alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
January 2024

STORAGE COMPUTED* RELEASE - C.F.S.

1000 ACRE-FEET INFLOW RIVER PUMPING EVAPORATION PRECIP

DAY ELEV IN LAKE CHAN

GE C.F.S. POWER SPILL OUTLET PLANT C. F. S. INCHES INCHES

465.1

1 412.03 465.1 0.0 1,879 1,795 0 0 74 10 0.04 0.00

2 412.04 465.2 0.1 2,017 1,907 0 0 72 0 0.00 0.60

3 412.08 465.5 0.3 2,313 2,090 0 0 69 0 0.00 0.07

4 412.06 465.3 -0.2 2,021 2,025 0 0 68 5 0.02 0.00

5 411.98 464.7 -0.6 1,628 1,859 0 0 71 5 0.02 0.00

6 411.87 463.9 -0.8 1,604 1,963 0 0 57 3 0.01 0.00

7 411.83 463.6 -0.3 1,629 1,712 0 0 67 3 0.01 0.00

8 411.74 462.9 -0.7 1,319 1,591 0 0 68 3 0.01 0.00

9 411.61 461.9 -1.0 1,395 1,823 0 0 67 0 0.00 0.04

10 411.55 461.5 -0.5 1,601 1,761 0 0 68 0 0.00 0.09

11 411.75 463.0 1.5 2,542 1,714 0 0 66 0 0.00 0.09

12 411.81 463.4 0.5 2,142 1,850 0 0 64 0 0.00 0.00

13 411.96 464.6 1.1 2,360 1,723 0 0 65 0 0.00 0.50

14 412.56 469.1 4.6 4,125 1,755 0 0 63 0 0.00 0.50

15 413.05 472.9 3.7 3,669 1,718 0 0 64 0 0.00 0.00

16 413.48 476.2 3.3 3,529 1,786 0 0 73 0 0.00 0.28

17 413.85 479.0 2.9 3,200 1,709 0 0 54 0 0.00 0.01

18 414.31 482.6 3.6 3,491 1,631 0 0 61 0 0.00 0.00

19 414.57 484.6 2.0 2,729 1,651 0 0 58 0 0.00 0.07

20 414.87 487.0 2.3 2,918 1,680 0 0 61 0 0.00 0.85

21 415.83 494.5 7.5 5,375 1,518 0 0 61 0 0.00 0.40

22 416.99 503.7 9.2 6,165 1,473 0 0 61 0 0.00 0.13

23 417.80 510.2 6.5 5,411 2,086 0 0 57 0 0.00 0.00

24 418.50 515.8 5.6 4,680 1,782 0 0 54 0 0.00 0.26

25 419.01 519.9 4.1 3,764 1,634 0 0 52 0 0.00 0.00

26 419.48 523.7 3.8 3,694 1,698 0 0 60 5 0.02 0.00

27 419.84 526.7 2.9 3,217 1,667 0 0 62 8 0.03 0.00

28 420.12 529.0 2.3 2,984 1,757 0 0 63 8 0.03 0.00

29 420.44 531.6 2.6 3,143 1,737 0 0 65 14 0.05 0.00

30 420.78 534.4 2.8 3,237 1,743 0 0 66 17 0.06 0.00

31 421.19 537.8 3.4 3,391 1,607 0 0 64 11 0.04 0.43

TOTALS 72.5 93,172 54,445 0 0 1,975 92 0.34 4.32

ACRE-FEET 72,500 184,807 107,992 0 0 3,917 182

* COMPUTED INFLOW IS THE SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES, PUMPING AND EVAPORATION

Release (ACRE-FEET)

Power 107,992 Outlet 0

Spill 0 Pumping Plant 3,917

Total = 111,909

Precipitation

This month = 4.32

October 01, 2023 To date = 9.26

SUMMARY

Historical Archive and Report Database

Folsom Lake Daily Operations

Run Date: 2/10/2024
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY ELEV

 498.19

 498.82

 499.35

 500.00

 500.67

 501.35

 501.65

 502.12

 502.72

 503.47

 504.12

 504.43

 504.70

 505.13

 505.80

 506.50

 507.24

 507.94

 508.13

 508.04

 508.07

 508.33

 508.55

 508.62

 508.75

 509.05

 509.26

 509.49

 509.63

 509.79

 509.98

 210.4

 212.2

 213.7

 215.6

 217.6

 219.6

 220.5

 221.9

 223.7

 226.0

 228.0

 228.9

 229.7

 231.1

 233.1

 235.3

 237.6

 239.8

 240.4

 240.1

 240.2

 241.0

 241.7

 241.9

 242.3

 243.3

 243.9

 244.7

 245.1

 245.6

 246.2

STORAGE

+1.5

+1.8

+1.5

+1.9

+2.0

+2.0

+0.9

+1.4

+1.8

+2.3

+2.0

+0.9

+0.8

+1.3

+2.1

+2.2

+2.3

+2.2

+0.6

-0.3

+0.1

+0.8

+0.7

+0.2

+0.4

+0.9

+0.7

+0.7

+0.4

+0.5

+0.6

CHANGE

1,015

1,185

1,063

1,232

1,322

1,363

853

1,147

1,323

1,559

1,429

1,012

1,082

1,387

1,760

1,720

1,745

1,721

1,103

707

521

964

872

629

725

974

823

846

704

741

835

INFLOW

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

MADERA

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

SPILL

 184

 186

 188

 189

 226

 254

 312

 354

 336

 323

 341

 410

 509

 550

 550

 463

 404

 407

 522

 554

 175

 272

 252

 253

 253

 253

 254

 255

 255

 256

 286

FRIANT-KERN

 12

 1

 19

 7

 23

 17

 15

 10

 2

 17

 17

 23

 20

 24

 20

 14

 15

 15

 17

 7

 8

 12

 20

 15

 15

 14

 23

 12

 15

 19

 35

C.F.S.

 .13

 .01

 .20

 .07

 .24

 .18

 .16

 .10

 .02

 .17

 .17

 .23

 .20

 .24

 .20

 .14

 .15

 .15

 .17

 .07

 .08

 .12

 .20

 .15

 .15

 .14

 .22

 .12

 .15

 .18

 .34

INCHES

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .25

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .35

 .15

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

MARCH 2007 MILLERTON LAKE DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: June 7, 2007

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S. 

TOTALS +37.3 34,362 0 10,026 0 483 4.85 .75

ACRE-FEET +37,331 68,157 0 19,887 0 958

COMMENTS:

* COMPUTED INFLOW IS THE SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES, PUMPING AND EVAPORATION.

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

CANALS

FRIANT-KERN

MADERA

 19,887

 0 29,870

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

JULY 1, 2006 TO DATE = 7.11

 208.9

 9,983 0.75

CANALS

AT FRIANT

TOTAL RELEASES

OUTLET

 76

 76

 76

 76

 76

 76

 76

 76

 77

 78

 78

 102

 138

 150

 150

 151

 166

 196

 263

 289

 290

 267

 250

 250

 250

 230

 210

 210

 210

 210

 210

RIVER

 5,033

 9,983

RIVER

Table 15
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### APPEAL 

### O F 

### F LORIDA 

### S ECOND 

### D ISTRICT THOMAS BURCH, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. No. 2D23-1911 March 8, 2024 Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Pasco County; Mary M. Handsel, Judge.

PER CURIAM. Affirmed. LaROSE, BLACK, and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, JJ., Concur. Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

