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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-7109

ABDUR R. SHABAZZ,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

HELEN F. FAHEY, Chairwoman, Virginia Pardon

and Parole Board; GENE JOHNSON, Director,

Virginia Department of Corrections,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District

Judge. (CA-04-344-2)

Submitted: November 18, 2004 Decided: November 29, 2004

Before LUTTIG and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Abdur R. Shabazz, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Abdur R. Shabazz appeals the district court’s order that

dismissed his action, which the court construed as filed under 42

U.S.C. § 1983 (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the

district court. See Shabazz v. Fahey, No. CA-04-344-2 (E.D. Va.

June 21, 2004). 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
<PAGE>   1
        EXHIBIT 12 -- COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
             (COMBINED WITH 50% OWNED UNCONSOLIDATED SUBSIDIARIES)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                   2001         2000
THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31 (In millions)                          ----         ----
<S>                                                                <C>          <C>
Income from continuing operations...........................       $ 29         $ 29
Add
  Interest..................................................         29           34
  Portion of rentals representative of interest factor......          4            4
  Income tax expense and other taxes on income..............         21           21
                                                                   ----         ----
       Earnings as defined..................................       $ 83         $ 88
                                                                   ====         ====
Interest....................................................       $ 29         $ 34
Interest capitalized........................................          1            2
Portion of rentals representative of interest factor........          4            4
                                                                   ----         ----
       Fixed charges as defined.............................       $ 34         $ 40
                                                                   ====         ====
Ratio of earnings to fixed charges..........................       2.44         2.20
                                                                   ====         ====
</TABLE>
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, May 18, 2022.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, May 18, 2022

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A22I0182. ROCKBRIDGE ENTERPRISE INC. v. CASSANDRA LYNCH.

Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of 

this order. The Clerk of State Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record 

transmitted to the Court of Appeals.

LC NUMBERS:

21C04998
CASE ANNOUNCEMENTS

*July 10, 2014*

[Cite as *07/1012014 Case Announcements,*2014-Ohio-3028.]

MOTION AND PROCEDURAL RULINGS

#### In re Henderson.

On January 18, 2012, this court found Paul S. Henderson to be a vexatious litigator under S.Ct.Prac.R. 4.03(B). This court further ordered that Henderson was prohibited from continuing or instituting legal proceedings in this court without first obtaining leave. On July 2, 2014, Henderson submitted an application for leave to file a notice of appeal and memorandum in support of jurisdiction.

It is ordered by the court that the application for leave is denied.
Exhibit 23




                         Consent of Independent Auditors




The Board of Directors
Markel Corporation

We consent to incorporation by reference in Registration Statements No.
33-28921, No. 33-46706 and No. 33-61598 on Form S-8 and No. 333-21633 on Form
S-4 of Markel Corporation of our report dated February 4, 1997, relating to the
consolidated balance sheets of Markel Corporation and subsidiaries (the
"Company") as of December 31, 1996 and 1995, and the related consolidated
statements of income, changes in shareholders' equity, and cash flows for each
of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 1996, which report
appears in the Company's 1996 annual report on Form 10-K.

Our report refers to the Company's adoption of Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards No. 121, ACCOUNTING FOR THE IMPAIRMENT OF LONG-LIVED ASSETS AND
LONG-LIVED ASSETS TO BE DISPOSED OF.


                                                     KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP


Richmond, Virginia
March 24, 1997
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 
-                   Secretary of Labor v. Northshore Mining Company              

#   Secretary of Labor v. Northshore Mining Company

Northshore LAKE 2017-224 Argument Notice 5-27-20.pdf

Northshore LAKE 2017-224 Argument Notice 5-27-20.htm

Commission Oral Argument_Secretary of Labor v. Northshore Mining Co., Docket Nos. LAKE 2017-224, et al_05-27-2020.mp3

##### 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
|                                                                                      |   |                    |   |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|-------------------------|--------|
| Date:           May 12, 2011  |   | /s/ Jason Young    |   |
|                                                                                      |   | Jason Young             |   |
|                                                                                      |   | Chief Executive Officer |   |
|                                                                                      |   |                    |   |

| Date:           May 12, 2011  |   | /s/ Steve Olson               |   |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|------------------------------------|--------|
|                                                                                      |   | Steve Olson                        |   |
|                                                                                      |   | Chief Technology Officer and       |   |
|                                                                                      |   | Acting Principal Financial Officer |   |
Exhibit 12.1
 Associated Materials, LLC
COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
 October 13, 2010
    
    
    
    January 3, 2010
    
    
    Years Endedto
    
    
    
    to
    
    
    January 2,
    
    
    January 3,
    
    
    December 29,
    
    
    December 30,January 1, 2011
    
    
    
    October 12, 2010
    
    
    2010
    
    
    2009
    
    
    2007
    
    
    2006Successor
    
    
    
