alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 217 (Monday, November 13, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52298-52299]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-24522]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank 
or Bank Holding Company

    The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank 
Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and Sec.  225.41 of the Board's 
Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire shares of a bank or bank 
holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the 
notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).

[[Page 52299]]

    The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal 
Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for 
inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons 
may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for 
that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must 
be received not later than November 27, 2017.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (Gerald C. Tsai, Director, 
Applications and Enforcement) 101 Market Street, San Francisco, 
California 94105-1579:
    1. Matthew Moskowitz, Plainview, New York; Yaakov Markowitz, 
Brooklyn, New York; Jarret Prussin, Westport, Connecticut; Paul Brown, 
Monte Carlo, Monaco; and Menachem Wilenkin, Brooklyn, New York; to 
acquire voting shares of All West Bancorp, and thereby indirectly 
acquire shares of FinWise Bank, both of Sandy, Utah.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, November 7, 
2017.
Yao-Chin Chao,
Assistant Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2017-24522 Filed 11-9-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
EXHIBIT 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the incorporation our report dated June 20, 3003 (which expressed an unqualified opinion and included explanatory paragraphs relating to the
entity's ability to continue as a going concern described in Note 1 and the Company's change in its method of accounting for goodwill and other intangibles to conform with Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 142,Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets), relating to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Med Diversified,
Inc. and Subsidiaries as of and for the year ended March 31, 2003 appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Brown &
Brown, LLP
Boston, Massachusetts
June 30, 2003

---

QuickLinks
{"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":"Statement of Commissioner Rebecca Dye Revised Timetable for Retrospective Review of Existing Rules to Include Service Contract Rules","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"xsHmakdc1y\"><a href=\"\/statement-of-commissioner-rebecca-dye-revised-timetable-for-retrospective-review-of-existing-rules-to-include-service-contract-rules\/\">Statement of Commissioner Rebecca Dye Revised Timetable for Retrospective Review of Existing Rules to Include Service Contract Rules<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"\/statement-of-commissioner-rebecca-dye-revised-timetable-for-retrospective-review-of-existing-rules-to-include-service-contract-rules\/embed\/#?secret=xsHmakdc1y\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Statement of Commissioner Rebecca Dye Revised Timetable for Retrospective Review of Existing Rules to Include Service Contract Rules” — Federal Maritime Commission\" data-secret=\"xsHmakdc1y\" 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"}
84 A.3d 698

#### In the Interest of C.S., a Juvenile. Appeal of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

Jan. 23, 2014.

Heather F. Gallagher, James Bernard Martin, Lehigh County District Attorney’s Office, for Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

Andrea Dawn Olsovsky, Christian Michael Perrucci, Lehigh County Public Defender’s Office, Marsha Levick, Riya Saha Shah, Juvenile Law Center, Philadelphia, for C.S.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 23rd day of January, 2014, the order of the court of common pleas is REVERSED, the delinquency peti*213tion is REINSTATED, and the case is REMANDED to the court of common pleas for resolution of any issues C.S. properly raised in her motion to dismiss. The court erred when it *sua sponte*raised a vagueness challenge to 18 Pa.C.S. § 6312 and declared the statute unconstitutional on that basis. *See MacGregor v. Mediq, Inc.,*395 Pa.Super. 221, 576 A.2d 1123, 1128 (1990) (determining it was improper for trial court to act as advocate and *sua sponte*raise defenses on behalf of a party). By failing to raise such a challenge in the trial court, C.S. waived the issue for purposes of appeal. *See Commonwealth v. Klobuchir,*486 Pa. 241, 405 A.2d 881, 883-84 (1979) (holding that issues, even of constitutional dimension, cannot be raised for the first time on appeal); *see also*Pa.R.A.P. 302(a). C.S.’s additional argument that we should address the constitutional issue now in the interest of judicial economy is meritless, because she cannot raise the issue on remand. *See*Pa.R.J.C.P. 346 (“Unless otherwise required in the interests of justice, all pre-adjudicatory requests for relief shall be included in one omnibus motion filed prior to the adjudicatory hearing.”).