DAY ELEV

 360.77

 360.66

 360.66

 360.66

 360.66

 360.66

 360.66

 360.46

 360.55

 360.55

 360.55

 360.19

 360.16

 360.16

 360.19

 360.19

 360.19

 360.19

 360.19

 360.19

 360.19

 360.19

 360.19

 360.19

 360.19

 360.22

 360.19

 360.19

 360.19

 360.19

 591

 583

 583

 583

 583

 583

 583

 569

 576

 576

 576

 550

 548

 548

 550

 550

 550

 550

 550

 550

 550

 550

 550

 550

 550

 552

 550

 550

 550

 550

STORAGE

+0

-8

+0

+0

+0

+0

+0

-14

+7

+0

+0

-26

-2

+0

+2

+0

+0

+0

+0

+0

+0

+0

+0

+0

+0

+2

-2

+0

+0

+0

CHANGE

 284

 302

 331

 341

 345

 364

 395

 399

 395

 367

 345

 328

 319

 314

 335

 340

 348

 364

 382

 394

 394

 377

 375

 392

 406

 414

 428

 428

 427

 446

 1,500

 1,294

 1,254

 1,253

 1,252

 1,253

 1,255

 747

 1,004

 1,003

 1,000

 562

 405

 405

 404

 401

 404

 403

 405

 404

 401

 402

 408

 403

 402

 405

 370

 352

 352

 355

SPILL

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

OUTLET

OAKDALE IRRIGATION DISTRICT

SOUTH SAN JOAQUIN IRRIGATION DISTRICT

TRI DAMS PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

JUNE 2007 GOODWIN RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: September 25, 2007

RES.

ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S. 

TOTALS -41 0 20,458 11,079

ACRE-FEET -41 0 40,578 21,975

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

JOINT MAIN CANAL 57,274

SOUTH MAIN CANAL 21,975

 119,827

 591

OUTLET 0

TOTAL 

TULLOCH

RELEASE

 3,166

 2,662

 2,657

 2,656

 2,650

 2,669

 2,681

 2,253

 2,575

 2,416

 2,383

 1,934

 1,779

 1,765

 1,930

 1,962

 1,962

 1,954

 1,951

 1,977

 1,973

 1,890

 1,968

 1,971

 1,986

 1,993

 2,015

 2,059

 2,077

 2,077

 65,991

 130,893

JOINT MAIN OPERATED BY SSJID AND OID.

JOINT

MAIN

SOUTH

MAIN

SPILL 40,578

 1,007

 932

 874

 868

 873

 878

 893

 894

 896

 894

 891

 902

 901

 897

 984

 1,027

 1,023

 1,002

 977

 1,008

 1,008

 1,019

 1,012

 1,012

 1,025

 1,025

 1,031

 1,043

 1,049

 1,030

 28,875

 57,274

RIVER CANALS

Table 14
### subpart 4—studies
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Daisy Coleman, Appellant.

Judgment of the Court of Special Sessions of the City of New York, Borough of Brooklyn, convicting the defendant of selling alcoholic beverages without an appropriate license therefor (Alcoholic Beverage Control Law, §§ 100, 130) and imposing sentence, unanimously affirmed. No opinion. Present — Lewis, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Wenzel, JJ.
#### Leegar Realty Corp., et al., Respondents, v. Electromatic Manufacturing Corp. et al., Defendants, and Syzygy Realty Corporation et al., Appellants.

Motion for reargument denied, without costs. Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied. Present — Hagarty, Acting P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Sneed, JJ. [See 272 App. Div. 1069.]
#### Jagjit SINGH, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 04-71699.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 13, 2006.*

Decided Feb. 21, 2006.

George T. Heridis, Esq., Rai & Associates, P.C., San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.

Regional Counsel, Western Region Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, Papú Sandhu, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, Keith Bernstein, Office of Immigration Litigation Civil Division, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: FERNANDEZ, RYMER, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Jagjit Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).

We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s determination that Singh is statutorily ineligible for asylum based on the one-year time bar. *See Ramadan v. Gonzales,*427 F.3d 1218, 1221-22 (9th Cir.2005).

We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 over Singh’s withholding of removal claim and CAT claim. Reviewing for substantial evidence, *Li v. Ashcroft,*378 F.3d 959, 962 (9th Cir.2004), we deny the petition. The IJ identified inconsistencies in the record that go to the heart of Singh’s claim of persecution, and the denial of withholding based on the adverse credibility determination must therefore be upheld. *See id.*

*207Because Singh’s CAT claim is based on the same testimony that was found not credible, and he points to no other evidence that the IJ should have considered in making the CAT determination, his CAT claim also fails. *See Farah v. Ashcroft,*848 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir.2003).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part, and DENIED in part

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
---

---

Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
RULE 13a-14(b) UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly
report of Ampal-American Israel Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the
period ending June 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned executive officers of the
Company certifies, to the best of such executive officers knowledge, pursuant to
Rule 13a-14(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
               Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
               respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | /s/ Yosef A. Maiman
Yosef A. MaimanChairman of the Board, President and CEOAmpal-American Israel CorporationAugust 5, 2008 | /s/ Irit Eluz
Irit EluzCFO and Senior Vice President Finance and TreasurerAmpal-American Israel CorporationAugust 5, 2008
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or
otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version
of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.



