alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Jacqueline A.M. PHILLIPS, Appellant v. U.S. ATTORNEY FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Appellee.

No. 05-5195.

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

Oct. 31, 2005.

Jacqueline A.M. Phillips, Annandale, VA, pro se.

R. Craig Lawrence, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Washington, DC, for Appellee.

Before GINSBURG, Chief Judge, and SENTELLE and BROWN, Circuit Judges.

*JUDGMENT*

PER CURIAM

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the brief filed by appellant. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C.Cir. Rule 34(j). It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s final judgment, filed May 6, 2005, be affirmed. The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the complaint. *See Ciralsky v. CIA,*355 F.3d 661, 671 (D.C.Cir.2004). The district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to review the judgment of District of Columbia courts or to compel those courts to act or not act. *See District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman,*460 U.S. 462, 486, 103 S.Ct. 1303, 75 L.Ed.2d 206 (1983). Moreover, this case is frivolous. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e); *see Neitzke v. Williams,*490 U.S. 319, 109 S.Ct. 1827, 104 L.Ed.2d 338 (1989) (a claim is frivolous under section 1915(e) if it “lacks an arguable basis either in law or fact”).

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 41(b); D.C.Cir. Rule 41.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Marco Antonio MARTIN-PARADA, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 04-41390.

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided March 7, 2006.

Paula Camille Offenhauser, Assistant U.S. Attorney, James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Brent Evan Newton, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before BARKSDALE, STEWART and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Marco Antonio Martin-Parada (Martin) appeals his sentence following his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry. He argues that the “felony” and “aggravated felony” provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1) and (b)(2) are unconstitutional in light of *Apprendi v. New Jersey,*530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). Martin’s constitutional challenge is foreclosed by *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998). Although Martin contends that *Almendarez-Torres*was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule *Almendarez-Torres*in light of *Apprendi,*we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that *Almendarez-Torres*remains binding. *See United States v. Garza-Lopez,*410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), *cert. denied,*— U.S.-, 126 S.Ct. 298, 163 L.Ed.2d 260 (2005). Martin properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed in light of *Almendarez-Torres*and circuit precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for further review.

Martin also argues that the district court reversibly erred under *United States v. Booker,*543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), by sentencing him pursuant to a mandatory application of the *885Sentencing Guidelines. The Government concedes that Martin has preserved this issue for appeal. The Government, however, has not shown beyond a reasonable doubt that the error was harmless. *See United States v. Walters,*418 F.3d 461, 463-64 (5th Cir.2005). Accordingly, Martin’s sentence is VACATED, and this case is REMANDED for resentencing.

CONVICTION AFFIRMED; SENTENCE VACATED; REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             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 24Holdings Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2003, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael Neame,
President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 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; 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/ Michael Neame
                                      ------------------------------------
                                       Michael Neame
                                       President and
                                       Chief Executive Officer

Dated:  August 14, 2003
### SUBCHAPTER I—INDIAN HEALTH PROFESSIONAL PERSONNEL
### §1085. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 89–655, §5, Oct. 14, 1966, 80 Stat. 905, which related to development and adoption of a tribal organizational document upon completion of Hoh base roll, was omitted from the Code as being of special and not general application.
### §5813. Report on overall assistance and economic cooperation strategy

#### (a) Requirement for submission

As soon as practicable after October 24, 1992, the coordinator designated pursuant to section 5812(a) of this title shall submit to the Congress a report on the overall assistance and economic cooperation strategy for the independent states of the former Soviet Union that is required to be developed pursuant to paragraph (1) of that section.

#### (b) Assistance plan

The report submitted pursuant to subsection (a) shall include a plan specifying—

(1) the amount of the funds authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 1993 by chapter 11 of part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 [22 U.S.C. 2295 et seq.] proposed to be allocated for each of the categories of activities authorized by section 498 of that Act [22 U.S.C. 2295] and to carry out section 5821 of this title (relating to American Business Centers), section 5823 of this title (relating to export promotion activities and capital projects), and subchapter III of this chapter (relating to the Democracy Corps);

(2) the amount of other funds made available for fiscal year 1993 to carry out the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 [22 U.S.C. 2151 et seq.] proposed to be allocated for assistance under that Act for the independent states of the former Soviet Union; and

(3) the amount of funds available for fiscal year 1993 under the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 [22 U.S.C. 2151 et seq.] that are proposed to be made to each agency to carry out activities for the independent states under that Act or this Act.

(Pub. L. 102–511, title I, §103, Oct. 24, 1992, 106 Stat. 3323.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, referred to in subsec. (b), is Pub. L. 87–195, Sept. 4, 1961, 75 Stat. 424, which is classified principally to chapter 32 (§2151 et seq.) of this title. Chapter 11 of part I of the Act is classified generally to part XI (§2295 et seq.) of subchapter I of chapter 32 of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 2151 of this title and Tables.