Justices EAKIN and TODD join the order reversing and remanding the case, but express no opinion on matters of waiver.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Federal Maritime Commission","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov","author_name":"Alvin Curry","title":"Complaints and Assistance - Federal Maritime Commission","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"AkVjlFKjE7\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/complaints-and-assistance\/\">Complaints and Assistance<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/complaints-and-assistance\/embed\/#?secret=AkVjlFKjE7\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Complaints and Assistance” — Federal Maritime Commission\" data-secret=\"AkVjlFKjE7\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"About The FMC assists in resolving complaints and disputes related to ocean transportation activities. The table below provides links to access resources available at the FMC. Type of Assistance Assistance Description Contact Office Submit comment or general inquiry Answer general inquiries and route to the correct Commission Bureau or Office Office of the Secretary File […]","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/seal_final_sm.jpg","thumbnail_width":300,"thumbnail_height":293}
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

MICHAEL JOSEPH GROVE,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 250 WAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 15th day of April, 2020

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
EXHIBIT 32.2





CERTIFICATION


Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. 1350


(Section
302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)





In
connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of SOKO Fitness & Spa
Group, Inc. (the “Company”) for the year ended May 31, 2008, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Xia Yu,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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.








Date:              August
29,
2008                                                                        By:  /s/ Xia Yu


Name: Xia
Yu


Title:
Chief Financial Officer















This
certification accompanies each Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of §18 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.





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.
ex_372998.htm


Exhibit 10.2


 


Certain identified information has been excluded from this exhibit because it is both (i) not material and (ii) would be competitively harmful if publicly disclosed.


 


	
			Addendum No. 6 dated 04.05.2022


			Contract No 840/08625142/31/22-21

			
	
			THE SELLER


			Isotope - Regional Alliance, Joint-Stock Company (Isotope JSC)


			Pogodinskaya str., 22,


			Moscow, 119435, Russia.


			Phone: +7 (495) 981-96-16/17

			
	
			THE BUYER


			The Company IsoRay Medical Inc.


			350 Hills Street, Suite 106


			Richland, WA 99354-5411 USA

			
	
			THE BUYER and THE SELLER have mutually agreed on the following:


			Paying party for the shipments under the current contract could be:


			SphereRx, LLC


			Chase Bank


			Bank Code Type: ABA 325070760


			Bank Code Type: Swift CHASUS33


			Account: [**]


			Account Name: SphereRx

			
	
			All other terms and conditions are in accordance with Contract No. 840/08625142/31/22-21, Addendum 1-5.


			The present Addendum No.6 is an integral part of the Contract and may be signed via facsimile or e-mail.

			



 


	
			/s/ Konstantin Ershov, Head of Supplies, May 5, 2022


			THE SELLER 

				
			/s/ Jonathan Hunt, CFO, May 5, 2022


			THE BUYER
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT
JONATHAN B IRD T,

Pla i ntiff-Appe lla

nt,
v. C HARLIE B EC K; e t a l .,

De fe nda n ts-Appe lle e s. No. 12-55115 D.C . No. 2:10-c v-08377-JAKJEM
M EM OR ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the C e ntra l Distric t of C a lifornia John A. Kronstadt, Distric t Judge , Pre siding Subm itte d Oc tobe r 25, 2016 * * B e fore : LEAVY, SILVER M AN, a n d GR AB ER , C i rc uit Judge s. Jona tha n B irdt a p pe a l s from

the distric t c ourt’ s sum

m ary judgm e nt in his 42 U.S.C . § 1983 a c tion a lle ging viola tions of his Se c ond Am e ndm e nt rights. W e have jurisdic tion unde r 28 U.S.C . § 1291. W e re vie w de novo, Pe ruta v . C o unty of San Die go , 824 F.3d 919, 925 (9th C ir. 2016) (e n ba n c ), a nd we a ffirm
. 

# FIL ED

N OV 09 2016 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U

. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by Ninth C irc uit R

ule 36-3.

