Coleman) requesting unrestricted production 
authority within Subzone 119I at the Coleman facility located in Sauk 
Rapids, Minnesota. Specifically, the application requests unrestricted 
authority to produce personal flotation devices and flotation cushions 
using the following inputs in foreign status: Certain nylon and 
polyester woven fabrics; webbing of man-made fibers; neoprene fabrics; 
knit polyester fleece fabrics; and, water soluble sensing elements.
    On July 31, 2017, Coleman made a submission to the FTZ Board that 
included new evidence in response to the examiner's preliminary 
recommendation not to approve the unrestricted authority. Public 
comment is invited on Coleman's submission through September 22, 2017. 
Rebuttal comments may be submitted through the subsequent 15-day 
period, until October 10, 2017. Submissions shall be addressed to the 
FTZ Board's Executive Secretary at the address below.
    A copy of Coleman's submission will be available for public 
inspection at the Office of the Executive Secretary, Foreign-Trade 
Zones Board, Room 21013, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution 
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230-0002, and in the ``Reading Room'' 
section of the FTZ Board's Web site, which is accessible via 
www.trade.gov/ftz.
    For further information, contact Diane Finver at 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#014568606f642f47686f7764734175736065642f666e77"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="25614c444b400b634c4b5340576551574441400b424a53">[email protected]</span></a> or (202) 482-1367.

    Dated: August 16, 2017.
Andrew McGilvray,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-17854 Filed 8-22-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P


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

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 453 

To amend the Public Health Service Act to provide grants to States to 

streamline State requirements and procedures for veterans with military 

emergency medical training to become civilian emergency medical technicians. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 11, 2015 

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

to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To amend the Public Health Service Act to provide grants 

to States to streamline State requirements and procedures for veterans with military emergency medical training to become civilian emergency medical technicians. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Veteran Emergency 

5 Medical Technician Support Act of 2015’’. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 453 IS

1 SEC. 2. ASSISTING VETERANS WITH MILITARY EMERGENCY 

2 MEDICAL TRAINING TO MEET REQUIRE3 MENTS FOR BECOMING CIVILIAN EMER4 GENCY MEDICAL TECHNICIANS. 

5 Part B of title III of the Public Health Service Act 

6 (42 U.S.C. 243 et seq.) is amended by inserting after sec7 tion 314 the following: 

8 ‘‘SEC. 315. ASSISTING VETERANS WITH MILITARY EMER9 GENCY MEDICAL TRAINING TO MEET RE10 QUIREMENTS FOR BECOMING CIVILIAN 

11 EMERGENCY MEDICAL TECHNICIANS. 

12 ‘‘(a) PROGRAM.—The Secretary shall establish a pro13 gram consisting of awarding demonstration grants to 

14 States to streamline State requirements and procedures 

15 in order to assist veterans who completed military emer16 gency medical technician training while serving in the 

17 Armed Forces of the United States to meet certification, 

18 licensure, and other requirements applicable to becoming 

19 an emergency medical technician in the State. 

20 ‘‘(b) USE OF FUNDS.—Amounts received as a dem21 onstration grant under this section shall be used to pre22 pare and implement a plan to streamline State require23 ments and procedures as described in subsection (a), in24 cluding by— 

25 ‘‘(1) determining the extent to which the re26 quirements for the education, training, and skill level 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 453 IS

1 of emergency medical technicians in the State are 

2 equivalent to requirements for the education, train3 ing, and skill level of military emergency medical 

4 technicians; and 

5 ‘‘(2) identifying methods, such as waivers, for 

6 military emergency medical technicians to forego or 

7 meet any such equivalent State requirements. 

8 ‘‘(c) ELIGIBILITY.—To be eligible for a grant under 

9 this section, a State shall demonstrate that the State has 

10 a shortage of emergency medical technicians. 

11 ‘‘(d) REPORT.—The Secretary shall submit to the 

12 Congress an annual report on the program under this sec13 tion. 

14 ‘‘(e) FUNDING.—No additional funds are authorized 

15 to be appropriated to carry out this section, and this sec16 tion shall be carried out using amounts otherwise available 

17 for such purpose.’’. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                      15,677,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               33,850,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             210,552,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       29,046,000
<BONDS>                                    157,278,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        68,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  24,160,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               210,552,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            16,857,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            11,852,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           3,232,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,773,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                   603,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,170,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0.17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.16






</TABLE>
| (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. |
|-----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                 | By:    | /s/ Jeffrey      Hall                                |   |
|--------------------------------------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                 |   | Jeffrey      Hall                                         |   |
|                                 |   | Executive      Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
|                                 |   | Express      Scripts, Inc.                                |   |
|                                 |   |                                                      |   |
| Date:        July 30, 2008 |   |                                                      |   |
JUDGMENT

Court of Appeals 

 

First District of Texas 

NO. 01-14-00809-CR

RODYS A. SANCHEZ, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Appeal from the 263rd District Court of Harris County. (Tr. Ct. No. 1400848).

This case is an appeal from the final judgment signed by the trial court on 

September 17, 2014. After submitting the case on the appellate record and the arguments 

properly raised by the parties, the Court holds that the trial court’s judgment contains no 

reversible error. Accordingly, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment.

The Court orders that this decision be certified below for observance.

Judgment rendered November 24, 2015.

Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Massengale, and Lloyd. Opinion delivered by Justice 

Keyes.