alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Antonio J. TOWNSEND, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Harold W. CLARKE, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 13-7299.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Nov. 21, 2013.

Decided: Nov. 26, 2013.

Antonio Jose Townsend, Appellant Pro Se.

Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Antonio Jose Townsend seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. *See*28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find *243that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (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, 120 S.Ct. 1595.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Townsend has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this 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.                  

###### Department of State

          - [Public Notice 10193]

By virtue of the authority vested in me as Secretary of State pursuant to section 7041(a)(1) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2017 (Div. J, Pub. L. 115-31), I hereby certify that the Government of Egypt is sustaining the strategic relationship with the United States and meeting its obligations under the 1979 Egypt-Israel Peace Treaty.

                    This determination shall be published in the                     **Federal Register**                     and, along with the accompanying Memorandum of Justification, shall be reported to Congress.                

Dated: October 16, 2017.

Rex W. Tillerson,

Secretary of State.

[FR Doc. 2017-24091 Filed 11-3-17; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 4710-31-P
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Federal Maritime Commission","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov","author_name":"Catie-Megan Moran","author_url":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/author\/cmoranfmc-gov\/","title":"Announcements About Gate Weights Are Encouraging Sign for Smooth VGM Implementation","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"eWd5jgBeji\"><a href=\"\/announcements-about-gate-weights-are-encouraging-sign-for-smooth-vgm-implementation\/\">Announcements About Gate Weights Are Encouraging Sign for Smooth VGM Implementation<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"\/announcements-about-gate-weights-are-encouraging-sign-for-smooth-vgm-implementation\/embed\/#?secret=eWd5jgBeji\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Announcements About Gate Weights Are Encouraging Sign for Smooth VGM Implementation” — Federal Maritime Commission\" data-secret=\"eWd5jgBeji\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script type=\"text\/javascript\">\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(c,l){\"use strict\";var e=!1,o=!1;if(l.querySelector)if(c.addEventListener)e=!0;if(c.wp=c.wp||{},c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage);else if(c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if(!t);else if(!(t.secret||t.message||t.value));else if(\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret));else{for(var r,s,a,i=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),n=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=0;o<n.length;o++)n[o].style.display=\"none\";for(o=0;o<i.length;o++)if(r=i[o],e.source!==r.contentWindow);else{if(r.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message){if(1e3<(s=parseInt(t.value,10)))s=1e3;else if(~~s<200)s=200;r.height=s}if(\"link\"===t.message)if(s=l.createElement(\"a\"),a=l.createElement(\"a\"),s.href=r.getAttribute(\"src\"),a.href=t.value,a.host===s.host)if(l.activeElement===r)c.top.location.href=t.value}}},e)c.addEventListener(\"message\",c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",t,!1),c.addEventListener(\"load\",t,!1);function t(){if(o);else{o=!0;for(var e,t,r,s=-1!==navigator.appVersion.indexOf(\"MSIE 10\"),a=!!navigator.userAgent.match(\/Trident.*rv:11\\.\/),i=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),n=0;n<i.length;n++){if(!(r=(t=i[n]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\")))r=Math.random().toString(36).substr(2,10),t.src+=\"#?secret=\"+r,t.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",r);if(s||a)(e=t.cloneNode(!0)).removeAttribute(\"security\"),t.parentNode.replaceChild(e,t);t.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:r},\"*\")}}}}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n"}
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Randy D. McNair, Appellant.

[666 NYS2d 496]

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (West, J.), rendered May 3, 1995, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf., People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Miller, J. P., Ritter, Sullivan, Santucci and Mc-Ginity, JJ., concur. .
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 Alaska Communications Systems
Holdings, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2004
(the "Report"), I, David Wilson, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, created by 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),
      as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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

Date: May 12, 2004             /s/ David Wilson
                               --------------------------------
                               David Wilson
                               Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
                               Alaska Communications Systems Holdings, Inc.
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 206 (Thursday, October 26, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 49645]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-23246]



[[Page 49645]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-3384-EM; Docket ID FEMA-2017-0001]


Puerto Rico; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of an Emergency 
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of an emergency declaration for 
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (FEMA-3384-EM), dated September 5, 
2017, and related determinations.

