alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Peter Kay STERN, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 06-8017.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: March 22, 2007.

Decided: March 30, 2007.

*303Peter Kay Stern, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Office of the United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Peter Kay Stern seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying various motions that he filed along with his pending 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion, including motions to disqualify all of the judges of the Western District of North Carolina and the U.S. Attorney, a motion for release on bond, a motion for copies of grand jury transcripts, a motion to produce a witness at a hearing, and a motion for a gag order. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2000), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2000); Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b); *Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp.,*337 U.S. 541, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order Stern seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we deny Stern’s motion for summary judgment and dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 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.*
Change a User to a Coordinator

Go to: https://www.fdicconnect.gov

- Sign-in

- Select “User Functions” from the FDICconnect Business Center Menu

- Select “Institution Association” 

- Click on “Request Coordinator Role” button

- Follow the instructions provided on the screen to complete the necessary changes

If you need assistance, please contact the FDICconnect Helpdesk at 877-275-3342 (Select 

Option 4) or 703-516-1069 or email fdicconnect@fdic.gov
Exhibit 23.2











CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in this Registration Statement on Form S-8 of our report dated February 26, 2013, except with respect to our opinion on the consolidated financial statements insofar as it relates to the effects of discontinued operations described in Notes 14 and 19 as to which the date is June 27, 2013, relating to the financial statements, financial statement schedule and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which appears in PDC Energy, Inc.'s Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 28, 2013.





/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP


Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania


June 28, 2013
Download Invoices and Official FDIC Correspondence 

Go to: https://www.fdicconnect.gov

− Sign-in

− Press Continue

− If the "Assessment Statement/Official Correspondence" is turned on, go to Step 1 below

− Select “Coordinator Functions” from the FDICconnect Business Center Menu

− Select “Manage Transactions”

− Click on the radio button (in the select column) next to "Assessment Statements/Official 

Correspondence”

− Click the “Manage Transaction Users” button at the bottom of the screen

− Select “Execute” in the “Privileges” column next to your name

− Click the “Update Privileges” button at the bottom of the screen

− Select “Menu” (located in the upper right corner) to return to the Business Center Menu 

1. Select Deposit Insurance Assessment 

2. Select Assessment Statements/Official Correspondence 

3. For invoices, click the tab “Assessment Invoices” and then click on the first blue 

underlined invoice number for your most recent invoice 

4. For correspondence, click either the tab “Official Correspondence” or “Email 

Correspondence” and then click the item you wish to download

If you need assistance, please contact the FDICconnect Helpdesk at 877-275-3342 (Select 

Option 4) or 703-516-1069 or email fdicconnect@fdic.gov.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 46 (Thursday, March 8, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 13927]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-5597]


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

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Ocean Transportation Intermediary License; Reissuances

    Notice is hereby given that the following Ocean Transportation 
Intermediary licenses have been reissued by the Federal Maritime 
Commission pursuant to section 19 of the Shipping Act of 1984, as 
amended by the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 1998 (46 U.S.C. app. 1718) 
and the regulations of the Commission pertaining to the licensing of 
Ocean Transportation Intermediaries, 46 CFR 515.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
           License No.               Name/Address       Date  reissued
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4335NF..........................  International       December 1, 2000.
                                   Services, Inc.,
                                   2907 Empress Ct.,
                                   Valrico, FL 33594.
3863F...........................  Tera Trading        January 14, 2001.
                                   Group, Inc., d/b/
                                   a T.T.G.
                                   International
                                   Freight
                                   Forwarders, 1850
                                   N.W. 82nd Avenue,
                                   Miami, FL 33126.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


Sandra L. Kusumoto,
Director, Bureau of Consumer Complaints and Licensing.
[FR Doc. 01-5597 Filed 3-7-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-P
FDIC Quarterly FOIA Report

1st Quarter 2019 (October 1 – December 31, 2018)

1. Number of requests received during quarter: 64

2. Number of requests processed during quarter: 60

3. Number of requests backlogged at end of quarter: 0

4. Status of the FDIC’s ten overall oldest pending FOIA requests from the previous fiscal 

year (i.e., number closed during quarter): All ten (10) requests were closed during the 1st

quarter of FY2019
**EXHIBIT 21**

 

**IGEN Networks Corp**

**Subsidiary Information**

 

IGEN Networks Corporation has a two wholly-owned California subsidiaries:

 

Name:  Nimbo Tracking LLC

Address:  29970 Technology Drive, Suite 108, Murrieta CA 92563

Formation Number: 201732410071

Date of Formation:  November 13, 2017

 

Name:  Medallion GPS LLC

Address:  29970 Technology Drive, Suite 108, Murrieta CA 92563

Formation Number: 201808010538

Date of Formation:  March 6, 2018
T hi s or derand j udgm enti s notbi ndi ng pr ece dent , exce ptundert he * d o ctri n es o f law o f th e c ase , res jud icata, and co ll ateral estop p el. T h e c o u rt gener al l ydi s favor s t he ci t at i on of or der s and j udgm ent s ; nevert hel es s , an or der and j udgm entm aybe ci t ed undert he t er m s and condi t i ons of 10th C i r . R . 36. 3. 

## F I LED United States C ourt of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### A u gu s t7,2006 Elisab eth A. Shumaker C l erk of C ourt UNI TED S TATES CO URT O F AP PEALS

T E N T H C IR C U IT R O Y J . W H IT E H E A D ,

Pl ai nt i ff- A ppel l ant , N o. 06- 2165 v. ( D . C. N o. CI V - 06 - 14 4 J B/ RL P) UNKNO WN AGE NC Y AND/ OR A G E N T S , (D . N e w M e x .)

D efe ndant - A ppel l ee.

ORDE R AND J UDGM EN T * B efor e K E L L Y , M c K A Y , and LU CE RO , C i rcui tJudg es.

A ft erexami ni ng t he br i efs and the appe l l at e r ecor d, t hi s panel has det er m i ned unani m ous l yt hator al ar gum entw oul d notm at er i al l yas s i s tt he d e te rm in a tio n o f

th is a p p e a l. See F ed . R . A p p . P . 3 4 (a)(2). T h e c ase is th ere fo re o rd e re d su b m itt e d w ith o u t o ra l ar g u m e n t. A ppel l antappl i ed forand r ece i ved perm i s s i on t o pr ocee d in fo rm a p a u p e ris i n hi s 42 U . S. C . § 1983 cl ai m . H e as s er t s thathe “ha s been t or tur ed byvoi ces s i nce a [] 1996 evi dent [i ] aryhear i ng i n N apl es , Fl or i da” a nd t hatt hes e voi ces- 2-

m i gh tcause h i m t o suffer anot her stroke or otherser i ou s bod i l yi njury . B ecause A ppel l antdoes notknow w ho orw hati s caus i ng hi m t o hearvoi ces , he has br oughtan ac t i on agai ns tunknow n defe ndant s . H e pr evi ous l yfi l ed a c om pl ai nt a lle g in g s im ila r i nju ri e s . See W hi t ehead v . C ol l i erC ount y Sher i f f ’s O f f i ce , M emora ndum O pi ni on and O r der( D . N . M . M ay12, 2005) . T hatcompl ai ntw as d is m is s e d w ith p reju d ic e . See W hi t ehead v . C ol l i erC ount y Sher i f f ’s O f f i ce , 143 F ed . A p p x . 9 9 7 (10 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ). In th is case , A p p ell an t r eq u ests that the c o u rt ( 1) m ake the voi ces and t or tur e s t op, ( 2) over tur n hi s convi ct i ons , and ( 3) rei m bu rs e him for l ostbu si ness. T he di s t r i ctcour tdi s m i s s ed A ppel l ant ’ s compl ai nts ua s pont e under28 U .S .C . § 1 9 1 5 (e )( 2 ). M e m o ra n d u m O p in o n a n d O rd e r, 6 (D .N .M . M a y1 5 , 2 0 0 6 ). A ccor di ng t o § 1915, a courts hal l di s m i s s an in fo rm a p a u p e ris compl ai nt“atany t i m e i f . . . t he ac t i on . . . i s fr i vol ous orm al i ci ous [or ] fai l s t o s t at e a c l ai m on w h ich re lief

m a yb e g ra n ted .” T h e d istric t co u rt h e ld th a t A p p e llan t h a d fa iled to m a k e a c la im u p o n w h ic h re lie f c a n b e g ra n te d . Id. at3. F o r su b sta n tiallysim ilar r e a so n s to th o se o u tli n e d b yth e d istric t co u rt in its M ay15, 2006, or der , w e AF F I RM the d istri ct co u rt ’s dism issal of A p p ell an t’ s c o m p lain t. E n tered fo r th e C o u rt M onr oe G . M cK ay C i r cui tJ udge
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 43 (Monday, March 5, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 13367]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-5269]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration


Notice Before Waiver With Respect to Land at Tri-State Airport, 
Huntington, West Virginia

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of intent of waiver with respect to land.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is publishing notice of proposed release of 0.459 
acres of land at the Tri-State Airport, Huntington, West Virginia to 
the City of Kenova for the installation of a water storage tank. There 
are no impacts to the Airport and the land is not needed for airport 
development as shown on the Airport Layout Plan. Fair Market Value of 
the land will be paid to the Airport sponsor, and used for Airport 
purposes.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 4, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Comments on this application may be mailed or delivered in 
triplicate to the FAA at the following address: Larry F. Clark, 
Manager, FAA Beckley Airports Field Office, 176 Airport Circle, Room 
101, Beaver, WV 25813.
    In addition, one copy of any comments submitted to the FAA must be 
mailed or delivered to Larry G. Salyers, Airport Director, Tri-State 
Airport at the following address: Larry G. Salyers, Airport Director, 
Tri-State Airport, 1449 Airport Road, Huntington, WV 25704.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry F. Clark, Manager Beckley 
Airports Field Office, (304) 252-6216, fax (304) 253-8028.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April 5, 2000, new authorizing 
legislation became effective. That bill, the Wendell H. Ford Aviation 
Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century, Public Law 106-181 
(Apr. 5, 2000; 114 Stat. 61) (AIR 21) requires that a 30 day public 
notice must be provided before the Secretary may waive any condition 
imposed on an interest in surplus property.

    Issued in Beckley, West Virginia on February 2, 2001.
Larry F. Clark,
Manager, Beckley Airports Field Office, Eastern Region.
[FR Doc. 01-5269 Filed 3-2-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
II 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2876 

To amend the National Trails System Act to provide for the study of the 

Pike National Historic Trail. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 17, 2018 

Mr. BENNET (for himself and Mr. GARDNER) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To amend the National Trails System Act to provide for 

the study of the Pike National Historic Trail. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Pike National Historic 

5 Trail Study Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. WESTERN STATES TRAIL STUDY. 

7 Section 5(c) of the National Trails System Act (16 

8 U.S.C. 1244(c)) is amended by adding at the end the fol9 lowing: 


pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2876 IS

1 ‘‘(46) PIKE NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAIL.—The 

2 Pike National Historic Trail, a series of routes ex3 tending approximately 3,664 miles, which follows the 

4 route taken by Lt. Zebulon Montgomery Pike during 

5 the 1806–1807 Pike expedition that began in Fort 

6 Bellefontaine, Missouri, extended through portions 

7 of the States of Kansas, Nebraska, Colorado, New 

8 Mexico, and Texas, and ended in Natchitoches, Lou9 isiana.’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                       1,871,353
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  812,452
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,824,172
<PP&E>                                       4,659,504
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,283,999
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,614,901
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          770,918
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        34,000
<OTHER-SE>                                   5,051,366<F1>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,614,901
<SALES>                                      1,857,120
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,857,937<F2>
<CGS>                                          902,641
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  902,641
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               706,889
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              83,154
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                177,233
<INCOME-TAX>                                   342,900
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (165,667)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (165,667)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.06)<F3>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.06)<F3>
<FN>
<F1>REFLECTS RETAINED EARNINGS PAID IN CAPITAL
<F2>REFLECTS OPERATING REVENUES AND INCOME
<F3>CALCULATED ON A PRO-FORMA BASIS WOULD BE .04
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
2009-1378.

#### State v. Powell.

Lake App. No. 2007-L-187, 2009-Ohio-2822.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ANDRES MATEO-MATEO, 

Petitioner, 

 v. 

JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney 

General, 

Respondent.