This Act, referred to in subsec. (b)(3), is Pub. L. 102–511, Oct. 24, 1992, 106 Stat. 3320, known as the Freedom for Russia and Emerging Eurasian Democracies and Open Markets Support Act of 1992 and also as the FREEDOM Support Act. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 5801 of this title and Tables.
February 2023

STORAGE ACRE-FEET COMPUTED* RELEASE - C.F.S.

DAY ELEV IN LAKE CHANGE INFLOW C.F.S. OUTLET SPILL

1,794

1 735.87 1,834 40 20 0 0

2 736.65 1,870 36 18 0 0

3 737.54 1,912 42 21 0 0

4 738.50 1,958 46 23 0 0

5 739.17 1,990 32 16 0 0

6 739.18 1,991 1 1 0 0

7 739.61 2,011 20 10 0 0

8 740.32 2,046 35 18 0 0

9 738.45 1,956 -90 21 66 0

10 735.04 1,796 -160 17 98 0

11 731.38 1,634 -162 14 96 0

12 727.30 1,464 -170 8 94 0

13 725.95 1,410 -54 9 36 0

14 726.63 1,437 27 14 0 0

15 727.31 1,465 28 14 0 0

16 727.94 1,491 26 13 0 0

17 728.56 1,516 25 13 0 0

18 729.11 1,539 23 12 0 0

19 729.64 1,561 22 11 0 0

20 730.18 1,584 23 12 0 0

21 730.64 1,603 19 10 0 0

22 731.10 1,622 19 10 0 0

23 731.59 1,643 21 11 0 0

24 732.30 1,674 31 16 0 0

25 732.93 1,702 28 14 0 0

26 734.01 1,749 47 24 0 0

27 735.26 1,806 57 29 0 0

28 736.74 1,874 68 34 0 0

TOTALS 80 433 390 0

ACRE-FEET 80 859 774 0

Comments: *Computed inflow is the sum of change in storage, releases and evaporation.

SUMMARY

Release (ACRE-FEET)

Outlet 774

Spill 0

Total 774

Historical Archive and Report Database

Spring Creek Debris Reservoir Daily 

Operations

Run Date: 3/28/2023
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

DAY ELEV

 499.92

 499.60

 499.22

 498.97

 499.05

 499.45

 499.62

 499.91

 499.93

 499.76

 499.73

 499.29

 499.34

 499.51

 499.83

 499.73

 500.45

 501.00

 501.43

 501.44

 501.09

 500.72

 500.48

 500.36

 500.08

 500.60

 500.26

 500.49

 55,218

 54,876

 54,471

 54,204

 54,289

 54,716

 54,898

 55,207

 55,228

 55,047

 55,015

 54,545

 54,599

 54,780

 55,122

 55,015

 55,791

 56,387

 56,861

 56,872

 56,486

 56,083

 55,823

 55,693

 55,390

 55,953

 55,585

 55,834

STORAGE

-768

-342

-405

-267

+85

+427

+182

+309

+21

-181

-32

-470

+54

+181

+342

-107

+776

+596

+474

+11

-386

-403

-260

-130

-303

+563

-368

+249

CHANGE

1,077

1,315

1,278

1,350

1,530

1,701

1,565

1,693

1,553

1,423

1,265

861

1,131

1,194

1,201

925

1,276

1,120

1,042

814

607

596

666

455

650

1,091

616

931

INFLOW

 1,462

 1,484

 1,480

 1,483

 1,483

 1,484

 433

 0

 0

 532

 1,279

 1,095

 1,097

 1,098

 1,025

 975

 881

 816

 800

 799

 799

 763

 796

 521

 803

 802

 802

 801

POWER

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 537

 150

 1,384

 884

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

SPILL

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 500

 1,384

 154

 95

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 33

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

OUTLET

 2

 3

 2

 2

 4

 2

 3

 3

 4

 3

 2

 3

 7

 5

 4

 4

 4

 4

 3

 9

 3

 3

 1

 0

 0

 5

 0

 4

C.F.S.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

FEBRUARY 2022 TULLOCH RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: 03/01/2022

RES.

EVAP

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S. 

