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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-7963

VICTOR QUINONES-GONDOLA,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

WARDEN; MAJOR, Worcester County Jail,

Defendants - Appellees,

and

ASSISTANT DISTRICT DIRECTOR, INS; COMMISSIONERS INS; DOC INTERNAL AFFAIRS,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Marvin J. Garbis, District Judge. (CA-01-

1846-MJG)

Submitted: February 14, 2002 Decided: February 27, 2002

Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Victor Quinones-Gondola, Appellant Pro Se. John Francis Breads,

Jr., Columbia, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Victor Quinones-Gondola appeals the district court’s grant of

Appellees’ Motion for More Definite Statement. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the order is not appealable.

This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28

U.S.C. § 1291 (1994), and certain interlocutory and collateral

orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (1994); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v.

Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order here

appealed is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory

or collateral order.

We dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. We also deny

Quinones-Gondola’s motion for appointment of counsel. 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
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

 NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

 DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

EARLTON FARQUHARSON AND 

BEULAH FARQUHARSON,

Appellants,

v. Case No. 5D16-2687

CITIBANK, N.A. FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE 

CERTIFCATE HOLDERS CWABS, INC. ASSET

BACKED CERTIFICATE SERIES 2007-QX1,

Appellee.

________________________________/

Opinion filed June 9, 2017

Appeal from the Circuit Court 

for Osceola County,

Kevin B. Weiss, Judge.

Earlton Farquharson and Beulah Farquharson, 

Buenaventura Lakes, pro se.

Sara F. Holladay-Tobias, Emily Y. Rottmann, 

Ada A. Hammond and Jason R. Bowyer, of 

McGuireWoods LLP, Jacksonville, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

After carefully reviewing the record on appeal, the hearing transcript, and the 

parties’ briefs, we affirm the lower court, whom we commend for showing great patience 

in the manner in which the August 2, 2016, hearing was conducted.

AFFIRMED.

COHEN, C.J., EVANDER, and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.
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 Veterans Affairs

          - 38 CFR Part 3 
          - RIN 2900-AJ44 

# AGENCY:

Department of Veterans Affairs. 

# ACTION:

Withdrawal of proposed rule. 

# SUMMARY:

                        In a document published in the                         **Federal Register**                         at 64 FR 67528 on December 2, 1999, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) proposed to amend its adjudication regulations concerning a claimant's statutory responsibility to support his or her                               ( print page 11550)                            claim with evidence adequate to make the claim “well grounded.” The proposed rule also addressed VA's duty to help claimants who have filled well-grounded claims obtain evidence pertinent to their claims. This document withdraws that proposed rule.                     

Subsequent to the publication of the proposed rule, the Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000 (VCAA), Pub. L. No. 106-475, 114 Stat. 2096, was signed into law. The VCAA eliminated the claimant's responsibility to file a well-grounded claim and redefined VA's duty to help claimants obtain evidence relevant to their claims. Therefore, we are withdrawing the proposed rule and preparing a new proposed rule to implement the new statutory requirements. 

# DATES:

The proposed rule is withdrawn as of February 26, 2001. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Janice Jacobs, Consultant, Policy and Regulations Staff, Compensation and Pension Service, Veterans Benefits Administration, 810 Vermont Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20420, telephone (202) 273-7223. 

Approved: February 15, 2001.

Anthony J. Principi, 

Secretary of Veterans Affairs. 

[FR Doc. 01-4634 Filed 2-23-01; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8320-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                          11,453
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                          43,433
<DEPRECIATION>                                   9,968
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  38,144
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                         39,425
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     (3,231)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    38,144
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 5,175
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    4,531
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 904
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (260)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         2
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (262)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (262)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (7.42)<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (7.42)<F1>
<FN>
<F1>Net loss per limited partner unit.
</FN>


</TABLE>
2023 년 카운티 

위원회 선거

2023년 6월 15일

후보자 추천 기간 시

작. 추천 양식은 

fsa.usda.gov/ 

elections에서 다운 

받을 수 있습니다.

2023년 8월 1일 

지역 FSA 카운티 사무

소에 후보자 추천 양

식 접수 마지막 날. 

2023년 11월 6일

유자격 유권자들에게 

우편으로 투표용지 

발송.