    PredecessorEarnings:Income (loss) before income taxes
    
    $
    (56,462
    )
    
    
    $
    (66,054
    )
    
    $
    23,048
    
    
    $
    (23,335
    )
    
    $
    15,356
    
    
    $
    14,859Plus: Fixed charges
    
    
    18,621
    
    
    
    
    67,895
    
    
    
    88,812
    
    
    
    93,727
    
    
    
    91,887
    
    
    
    91,267Total earnings
    
    $
    (37,841
    )
    
    
    $
    1,841
    
    
    $
    111,860
    
    
    $
    70,392
    
    
    $
    107,243
    
    
    $
    106,126Fixed charges:Interest expense
    
    $
    16,120
    
    
    
    $
    58,759
    
    
    $
    77,352
    
    
    $
    82,567
    
    
    $
    81,087
    
    
    $
    80,947Plus: Imputed interest on operating leases
    
    
    2,501
    
    
    
    
    9,136
    
    
    
    11,460
    
    
    
    11,160
    
    
    
    10,800
    
    
    
    10,320Total fixed charges
    
    $
    18,621
    
    
    
    $
    67,895
    
    
    $
    88,812
    
    
    $
    93,727
    
    
    $
    91,887
    
    
    $
    91,267Ratio of earnings to fixed charges
    
    
    
    (1)
    
    
    
    0.03
    
    
    
    1.26
    
    
    
    0.75
    
    
    
    1.17
    
    
    
    1.16
 
 (1)
    
    For the period October 13, 2010 to January 1, 2011, earnings were not adequate to cover
fixed charges.
## NO. 12

- 13

- 00371

- CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

RAY DON ARTERBERRY,

APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

APPELLEE §

§

§ APPEAL FROM THE 7 TH

DISTRICT COURT

SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

Appellant has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal. The motion is signed by Appellant

and his counsel. No decision has been delivered in this appeal. Accordingly, Appellant’s motion

to dismiss is gr

anted , and the appeal is dismissed

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.2 (a).

Opinion delivered January 31, 2014.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.

( DO NOT PUBLISH )

## COURT OF APPEALS

T WELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JUDGMENT

JANUARY 31 , 2014

NO. 12

- 13

- 00371

- CR

RAY DON ARTERBERRY,

Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

Appeal from the 7th District Court

of Smith County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 007

- 0887

- 10)

THIS CAUSE came on to be heard on the motion of the Appellant to dismiss

the appeal herein, and the same being considered, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED and

DECREED by this Court that the motion to dismiss be granted and the appeal be dismissed, and

that the decision be certified to the court below for observance.

By per curiam opinion

. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle , J

.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.fmcs.gov","title":"Office of Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) - Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"8Ivpx8TDqr\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.fmcs.gov\/aboutus\/agency-departments\/eeo\/\">Office of Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO)<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.fmcs.gov\/aboutus\/agency-departments\/eeo\/embed\/#?secret=8Ivpx8TDqr\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Office of Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO)” — Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service\" data-secret=\"8Ivpx8TDqr\" 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"}
#### Alverne C. BUSH, Appellant, v. L-3 COMMUNICATIONS/TITAN GROUP, Appellee.

No. 10-1940.

United States Court *of*Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: Nov. 25, 2010.

Filed: Dec. 13, 2010.

Alverne C. Bush, Kansas City, MO, pro se.

Michael L. Matula, Robert Lee Ortbals, Jr., Ogletree *&*Deakins, Kansas City, MO, Alan B. Pearl, Syosset, NY, for Defendant-Appellee.

Before LOKEN, MURPHY, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

*87PER CURIAM.

Alverne Bush appeals following the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgment in her employment discrimination action. After careful de novo review, *see Murphy v. Mo. Dep’t of Corr.,*372 F.3d 979, 982 (8th Cir.2004), we conclude that summary judgment was properly granted. Even assuming Bush made a prima facie case of discrimination on any of the bases asserted in her complaint, she failed to create a jury issue on whether her unsatisfactory job performance — the reason given for her termination — was a pretext for unlawful discrimination. *See Richmond v. Bd. of Regents of the Univ. of Minn.,*957 F.2d 595, 598 (8th Cir.1992). Summary judgment also was proper on Bush’s claim under the Family and Medical Leave Act, because she did not provide the required notice to her employer. *See Woods v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.,*409 F.3d 984, 991 (8th Cir.2005).

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court, *see*8th Cir. R. 47B, and deny Bush’s pending motion for appointment of counsel.

1

. The Honorable Howard F. Sachs, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.
ASCII File	

Fixed Format

NOTICE DATE   		      A08

INITIATED DATE                A08

EMPLOYER      				A52

EMP STREET       			A25

EMP CITY      	  		A17

EMP STATE         		A02

EMP ZIP      		      A09

EMP REP        		    	A20

EMP TITLE      			A10

UNION & LOCAL    			A52

UNION STREET         		A25

UNION CITY           		A17

UNION STATE          		A02

UNION ZIP            		A09

UNION REP            		A20

UNION TITLE          		A10

AFFECTED LOCATION CITY        A17

AFFECTED LOCATION STATE       A02

AFFECTED LOCATION ZIP         A09

EXPIRATION DATE         	A08

NAICS                         A02

INDUSTRY                      A25

BARGAINING SIZE          	N07

ESTABLISHMENT SIZE        	N07

NOTICE DATE SUBMITTED         A08

CATEGORY                      A25

HEALTHCARE RELATED     		A02
#### In re SIERRA WIRELESS, INC., Sierra Wireless America, Inc., Kyocera Corporation, Kyocera Communications, Inc., and Kyocera Wireless Corp., Petitioners.

No. 969.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Dec. 6, 2010.

ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

ORDER

Sierra Wireless, Inc. and Sierra Wireless America, Inc. (Sierra) move without opposition to withdraw as petitioners. Kyocera Corporation, Kyocera Communications, Inc., and Kyocera Wireless Corp. (Kyocera) separate move without opposition to withdraw the petition if this court grants Sierra’s motion.

Upon consideration thereof,

It Is Ordered That:

The motions are granted. The petition is dismissed.
{"id":4408,"date":"2019-12-13T11:28:07","date_gmt":"2019-12-13T15:28:07","guid":{"rendered":"\/?p=4408"},"modified":"2019-12-13T16:10:18","modified_gmt":"2019-12-13T20:10:18","slug":"servcon-will-be-down-for-maintenance-this-weekend","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"\/servcon-will-be-down-for-maintenance-this-weekend\/","title":{"rendered":"SERVCON Will Be Down for Maintenance This Weekend – 12\/13\/19 to 12\/16\/19"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>SERVCON will be down this weekend from Friday 6 pm Dec 13<sup>th<\/sup> \u00a0to Monday 7 am Dec 16<sup>th<\/sup>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>SERVCON will be down this weekend from Friday 6 pm Dec 13th \u00a0to Monday 7 am Dec 16th.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":7,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[4],"tags":[],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4408"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/7"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4408"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4408\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4416,"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4408\/revisions\/4416"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4408"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4408"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4408"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2


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

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350,  as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act, I, Linden J Boyne, certify that:

To the best of my  knowledge  and belief,  the  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-QSB
filed  with  the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on  July  16,  2003  by
Westminster  Auto Retailers Inc., and to which this  certification  is appended,
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934,  and the  information  contained  in the  Quarterly  Report  fairly
presents,  in all material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and results of
operations of Westminster Auto Retailers Inc.



                                                /s/ Linden J Boyne
                                                -------------------
                                                Linden  J Boyne
                                                Chief Financial Officer


A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided to Westminster Auto Retailers Inc., and will be retained by Westminster
Auto Retailers Inc., and furnished to the Securities and Exchange  Commission or
its staff upon request.
#### Maria Rodriguez DE ZAMORA, Petitioner, v. Eric HOLDER, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 07-72817.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Nov. 2, 2010.*

Filed Nov. 24, 2010.

Robert Bradford Jobe, Esquire, Law Offices of Robert B. Jobe, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.

Jesse Matthew Bless, OIL, David V. Bernal, Assistant Director, John Clifford Cunningham, I, Esquire, Senior Litigation Counsel, DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.

Before: KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, RYMER, Circuit Judge, and TRAGER,** District Judge.

*

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

**

 The Honorable David G. Trager, Senior United States District Judge for the Eastern District of New York, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM ***

Maria Rodriguez de Zamora petitions for review of the BIA’s decision affirming the IJ’s removal order and denial of her application for adjustment of status. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny her petition. Given the parties’ familiarity with the facts we do not recount them here.

“Pure questions of law raised in a petition to review a decision of the BIA are reviewed de novo.” *De Martinez v. Ashcroft,*374 F.3d 759, 761 (9th Cir.2004). However, findings of fact are conclusive unless “any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.” 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B).

The IJ and BIA did not credit petitioner’s testimony regarding the alleged coercion by a border patrol agent in 1997. The IJ and BIA stated that, due to petitioner’s “unclear testimony” and her failure to raise the issue of coercion in 2003 (when she instead said only that her aunt had told her to provide a false name), they were unable to conclude that her statement was coerced. That conclusion constitutes an express finding that petitioner’s *116testimony regarding the alleged coercion was not credible.

Given that finding, the decisions below correctly concluded that petitioner falsely represented herself to be a United States citizen and that she had done so for the purpose of obtaining a benefit under the INA. 8 U.S.C. §§ 1182(a)(6)(C)(ii), 1229a(c)(3)(A). As such, her petition is denied.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Judge RYMER

concurring.

I concur in the judgment. The BIA’s conclusion that her 2003 statements rendered Rodriguez de Zamora removable is supported by substantial evidence.