TOTALS -152 30,926 25,793 2,955 2,166 89

ACRE-FEET -152 61,342 51,160 5,861 4,296 177

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

POWER 51,160

SPILL 5,861 61,317

 55,986

OUTLET 4,296

TOTAL 

NEW

MELONES

RELEASE (1)

 1,082

 1,313

 1,289

 1,377

 1,521

 1,678

 1,587

 1,602

 1,500

 1,413

 1,266

 853

 1,121

 1,181

 1,170

 951

 1,276

 1,116

 1,018

 798

 617

 592

 666

 420

 643

 1,084

 612

 914

 30,660

 60,814

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

(1) EVAPORATION RECORDS TAKEN FROM NEW MELONES PAN.
§ 1784.3 Member service. ( a ) Appointments to advisory committees shall be for 2-year terms unless otherwise specified in the charter or the appointing document. Terms of service normally coincide with duration of the committee charter. Members may be appointed to additional terms at the discretion of the authorized appointing official. ( 1 ) The term of the member of a council who has been appointed on the basis of his status as an elected official of general purpose government serving the people of the geographical area for which the council is established shall end upon that person's departure from such elective office if such departure occurs before his or her term of appointment or reappointment to the council would otherwise expire. However, the Secretary, in his discretion, may permit the member to complete the term in another vacant position on the council, provided that the member is qualified to represent one of the other categories of major citizens' interests set forth in the charter of the council;
( 2 ) A vacancy occurring by reason of removal, resignation, death, or departure from elective office shall be filled for the balance of the vacating member's term using the same method by which the original appointment was made;
( b ) Committee members advise and report only to the official(s) specified in the charter. Service as an advisor, however, does not limit the rights of a member acting as a private citizen or as a member or official of another organization.
( c ) The Secretary or the designated Federal officer may, after written notice, terminate the service of an advisor if, in the judgment of the Secretary or the designated Federal officer, such removal is in the public interest, or if the advisor— ( 1 ) No longer meets the requirements under which elected or appointed;
( 2 ) Fails or is unable to participate regularly in committee work; or
( 3 ) Has violated Federal law or the regulations of the Secretary.
( d ) For purposes of compensation, members of advisory committees shall be reimbursed for travel and per diem expenses when on advisory committee business, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5703. No reimbursement shall be made for expenses incurred by members of subgroups selected by established committees, except that the designated Federal officer may reimburse travel and per diem expenses to members of subgroups who are also members of the parent committee.
[45 FR 8177, Feb. 6, 1980, as amended at 47 FR 6429, Feb. 12, 1982; 47 FR 34389, Aug. 9, 1982; 51 FR 39529, Oct. 29, 1986; 52 FR 5284, Feb. 20, 1987; 60 FR 9958, Feb. 22, 1995]
### §1300d–10. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 92–555, title III, §306, as added Pub. L. 102–497, §17, Oct. 24, 1992, 106 Stat. 3261, which authorized the Attorney General to negotiate and settle any action brought to contest the constitutionality or validity of the distribution to the Sisseton and Wahpeton tribes, was omitted from the Code as being of special and not general application.
NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

_____________

No. 21-2519

_____________

AMERICAN PATRIOT AMBULANCE SERVICE INC., d/b/a Patriot Ambulance,

Appellant,

 

v.

ZOLL DATA SYSTEMS INC.

______________

On Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania

(D.C. No. 2:21-cv-01709)

District Judge: Paul S. Diamond

______________

Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) on

September 20, 2022

Before: CHAGARES, Chief Judge, McKEE,



and PORTER, Circuit Judges

(Opinion filed: December 22, 2022)

_____________________

OPINION

______________________

McKEE, Circuit Judge:



Judge McKee assumed senior status on October 21, 2022.

 This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not 

constitute binding precedent. 
2

American Patriot Ambulance Service Inc. (“American Patriot”) appeals the 

District Court’s denial of its motions to amend the judgment and to file an amended 

complaint.1 For the reasons set forth below, we will affirm.

The District Court granted Defendant Zoll Data System Inc.’s motion to dismiss 

the complaint with prejudice. Thereafter, American Patriot moved to amend the judgment 

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59 and also moved to file an amended 

complaint in the event the District Court granted the motion to amend the judgment. 

A district court may only grant a Rule 59 motion if the party seeking reconsideration 

demonstrates one of the following: “(1) an intervening change in the controlling law; (2) 

the availability of new evidence that was not available when the court granted the motion

. . . ; or (3) the need to correct a clear error of law or fact or to prevent manifest 

injustice.”2 American Patriot moved for reconsideration based on newly discovered 

evidence. The District Court denied American Patriot’s Rule 59 motion because the 

evidence American Patriot presented was not newly discovered.3

We will affirm the District Court’s denial of the Rule 59 motion because 

American Patriot has conceded that the evidence was not newly discovered. The 

1 We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review a district court’s order 

denying a motion for reconsideration for abuse of discretion. Long v. Atl. City Police 

Dep’t, 670 F.3d 436, 446 (3d Cir. 2012).

2 Max’s Seafood Cafe ex rel. Lou-Ann, Inc. v. Quinteros, 176 F.3d 669, 677 (3d Cir. 

1999).