2023년 12월 4일

기입된 투표용지를 지

역 FSA 카운티 사무실

에 반납할 수 있는 마

지막 날.

2024년 1월 1일 x

새로 선출된 카운티 

위원회 위원들 취임.

연결고리가 됩니다.

농업 커뮤니티와 USDA 연결.

2023년 6월 USDA는 균등한 기회 제공자, 고용주 및 대출 기관입니다.

미국 농촌 진흥청 (FSA)

미국 농무부
Page 1 of 2 (proposal 2)

Instructions For FSA-525

CROP INSURANCE AND/OR NAP COVERAGE AGREEMENT FOR 

ERP 2022

This form will be used by any producer that is applying for the Emergency Relief 

Program 2022 Track 2. This form will capture a producer’s crops that suffered a 

revenue loss due to a qualifying disaster event. By completing this form, the 

producer agrees to purchase Federal Crop Insurance or NAP coverage for the next 

two available crop years. If they do not meet this linkage requirement, they will be 

required to pay back their ERP 2022 Track 2 payment.

Submit the original of the completed form in hard copy or facsimile to your 

recording county FSA office.

Producers must complete Items 4-8.

Items 1-3 are for FSA use only. 

Item No./

Fld Name

Instruction

1

Recording 

State

Enter the recording State name and code.

2

Recording 

County

Enter the recording county name and code.

3

FSA-524 

Application 

Number

Enter the corresponding FSA-524 Application number.

4

Producer 

Name

Enter the producer name.

Part A: Crops/Commodities that Suffered a Revenue Loss Due to a Qualifying 

Disaster Event

For Items 5-7 below, list the crop or commodity name(s), crop type(s), and intended 

use of the crop(s) that suffered revenue losses in whole or in part from qualifying 

disaster event(s) occurring in calendar year 2022. Producers can see examples of crop 

and commodity names, crop types, and intended uses by looking at acreage reports 

(FSA-578) or the list provided in 2-CP Exhibit 10:

https://www.fsa.usda.gov/Internet/FSA_File/2-cp_r16_a25.pdf

5 Enter the crop or commodity name. 

Example: Corn
Page 2 of 2 (proposal 2)

Item No./

Fld Name

Instruction

Crop/Comm

odity Name

6

Crop Type

Enter the crop type. 

Example: Yellow

7

Intended 

Use

Enter the intended use. 

Example: Grain

Part B: Linkage Agreement

Producer must read and agree to the terms of this agreement. 

8A

Producer’s

Signature

If you are mailing or faxing this form, print the form and manually enter 

your signature. If this form is approved for electronic transmission and 

you have established credentials with USDA to submit forms 

electronically, use the buttons provided on the form for transmitting the 

form to the USDA servicing office.

8B

Title/Relatio

nship of the 

Individual 

Signing in 

the 

Representati

ve Capacity

Representative Signature, if applicable

8C

Date Signed

MM-DD-YYYY
[Exhibit 99.2]



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the
undersigned, as Chief Financial Officer of Brookstone, Inc. (the Company), does hereby certify that to the undersigneds knowledge:



| | 1) |  | the Companys Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended May 3, 2003 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 Companys Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended May 3, 2003 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company.
| | -- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ Philip W. RoizinPhilip W. Roizin Executive Vice
President, Finance and Administration, Treasurer and Secretary
and Chief Financial Officer




Dated: June 10, 2003



19
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 207

Entitled the ‘‘Former Presidential Enough Is Enough and Taxpayers Relief

Act of 1991’’.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 5, 1993

Mr. JACOBS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Government Operations

A BILL

Entitled the ‘‘Former Presidential Enough Is Enough and

Taxpayers Relief Act of 1991’’.

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

3 That the total annual Government expenditures for the

4 care and feeding of a former President, excepting reason5 able Secret Service protection, shall not exceed ten times

6 the poverty level income for one family of four.

Æ
Exhibit 32.1
 
 Certification of Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer - Sarbanes-Oxley Section 906
 
 Pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Triad Guaranty Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge, that the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 
 Date: March 18, 2011By:
/s/ Kenneth W. JonesKenneth W. JonesPresident and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer)
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 Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. ER01-1178-001]

Take notice that on February 9, 2001, Sempra Energy Resources (Sempra) filed tariff pages to be substituted for Attachments B and D to Sempra's original application that was filed on February 6, 2001.