* * The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without ora l a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).In Pe ruta v
. San Die go , this c ourt, sitting e

n ba n c , he ld tha

t a m e m be r of the ge ne ra l public doe s not ha ve a right unde r the Se c ond Am e ndm e nt to c arry a
c onc e a l e d fire arm

in public , a

nd tha t a sta te m ay im pose re stric tions, inc luding a showing of good c a

use , on c onc e a le d c arry . Id. at 939. The San Die go a n d Yolo C ounty She riff’ s De pa

rtm e n t polic ie s inte rpre ting theC a lifornia sta tutory good
c a use re quire m e n t at issue in Pe ruta the re fore survive d a Se c ond Am e ndm e nt
c ha lle nge . Se e id. For the sa m e re a sons, theLos Ange le s Polic e De pa rtm e n t’ s a n d the L os Ange le s C ounty She riff’ s De pa rtm e nt’ s polic ie s inte rpre ting theC a lifornia sta tutory good c a use re quire m e nt do not viola te the Se c ond Am e ndm e nt. The m otions by

am i c i c uria e for le ave to file am i c i brie fs a re grante d. The C le rk sha ll file the am ic i brie fs subm itte d on Oc t obe r 30, 2012 a nd Nove m

be r 5, 2012. Appe lla

nt’ s m otion to subm

it the c a se without oral a

rgum e nt, file d on Oc tobe r 30, 2012, is gra

nte d. AFFIRM E D.

1 2
- 5 5 1 1 5 2
{"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 Sets January Dates for Petition P4-16 Hearings","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"VnfiHQMDJo\"><a href=\"\/commission-sets-january-dates-for-petition-p4-16-hearings\/\">Commission Sets January Dates for Petition P4-16 Hearings<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"\/commission-sets-january-dates-for-petition-p4-16-hearings\/embed\/#?secret=VnfiHQMDJo\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Commission Sets January Dates for Petition P4-16 Hearings” — Federal Maritime Commission\" data-secret=\"VnfiHQMDJo\" 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"}
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Kennedy POLIDORE, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 09-41231

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Dec. 8, 2010.

Michelle Suzanne Englade, Assistant U.S. Attorney, David Haskell Henderson, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Beaumont, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.

Kennedy Polidore, Herlong, CA, pro se.

Before KING, BENAVIDES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Kennedy Polidore has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Polidore has not filed a response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

 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.
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Election Commission

# FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION NOTICE OF PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENT:

82 FR 48810.

# PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED TIME AND DATE OF THE MEETING:

Tuesday, October 24, 2017 at 11:15 a.m. and its Continuation at the Conclusion of the Open Meeting on October 26, 2017.

# CHANGES IN THE MEETING:

 This meeting was held on Tuesday, October 24 at 10:30 a.m. and continued on Tuesday, November 7, 2017 at 10:00 a.m.

* * * * *

# CONTACT FOR MORE INFORMATION:

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

Laura E. Sinram,

Deputy Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 2017-24680 Filed 11-9-17; 11:15 am]

 BILLING CODE 6715-01-P
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-1846
ANTHONY A. AGWUMEZIE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge; Charles B. Day, Magistrate Judge. (CA-02-493-DKC) Submitted: August 28, 2003 Decided: September 3, 2003 Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Anthony A. Agwumezie, Appellant Pro Se. Craig David Roswell, Jeanie Lynn Scherrer, NILES, BARTON & WILMER, L.L.P., Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Anthony A. Agwumezie appeals the district court’s order granting in part Allstate Insurance Company’s motion to dismiss and the magistrate judge’s order denying his motion for new trial following a jury trial in his civil action against Allstate. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court and the magistrate judge. See Agwumezie v. Allstate Insurance , No. CA-02- 493-DKC (D. Md. Aug. 8, 2002; June 9, 2003). 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.

AFFIRMED
No. 945.

#### Pittsburgh Manufacturing Company, Petitioner, *v.*Ludlow Valve Manufacturing Company.

May 31, 1910.

*Mr. James. I. Kay*for the petitioner.

*Mr. Samuel Untermyer*and *Mr. Louis Marshall*for the respondent.

Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

 Respondent

 v.

JEREMIAH BUSH,

 Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 158 MAL 2015

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the

Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 11th day of June, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED.