alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Skip to main content    

      Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission    

En Español

            - About FMSHRC               - News
              - Commissioners
              - Chairman and Commissioner Tenure
              - Administrative Law Judges
            - Guides               - Frequently Asked Questions
              - FOIA Guide
              - How a Case Proceeds Before the Commission
              - Guide to Commission Proceedings
              - Requests to Reopen
              - Instructions for Electronic Filing
              - Videoconference Hearings
              - Section 105(c)(3) Complaints
            - Decisions               - Review Commission Decisions
              - ALJ Decisions
              - Blue Books
            - Review Commission Arguments & Meetings               - Oral Arguments
              - Meetings
            - The Mine Act & Procedural Rules               - The Mine Act
              - Procedural Rules
              - Changes to Procedural Rules
            - FOIA               - Submit a FOIA Request
              - FOIA Guide
              - Rules
              - FOIA References
              - FOIA Library
              - FOIA Public Liaison
              - FOIA Reports
              - Proposed FOIA Rules
            - Reports & Budget Submissions               - Strategic Plans
              - Budget and Annual Performance Reports
              - Buy American Reports
              - Performance Accountability Reports
              - Sustainability Report
              - Reports to Congress
              - Contingency Plan
              - Reports to the President
            - Cases on Review               - Cases Currently on Review Before the Commission
              - Commission Decisions On Appeal
            - Contact Us

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  About FMSHRC 
-  Latest FMSHRC News 
-                   The American Coal Company              

#   The American Coal Company

On August 29, 2018, the Commission issued its decision in *The American Coal Company*, Docket No. LAKE 2011-701 et al.  

Commission-Decision(The American Coal Company)LAKE 2011-701 et al.pdf

##### Footer Links

-  EEO Policies 
-  No Fear Act Notice 
-  Employee Ethical Conduct 
-  Equal Access to Justice Act 
-  Motions to Approve Settlement 
-  Non-Discrimination 
-  Reasonable Accommodation Procedures 
-  Privacy Act 
-  Sunshine Act Regulations 
-  USA.gov 
-  FMSHRC Privacy Policy 
-  Vulnerability Disclosure Policy 

### The Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission

#### 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW,Suite 520NWashington, DC 20004-1710Phone: (202)434-9900TTY/TDD (202)434-4000 ext. 293E-mail: fmshrc@fmshrc.gov
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE THREE
MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000825517
<NAME> SOURCINGLINK.NET
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                           7,259
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      221
<ALLOWANCES>                                        30
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   167
<PP&E>                                             396
<DEPRECIATION>                                     198
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   7,896
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,174
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          3
<COMMON>                                             7
<OTHER-SE>                                       6,712
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     7,896
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   288
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      145
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,055
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (913)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (913)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (913)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.14)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.14)


</TABLE>
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.fmcs.gov","title":"Online Mediation - Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"NPuldVRuOk\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.fmcs.gov\/services\/resolving-labor-management-disputes\/eservices-tags\/online-mediation\/\">Online Mediation<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.fmcs.gov\/services\/resolving-labor-management-disputes\/eservices-tags\/online-mediation\/embed\/#?secret=NPuldVRuOk\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Online Mediation” — Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service\" data-secret=\"NPuldVRuOk\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script type=\"text\/javascript\">\n\/* <![CDATA[ *\/\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\/* ]]> *\/\n<\/script>\n"}
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

CERTIFICATION

OF

PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

 

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, theundersigned officer of Ballistic Recovery Systems, Inc. does herebycertify that:

 

c.               the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB/A ofBallistic Recovery Systems, Inc. for the year ended September 30,2004 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

d.              information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of Ballistic Recovery Systems, Inc.

 

 
| Date:  May 24, 2005 | /s/  Robert L. Nelson         |   |
|--------------------------|-------------------------------|--------|
|                     | By  Robert L. Nelson          |
|                     | Principal Accounting  Officer |

 

----
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-6725

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus RAYMOND CHERISSON, a/k/a Haitian James, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (CR-94-97) Submitted: January 26, 2007 Decided: May 17, 2007 Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Raymond Cherisson, Appellant Pro Se. Christine Blaise Hamilton, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Raymond Cherisson seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. When the United States or its officer or agency is a party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than sixty days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). This appeal period is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Dir., Dep’t of Corr. , 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). The district court’s order was entered on the docket on July 8, 2004. The notice of appeal was filed on April 18, 2005. Because Cherisson failed to file a timely notice of appeal, and because the district court properly has denied Cherisson’s motion to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. 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
EXHIBIT
      32.1


CERTIFICATION
      OF CO-PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER


PURSUANT
      TO 18 U.S.C. § 1350 ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





Pursuant
      to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of
      section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersigned
      officer of Pilgrim’s Pride Corporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to
      such officer’s knowledge, that:





The
      Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended October 1, 2005 (the “Form 10-K”)
      of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
      of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and information contained in the Form
      10-K
      fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
      of operations of the Company.