                    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest such filing should file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's  Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). All such motions and protests should be filed on or before March 2, 2001. Protests will be considered by the Commission to determine the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to                           ( print page 11162)                        the proceedings.  Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection. This filing may also be viewed on the Internet at                     *http://www.ferc.fed.us/​online/​rims.htm*                     (call 202-208-2222 for assistance). Comments and protests may be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's web site at                     *http://www.ferc.fed.us/​efi/​doorbell.htm.*

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 01-4348  Filed 2-21-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### Prasad SHANKAR, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HSBC, INC., Defendant-Appellee.

No. 09-17381.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 14, 2010.*

Filed Jan. 7, 2011.

Prasad Shankar, Sioux Falls, SD, pro se.

Robert James Wilger, Littler Mendel-son, P.C., San Jose, CA, for Defendants Appellee.

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

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

MEMORANDUM **

Prasad Shankar appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in favor of HSBC, Inc. in his employment action alleging retaliation in violation of Title VII. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, *Learned v. City of Bellevue,*860 F.2d 928, 931 (9th Cir.1988), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment. Shankar’s claims based on his first and second Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) charges are time barred because he filed his lawsuit more than 90 days after the EEOC issued right-to-sue letters. *See*42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1); *Scholar v. Pac. Bell,*963 F.2d 264, 266-67 (9th Cir.1992) (“The requirement for filing a Title VII civil action within 90 days from the date EEOC dismisses a claim constitutes a statute of limitations.”). Regarding the claims in his third EEOC charge, Shankar failed to raise triable issues as to whether he engaged in protected activity and whether his termination was causally connected to the alleged protected activity. *See Villiarimo v. Aloha Island Air, Inc.,*281 F.3d 1054, 1064 (9th Cir.2002) (18-month lapse between protected activity and an adverse employment action is too long to give rise to an inference of causation); *Learned,*860 F.2d at 932 (complaining about conduct not prohibited by Title VII does not constitute protected activity); *Cohen v. Fred Meyer, Inc.,*686 F.2d 793, 796 (9th Cir.1982) (“Essential to a causal link is evidence that the employer was aware that the plaintiff had engaged in the protected activity.”).

Shankar’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

We deny Shankar’s motion to supplement the record. *See Kirshner v. Uniden*
      *64
      *Corp. of Am.,*842 F.2d 1074, 1077 (9th Cir.1988).

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                       2,033,465
<SECURITIES>                                   372,478
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,405,943
<PP&E>                                      17,030,179
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,848,699
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              19,436,122
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           86,832
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  19,349,290
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                19,436,122
<SALES>                                        446,618
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               474,402
<CGS>                                           53,749
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   53,749
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               188,223
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                232,430
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            232,430
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   232,430
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     8.32
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     8.32
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6722

ROBERT D. COOK, Petitioner - Appellant, versus LLOYD L. WATERS, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF 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- 2318-AMD) Submitted: October 24, 2001 Decided: November 13, 2001 Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert D. Cook, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Celia Anderson Davis, 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: Robert D. Cook 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 substantially on the reasoning of the district court. See Cook v. Waters , No.CA-00-2318-AMD (D. Md. Mar. 22, 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
946 A.2d 637

#### UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC., Petitioner v. PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION, Respondent.

No. 922 MAL 2007.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

March 25, 2008.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 25th day of March, 2008, the petition for allowance of appeal is DENIED.

Justice SAYLOR files a dissenting statement.

SAYLOR, Justice,

dissenting.

Mr. Justice Saylor dissents, as he would allow the appeal to determine whether an order, which is otherwise final under Pa.R.A.P. 341(c), must nevertheless be deemed non-appealable because it arose in the setting of a proceeding under Section 510(c) of the Public Utility Code.
#### FRANKIE TRIMMER *v.*COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION

The petitioner Frankie Trimmer’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 119 Conn. App. 653 (AC 29539), is denied.

*904
      *MarkM. Rembish,*special public defender, in support of the petition.

*Raheem L. Mullins,*assistant state’s attorney, in opposition.

Decided April 21, 2010

VERTEFEUILLE, J., did not participate in the consideration of or decision on this petition.