---

---
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY HIGH

 264

 261

 259

 256

 257

 256

 255

 256

 254

 251

 251

 252

 257

 253

 250

 249

 247

 237

 235

 232

 231

 221

 227

 229

 227

 229

 228

 228

 227

 226

 232

 238

 239

 242

 240

 239

 236

 230

 222

 218

 218

 213

 210

 208

 206

 206

 211

 217

 213

 204

 208

 202

 197

 192

 189

 192

 201

 202

 199

 196

 199

 201

 246

 246

 247

 246

 245

 243

 242

 237

 234

 232

 230

 230

 230

 226

 225

 228

 228

 223

 221

 221

 215

 209

 207

 208

 207

 212

 213

 212

 210

 211

 214

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

MAY 2009 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: June 2, 2009

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

HOLLAND TRACT ON OLD RIVER
#### Edgar Woodruff et al., Respondents, v. City of White Plains, Appellant.

No opinion. Close, P. J., Hagarty, Johnston, Taylor and Lewis, JJ., concur.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-5719
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JOEL A. LUCAS, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CR-95-286) Submitted: November 7, 1996 Decided: November 19, 1996 Before RUSSELL and WIDENER, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mark E. Hall, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant. J. René Josey, United States Attorney, Dean A. Eichelberger, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant noted this appeal outside the ten-day appeal periodestablished by Fed. R. App. P. 4(b) and failed to obtain an extension of the appeal period within the additional thirty-day period provided by Rule 4(b). The time period established by Rule 4(b) is mandatory and jurisdictional. United States v. Raynor , 939 F.2d 191, 197 (4th Cir. 1991). The district court entered its judgment on September 1, 1995; Appellant's notice of appeal was filed on September 12, 1995. Appellant's failure to note a timely appeal or obtain an ex tension of the appeal period deprives this court of jurisdiction to consider this case. We therefore 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
### §2305. Limitation

All of the funds made available under this chapter shall be used in accordance with the requirements of this chapter.

(Pub. L. 88–210, §6, as added Pub. L. 109–270, §1(b), Aug. 12, 2006, 120 Stat. 690.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 2305, Pub. L. 88–210, §6, as added Pub. L. 105–332, §1(b), Oct. 31, 1998, 112 Stat. 3082, related to limitation on use of funds, prior to the general amendment of this chapter by Pub. L. 109–270.
(No. 5598

#### John E. Brownback, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Respondent.

*Opinion filed March 22, 1973.*

John E. Brownback, Claimant, pro se.

William J. Scott, Attorney General, for Respondent.

Holderman, J.

Claimant seeks to recover the sum of $124.90 for money allegedly due him for travel expenses while working for the Illinois Division of Highways in the Bureau of Materials.

In April, 1968, he was sent to the West suburban Chicago area for a field assignment. He stayed at a motel where he was charged $9.50 per day, which he claims to be -the cheapest rate in the area.

The Division of Highways takes the position that the claimant was limited to Class C expenses and that the *240claimant was well aware of the limitations in said Class C regulations. They further claim that he was paid in conformance with the existing policy of the Bureau of Materials and in conformance with Administrative Memorandum No. 32, which apparently are the guide rules fixed by the Department for this type of expense.

It appears to the Court that the claimant was paid the proper amount due him under the rules and regulations in force and effect, therefore nothing is due him at this time.

Claim is hereby denied.
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 Defense

###### Office of the Secretary

# AGENCY:

Department of Defense.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This document is published to identify institutions of higher education that are ineligible for contracts and grants by reason of a determination by the Secretary of Defense that the institution prohibits or in effect prevents military recruiter access to the campus, students on campus or student directory information. It also implements the requirements set forth in section 983 of title 10, United States Code, and 32 CFR part 216. The institutions of higher education so identified are:

Vermont Law School, South Royalton, Vermont.

William Mitchell College of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota.

# ADDRESSES:

Director for Accession Policy, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, 4000 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-4000.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Lieutenant Colonel Paul Nosek, (703) 695-5529.

Dated: April 1, 2011.

Morgan F. Park,

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

[FR Doc. 2011-8377 Filed 4-7-11; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
<PAGE>
                                                                  EXHIBIT 10.13



        Written Description of Compensatory Plan for Randy N. McCullough

         Samuels Jewelers, Inc.'s President and Chief Executive Officer

         On October 2, 1998, the Company entered into an employment agreement
with Randy McCullough making him President and Chief Executive Officer. This
contract called for an annual salary of $325,000, a guaranteed bonus of 100% of
base salary, the granting of 100,000 shares of restricted stock and the issuance
of an option to purchase 75,000 shares of the Company's stock for $6.67. The
employment agreement expired on October 3, 2001. Mr. McCullough currently
receives a base salary of $325,000 with no guaranteed bonus.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff — Appellee, v. Jesus BARRIENTOS-MALDONADO, Defendant — Appellant.

No. 05-10255.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 17, 2006.*

Decided Feb. 22, 2006.

L. Anthony White, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Reno, NV, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Michael K. Powell, Esq., Federal Public Defender’s Office, Reno, NV, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: HALL, SILVERMAN, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.

*

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

*830MEMORANDUM **

Jesus Barrientos-Maldonado appeals the district court’s sentence of fifty-seven months of imprisonment and three years of supervised release for Unlawful Reentry by a Deported, Removed and/or Excluded Alien in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm.

*Post-Booker,*we review a sentence for “unreasonableness.” *United States v. Booker,*543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 765-66, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005). We review the constitutionality of a sentence de novo. *United States v. Leon H.,*365 F.3d 750, 752 (9th Cir.2004).

Barrientos-Maldonado argues that the district court did not consider the factors set out in 18 U.S.C. § 3553 and that his sentence was unreasonable under *Booker.*However, at sentencing the district court explicitly stated that it had considered the statutory factors. Barrientos-Maldonado does not contest his prior aggravated felony conviction for Possession with Intent to Manufacture or Deliver Heroin or his related deportation. Under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2), this prior conviction and deportation authorize a statutory maximum term of imprisonment of twenty years. Given the district court’s recognition of Barrientos-Maldonado’s “very serious” criminal history, his sentence of fifty-seven months, which is at the low end of the advisory Sentencing Guidelines, is not unreasonable.

Barrientos-Maldonado also challenges his sentence on Sixth Amendment grounds, arguing that any fact beyond the mere fact of conviction that justifies increased punishment under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. This claim is precluded by *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*523 U.S. 224, 226-27, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), and *United States v. Pacheco-Zepeda,*234 F.3d 411, 414 (9th Cir.2000). Contrary to Barrientos-Maldonado’s challenges, *Almendarez-Torres*remains good law. *See Pacheco-Zepeda,*234 F.3d at 414 (holding that *Almendarez-Torres*is “dispositive” in rejecting a Sixth Amendment *Apprendi*challenge to an 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) sentence enhancement). Accordingly, we reject BarrientosMaldonado’s Sixth Amendment challenge to the sentence enhancement.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
(No. 7067

#### International Business Machines Corporation, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Department of Corrections, Respondent.

*264
      *Opinion filed March 22, 1973.*

International Business Machines Corporation, Claimant, pro se.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; William E. Webber, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.
### §1161i–7. Authorization of appropriations

There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this part such sums as may be necessary for fiscal year 2009 and each of the five succeeding fiscal years.

(Pub. L. 89–329, title VIII, §818, as added Pub. L. 110–315, title VIII, §801, Aug. 14, 2008, 122 Stat. 3402.)