Date:
                November 18, 2005
            /s/
                Lonnie “Bo” PilgrimLonnie
                “Bo” PilgrimCo-Principal
                Executive Officer
Order filed, March 13, 2019

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 19

- 00178

- CV

____________ UNITED LOCATING SERV ICES, LLC , Appellant

V.
DAMON FOBBS, RODNEY JOHNSON, & CARLOS HA RRELL , Appellee

On Appeal from the 234th Dis trict Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2018

- 71384



### ORDER
The reporter’s record in this case was due March 11, 2019

. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.1. The court has not received a request to extend time for filing the
record. The record has not been filed w ith the court. Because the reporter’s record has not been filed timely, we issue the following order.

We order Norma Duarte , the court reporter, to file the record in this appeal
within 15 days of the date of this order

. PER CURIAM
Exhibit 31.1

               CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                             PURSUANT TO
                      18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                      AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
             SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, William Bosso, certify that:

       1.	I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of
Nortia Capital Partners, Inc.;

       2.	Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any
untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact
necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances
under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to
the period covered by this report;

       3.	Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other
financial information included in this report, fairly present in all
material respects, the financial condition, results of operations and
cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in
this report;

       4.	The registrant's other certifying officer and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e))
for the registrant and have:

       	a)	designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or
caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under
our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to
us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this report is being prepared;

       	b)	evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's
disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our
conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and
procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based
on such evaluation; and

       	c)	disclosed in this report any change in the
registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred
during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

       5.	The registrant's other certifying officer and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of our internal control
over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit
committee of the registrant's board of directors (or other persons
performing the equivalent functions):

       	a)	all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses
in the design or operation of internal control over financial
reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the
registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report
financial information; and


<PAGE>

        b)      any fraud, whether or not material, that involves
management or other employees who have a significant role in the
registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

Date:	November 18, 2005


/S/ WILLIAM BOSSO
--------------------------------------
William Bosso, Chief Executive Officer
#### Norma Judith Paiz CRUZ, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 06-73048.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted Nov. 3, 2010.

Filed Nov. 18, 2010.

*305Peter Duong, Law Offices of Peter Duong, Myrna Alvarez, Law Offices of Myrna Alvarez, Oakland, CA, Suzanne Nardone, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Petitioner.

Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, OIL, Lineka N. Quijano, Esquire, M. Jocelyn Lopez Wright, Carol Federighi, Esquire, Senior Litigation Counsel, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: PREGERSON, RIPPLE,* and GRABER, Circuit Judges.

*

 The Honorable Kenneth F. Ripple, Senior United States Circuit Judge for the Seventh Circuit, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM **

Petitioner Norma Paiz Cruz petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ affirmance of the immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of Petitioner’s application for cancellation of removal. Reviewing the procedural due process claim de novo, *Hamazaspyan v. Holder,*590 F.3d 744, 747 (9th Cir.2009), we grant the petition.

We have jurisdiction over colorable constitutional claims alleging a violation of procedural due process. *Mendez-Castro v. Mukasey,*552 F.3d 975, 978 (9th Cir.2009). The government’s argument that we lack jurisdiction over claims alleging substantive due process violations is, therefore, inapposite.

The IJ permitted cross-examination of Petitioner before direct examination, disregarded evidence, prejudged issues, cut off relevant testimony, and failed to discuss (or, apparently, even to consider) relevant evidence. Considering “the cumulative effect of the several due process violations,” *Zolotukhin v. Gonzales,*417 F.3d 1073, 1077 (9th Cir.2005), we hold that “the challenged proceeding was so fundamentally unfair that the alien was prevented from reasonably presenting [her] case,” *Cruz Rendon v. Holder,*603 F.3d 1104, 1109 (9th Cir.2010) (internal quotation marks omitted). Furthermore, the evidence and testimony concerned a central issue in determining Petitioner’s eligibility for relief, namely, the hardship that her Americaneitizen children would suffer; consequently, “the outcome of the proceeding may have been affected” by the IJ’s actions. *Tampubolon v. Holder,*610 F.3d 1056, 1063 (9th Cir.2010) (internal quotation marks omitted).

Petition GRANTED; case REMANDED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N
NO. 03-12-00240- CV

Michael Mc Der m ott, Appellant

v. The State of Texas; Edu ardo Espi nosa, Tem porary Re ceive r of Retire m ent Value, LLC; and Don ald T aylor, Tem porary Re ceive r of Hil l Country F und ing, L LC, Appellees

F ROM TH E DISTRI CT COURT O F TRAVIS CO UNTY, 126 TH JUDICI AL DISTRICT NO. D-1 -GV-1 0-0 0045 4, H ONO RAB LE GISELA D. TRI ANA-DO Y AL, JUDGE P RESIDING
M E M O R A N D U M O PI N I O N
Michae l McDe rmott has notified this Court t h at h e no longe r wishes to pursue this appea l and has filed an unopposed motion to dismiss this appea l with prejudice
. McDe rmott’s counsel states that he has confe rre d with counsel for the State of Texas, Retirement Value’ s rec eiver , and Hill Country Funding ’s rec eiver , who do not oppose this motion. We grant the motion and dismiss the appe al. SeeTex. R. App. P . 42.1(a)
.