No. 17-70873 

Agency No. A205-536-302 

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted September 12, 2018**

Before: LEAVY, HAWKINS, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges. 

Andres Mateo-Mateo, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review 

of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an 

immigration judge’s order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. We 

have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the 

denial of a motion to reopen, and review de novo questions of law, including 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

SEP 20 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 17-70873 

claims of due process violations due to ineffective assistance. Mohammed v. 

Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny the petition for review.

The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying Mateo-Mateo’s motion to 

reopen due to lack of prejudice from his prior counsel’s performance, where the 

evidence submitted with the motion did not show plausible grounds for any relief.

See Martinez-Hernandez v. Holder, 778 F.3d 1086, 1088 (9th Cir. 2015) (to 

establish prejudice resulting from ineffective assistance of counsel, petitioner must 

show, at a minimum, that the asserted ground for relief is at least plausible).

In light of our disposition, we do not reach Mateo-Mateo’s remaining 

contentions regarding prior counsel’s performance and compliance with the 

procedural requirements of Matter of Lozada, 19 I. & N. Dec. 637 (BIA 1988). See

Simeonov v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 532, 538 (9th Cir. 2004) (courts and agencies are 

not required to decide issues unnecessary to the results they reach).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
**Exhibit 15.1****Awareness Letter of Independent Accountants**August 5, 2005Securities and Exchange Commission450 Fifth Street, N.W.Washington, D.C. 20549Commissioners:     We are aware that our report dated August 5, 2005 on ourreview of interim financial information of Amegy Bancorporation,Inc. for the three-month and six-month periods endedJune 30, 2005 and 2004 and included in the Company’squarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter endedJune 30, 2005 is incorporated by reference in itsRegistration Statements on Form S-8 (File Nos.333-76269, 333-21619, 333-55685, 333-33533, 333-27891,333-60190, 333-74452, 333-87630, 333-36092, 333-120196, and333-120197).Very truly yours,/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
2010-0421.

#### State ex rel. Cummings v. Brunner.

In Prohibition. This cause originated in this court on the filing of a complaint for a writ of prohibition. Upon consideration of the joint motion to consolidate this case with 2010-0367, *State ex rel. LetOhioVote.org v. Brunner,*and 2010-0415, *State ex rel. New Models v. Brunner,*

It is ordered by the court that the motion to consolidate is granted. The briefing and presentation of evidence in case Nos. 2010-0367, 2010-0415, and 2010-0421 shall be consolidated. The parties shall file three originals of all documents and include all case numbers on the cover page. The parties shall otherwise comply with the requirements of S.CtPrac.R. 10.6 through 10.8.

It is further ordered, sua sponte, that the parties shall comply with the following revised schedule for the presentation of evidence and filing of briefs pursuant to S.Ct.Prac.R. 10.6:

If the respondent has not already filed an answer, then respondent shall file an answer within three days of the date of this entry. The parties shall file any evidence they intend to present within seven days of the date of this entry; relators shall file a brief within five days of the filing of the evidence; respondent shall file a brief within ten days after the filing of relators’ brief; and relators may file a reply brief within five days after filing of respondent’s brief.
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-20-00493-CR

Mathew Mungia

v.

The State of Texas

On Appeal from the

28th District Court of Nueces County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 17FC-2156A

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed. The Court 

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

August 31, 2021
#### Central of Georgia Railway Co. *v.*Van Buren & Co.

Argued May 4,

Decided May 24, 1901.

Case — appeal. Before Judge Hart. Jones superior court, November 28, 1900.

*Hall & Wimberly*and *Hardeman & Moore,*for plaintiff in error.

Eish, J.

This case turning entirely on an issue of fact, and there being sufficient evidence to support the verdict, this court will not disturb the same after its approval by the trial judge.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concurring.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                          17,366
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  127,351
<ALLOWANCES>                                     9,381
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               155,891
<PP&E>                                         274,674
<DEPRECIATION>                                   6,052
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,250,051
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          143,669
<BONDS>                                      1,863,170
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          317,823
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,585,994
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,250,051
<SALES>                                        512,477
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               512,477
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  295,992
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               267,992
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             115,144
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (166,841)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (37,963)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (141,499)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (154,208)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>