DATES: The change occurred on October 10, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and 
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., 
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency 
(FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the 
Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Michael F. 
Byrne, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer 
for this emergency.
    This action terminates the appointment of Alejandro DeLaCampa as 
Federal Coordinating Officer for this emergency.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) 
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community 
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment 
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, 
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In 
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially 
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for 
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster 
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036, 
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared 
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Brock Long,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2017-23246 Filed 10-25-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
Table of Contents

Exhibit 15.1 

**Consent of Engeval Engenharia de Avaliações S/C Ltda**

June 17, 2009

TAM S.A. TAM Linhas Aéreas S.A. TAM Capital Inc. 

c/o TAM S.A. Av. Jurandir, 856, Lote 4, 1° andar 04072-000, São Paulo, SP Federative Republic of Brazil 

Ladies and Gentlemen:

     We, Engeval Engenharia de Avaliações S/C Ltda., part of the ArcaLaudis — Global Network of International Valuers and Loss Assessors, hereby consent to being named in the Annual Report on Form 20-F ofTAM S.A., TAM Linhas Aéreas S.A. and TAM Capital Inc. (together, “**TAM**”) for the year ended December 31, 2008 (the “**2008 20-F**”) in reference to our preparation of valuations of TAM’s flight equipment asat January 1, 2007, December 31, 2007 and December 31, 2008. 

     We also consent to the incorporation by reference of the 2008 20-F into (a) the Registration Statement on Form F-3 of TAM S.A. (File No. 333-147020), TAM Linhas Aéreas S.A. (File No. 333-147020-01) and TAMCapital Inc. (File No. 333-147020-02), in each case including all amendments thereto.

Very truly yours, 

/s/ Engeval Engenharia de Avaliações S/C Ltda., part of the ArcaLaudis — Global Network of International Valuers and Loss Assessors 

----
#### Wesley McINTOSH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Randall PRESTWICH; et al., Defendants—Appellees.

No. 06-56868.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 22, 2008.*

Filed May 5, 2008.

Wesley McIntosh, Los Angeles, CA, pro se.

John P. Pringle, Esq., Roquemore Prin-gle *&*Moore, Gilbert M. Nishimura, Esq., Seki Nishimura & Watase, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.

Before: GRABER, FISHER, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Wesley McIntosh appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in favor of defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging the defendants violated his Fourth Amendment rights when they arrested him. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a grant of summary judgment, *Edgerly v. City & County of San Francisco,*495 F.3d 645, 658 (9th Cir.2007), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed McIntosh’s Fourth Amendment claim because he was collaterally estopped from relitigating the probable cause determination made at his preliminary hearing. *See Haupt v. Dillard,*17 F.3d 285, 288 (9th Cir.1994) (probable cause determination at preliminary hearing provides full and fair opportunity sufficient to support collateral estoppel in subsequent § 1983 action); *see also McCutchen v. City of Montclair,*73 Cal.App.4th 1138, 87 Cal.Rptr.2d 95, 100 (1999) (noting that Nevada collateral estoppel law, which was applied in *Haupt,*is identical to California law). The state court had before it the same evidence that defendants relied upon to support the warrant for McIntosh’s arrest, and McIntosh had a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issue of probable cause. *See Haupt,*17 F.3d at 289-90.

Because the district court properly dismissed McIntosh’s only federal claim, it properly dismissed his state law claims without prejudice. *See*28 U.S.C. § 1367(c); *see also Haynie v. County of Los Angeles,*339 F.3d 1071, 1078 (9th Cir. 2003).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
*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. 97-20532

Summary Calendar

_____________________

NELDA HOLDEN,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

SIMPSON PASADENA PAPER COMPANY,

Defendant-Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Southern District of Texas

(H-95-CV-4989)

_________________________________________________________________

December 4, 1997

Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

After review of the record and a study of the briefs, we have

arrived at the conclusion that the district court was correct to

grant summary judgment in favor of appellee Simpson Pasadena Paper

Company in this Title VII gender discrimination action. Even

assuming that appellant Nelda Holden established her prima facie

case, Simpson presented a completely legitimate nondiscriminatory

reason for the complained-of employment action in the form of the

collective bargaining agreements. Under St. Mary’s Honor Center v.
-2-

Hicks, 509 U.S. 502, 515 (1993), Holden had the burden of coming

forward with probative evidence that the proferred

nondiscriminatory reason was merely a pretext for intentional

discrimination. To do so, Holden needed to show both “that the

reason was false and that discrimination was the real reason.” Id.

As the district court correctly found, Holden came forward with

absolutely no evidence on either prong. Indeed, Holden never

produced any evidence that gender played any role in the employment

action in question. The district court wrote a detailed and well

reasoned opinion on this point, and we agree with it in all

respects. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is

A F F I R M E D.
**EXHIBIT32.2**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,****AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO****SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with theAnnual report of OCM HoldCo, LLC (the “*Company*”) onForm 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006, as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission (the “*Report*”), I,Ronald N. Beck, a Manager of the Company and performing certain services forthe Company commonly performed by the principal financial officer, do herebycertify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

(1) the Report fullycomplies with the requirements of §13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934, as amended, and

(2) the informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| Date: March 29, 2007 | By:    | /s/* Ronald N. Beck* | * * |
|----------------------|--------|---------------------------|----------|
|                 |   | * *                  | * * |
|                 |   | Ronald N. Beck   Manager  |     |

 

 

----
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Federal Maritime Commission","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov","author_name":"Catie-Megan Moran","author_url":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/author\/cmoranfmc-gov\/","title":"Commission Meeting Scheduled for December 7, 2018","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"M1KaBi0RIz\"><a href=\"\/commission-meeting-scheduled-for-december-7-2018\/\">Commission Meeting Scheduled for December 7, 2018<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"\/commission-meeting-scheduled-for-december-7-2018\/embed\/#?secret=M1KaBi0RIz\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Commission Meeting Scheduled for December 7, 2018” — Federal Maritime Commission\" data-secret=\"M1KaBi0RIz\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script type=\"text\/javascript\">\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(c,l){\"use strict\";var e=!1,o=!1;if(l.querySelector)if(c.addEventListener)e=!0;if(c.wp=c.wp||{},c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage);else if(c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if(!t);else if(!(t.secret||t.message||t.value));else if(\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret));else{for(var r,s,a,i=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),n=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=0;o<n.length;o++)n[o].style.display=\"none\";for(o=0;o<i.length;o++)if(r=i[o],e.source!==r.contentWindow);else{if(r.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message){if(1e3<(s=parseInt(t.value,10)))s=1e3;else if(~~s<200)s=200;r.height=s}if(\"link\"===t.message)if(s=l.createElement(\"a\"),a=l.createElement(\"a\"),s.href=r.getAttribute(\"src\"),a.href=t.value,a.host===s.host)if(l.activeElement===r)c.top.location.href=t.value}}},e)c.addEventListener(\"message\",c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",t,!1),c.addEventListener(\"load\",t,!1);function t(){if(o);else{o=!0;for(var e,t,r,s=-1!==navigator.appVersion.indexOf(\"MSIE 10\"),a=!!navigator.userAgent.match(\/Trident.*rv:11\\.\/),i=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),n=0;n<i.length;n++){if(!(r=(t=i[n]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\")))r=Math.random().toString(36).substr(2,10),t.src+=\"#?secret=\"+r,t.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",r);if(s||a)(e=t.cloneNode(!0)).removeAttribute(\"security\"),t.parentNode.replaceChild(e,t);t.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:r},\"*\")}}}}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n"}
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-7354

SHANNON CAUSION-EL,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

PATRICK CONROY, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR

THE STATE OF MARYLAND,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (CA-00-

1199-AMD)

Submitted: December 19, 2001 Decided: January 11, 2002

Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Shannon Causion-El, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr.,

Attorney General, Ann Norman Bosse, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Shannon Causion-El seeks to appeal 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 and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny

a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the

reasoning of the district court. See Causion-El v. Conroy, No. CA00-1199-AMD (D. Md. Aug. 7, 2001). 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
FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MORSHED ALAM, 

Petitioner, 

 v. 

MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney 

General, 

Respondent.

No. 19-72744 

Agency No. A215-826-397 

ORDER

THOMAS, Chief Judge:

Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused active judges, it is ordered that 

this case be reheard en banc pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 35(a) 

and Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel disposition is vacated. 

FILED

JUN 3 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
Exhibit
32.1











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 Big Cat Energy
Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period end of January 31, 2010 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "report"), I,
Timothy Barritt, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:





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





(2)
            The
      information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.





Dated this 8th day of March,
2010.





/s/ Timothy BarrittTimothy
      BarrittPresident
      and Chief Executive Officer