__________________________________________ J eff Rose, J ustice Be fore Justices Puryear , Pemberton and Rose Dismissed on Appellant’s Motion Filed: Mar ch 6, 2013
Order entered May 15, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-15-00150-CR

No. 05-15-00151-CR

CHRISTOPHER CHARLES BYNUM, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 7

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. F14-53422-Y, F14-53483-Y

ORDER

The Court REINSTATES the appeals.

On May 1, 2015, we ordered the trial court to make findings regarding why the reporter’s 

record had not been filed. On May 13, 2015, we received the reporter’s record. Therefore, in the 

interest of expediting the appeals, we VACATE the May 1, 2015 order requiring findings.

Appellant’s brief is due within thirty days of the date of this order.

/s/ ADA BROWN 

JUSTICE
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 02-3203

___________ Prasith Long, * * Petitioner, * * Petition for Review of v. * an Order of the Immigration * and Naturalization Service. John Ashcroft, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Respondent. *

___________ Submitted: August 29, 2003 Filed: September 3, 2003

___________ Before RILEY, HANSEN, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Petitioner, a Lao citizen, seeks review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissing his appeal from an Immigration Judge’s denial of his application for asylum and withholding of removal. He argues that the BIA erred in denying his application because the BIA “blurred” his statutory basis for asylum, inadequately addressed whether he suffered past persecution, and relied exclusively on the State Department’s country report to distort the political situation in Laos. After careful review of the record, we deny the petition. See Navarijo-Barrios v. Ashcroft , 322 F.3d 561, 562 (8th Cir. 2003) (standard of review).-2- Even assuming petitioner established past persecution, his testimony, along with the State Department’s country report, support the BIA’s conclusion that he lacks a well-founded fear of future persecution. See Francois v. INS , 283 F.3d 926, 930-31 (8th Cir. 2002). He was not harassed during the nine years before he left Laos, his wife was not bothered after he left, and there is no indication that his two daughters who remain in Laos have been harmed. In addition, petitioner and his wife were issued passports and were permitted to leave the country, see id. at 932; Manivong v. Dist. Dir., U.S. Dep’t of Justice , 164 F.3d 432, 433 (8th Cir. 1999), and the country report indicates that conditions in Laos have improved, exit visas and passports are generally easy to obtain, the government does not interfere with emigration, and former citizens who fled the regime have been welcomed back, see Perinpanathan v. INS , 310 F.3d 594, 599 n.1 (8th Cir. 2002). Accordingly, we deny the petition. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<PAGE>

<ARTICLE>                    5

<LEGEND>                     The Schedule contains summary financial 
                             information extracted from the financial
                             statements for Prudential-Bache/A.G. Spanos
                             Genesis Income Partners L.P., I, and is
                             qualified entirely by reference to such
                             financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<RESTATED>

<CIK>                        000803399
<NAME>             Prudential-Bache/AG Spanos Genesis Income Partners LP I
<MULTIPLIER>                 1

<FISCAL-YEAR-END>            Dec-31-1997

<PERIOD-START>               Jan-1-1997

<PERIOD-END>                 Dec-31-1997

<PERIOD-TYPE>                12-Mos

<CASH>                       5323329     

<SECURITIES>                 0

<RECEIVABLES>                394236      

<ALLOWANCES>                 0

<INVENTORY>                  0

<CURRENT-ASSETS>             5717565     

<PP&E>                       101809401   

<DEPRECIATION>               33632580    

<TOTAL-ASSETS>               73894386    

<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>        2448481     

<BONDS>                      57927235    

<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>        0

<PREFERRED>                  0

<COMMON>                     0

<OTHER-SE>                   13518670    

<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY> 73894386    

<SALES>                      16317774    

<TOTAL-REVENUES>             16507383    

<CGS>                        0

<TOTAL-COSTS>                0

<OTHER-EXPENSES>             11351207    

<LOSS-PROVISION>             0

<INTEREST-EXPENSE>           4867527     

<INCOME-PRETAX>              0

<INCOME-TAX>                 0

<INCOME-CONTINUING>          0

<DISCONTINUED>               0

<EXTRAORDINARY>              0

<CHANGES>                    0

<NET-INCOME>                 288649      

<EPS-PRIMARY>                4.37        

<EPS-DILUTED>                0

</TABLE>