3 App. 3a-4a. Alternatively, the District Court denied the Rule 59 motion as untimely. 

App. 3a. We need not address this alternative basis for denial. 
3

judgment dismissing the action with prejudice remains unaltered; therefore, we will also 

affirm the District Court’s denial of American Patriot’s motion to amend the complaint.
§ 725.457 Witnesses. ( a ) Witnesses at the hearing shall testify under oath or affirmation. The administrative law judge and the parties may question witnesses with respect to any matters relevant and material to any contested issue. Any party who intends to present the testimony of an expert witness at a hearing, including any physician, regardless of whether the physician has previously prepared a medical report, shall so notify all other parties to the claim at least 10 days before the hearing. The failure to give notice of the appearance of an expert witness in accordance with this paragraph, unless notice is waived by all parties, shall preclude the presentation of testimony by such expert witness.
( b ) No person shall be required to appear as a witness in any proceeding before an administrative law judge at a place more than 100 miles from his or her place of residence, unless the lawful mileage and witness fee for 1 day's attendance is paid in advance of the hearing date.
( c ) No person shall be permitted to testify as a witness at the hearing, or pursuant to deposition or interrogatory under § 725.458, unless that person meets the requirements of § 725.414(c). ( 1 ) In the case of a witness offering testimony relevant to the liability of the responsible operator, in the absence of extraordinary circumstances, the witness must have been identified as a potential hearing witness while the claim was pending before the district director.
( 2 ) In the case of a physician offering testimony relevant to the physical condition of the miner, such physician must have prepared a medical report. Alternatively, in the absence of a showing of good cause under § 725.456(b)(1) of this part, a physician may offer testimony relevant to the physical condition of the miner only to the extent that the party offering the physician's testimony has submitted fewer medical reports than permitted by § 725.414. Such physician's opinion shall be considered a medical report subject to the limitations of § 725.414.
( d ) A physician whose testimony is permitted under this section may testify as to any other medical evidence of record, but shall not be permitted to testify as to any medical evidence relevant to the miner's condition that is not admissible.
Exhibit 1

      Information on material fact (event, action) affecting financial and
                        economic activity of the issuer

Open Joint Stock  Company  Long-Distance  and  International  Telecommunications
Rostelecom

Place of location:  5 Delegatskaya St., 127091, Moscow
Issuer's code:  00124-A

Date of fact (event, action):  December 27, 2002
Code of fact (event, action):  0400124A27122002

Full  name of the  legal  entity,  in which  stake in the  shareholders  capital
belonging to the issuer has been changed: Open Joint-Stock Company RTComm.Ru

Location of the legal entity: 32 Nizhegorodskaya  Str.,  building 15, 8th floor,
Moscow,  109029 Postal  address of the legal entity:  32  Nizhegorodskaya  Str.,
building 15, 8th floor, Moscow, 109029

Stake of OJSC "Rostelecom" in the legal entity's shareholders capital before the
change:  25.00001% Stake of OJSC "Rostelecom" in the legal entity's shareholders
capital after the change: 31.1%

Deputy General Director -
Finance Director              [signed and sealed]           Vladimir I. Androsik

                                       5
<PAGE>

                                                                       Exhibit 2

      Information on material fact (event, action) affecting financial and
                        economic activity of the issuer


Open Joint Stock  Company  Long-Distance  and  International  Telecommunications
Rostelecom

Place of location:  5 Delegatskaya St., 127091, Moscow
Issuer's code:  00124-A

Date of fact (event, action):  December 27, 2002
Code of fact (event, action):  1800124A27122002

The governing  body of the issuer that has adopted a resolution  authorizing  to
execute the  transaction:  The Board of Directors of OJSC  Rostelecom  (Protocol
No. 8 December 10, 2002).

Full  name of the  legal  entity,  contracting  party in the  transaction:  Open
Joint-Stock Company RTComm.Ru
Location  of  the  legal  entity,  contracting  party  in  the  transaction:  32
Nizhegorodskaya  Str., building 15, 8th floor, Moscow,  109029
Postal address of the legal entity,  contracting  party in the  transaction:  32
Nizhegorodskaya Str., building 15, 8th floor, Moscow, 109029

Description:  signing of an  agreement on the purchase of 1 250 000 001 ordinary
shares of additional  share issue by OJSC  "RTComm.Ru"  at nominal value of 0,01
rubles per share with the total value of the transaction - 12 500 000 rubles.

Agreement entered into force: December 25, 2002

Deputy General Director -
Finance Director              [signed and sealed]           Vladimir I. Androsik

                                       6
§ 670.710 What placement services are provided for Job Corps students? ( a ) Job Corps placement services focus on placing program graduates in: ( 1 ) Full-time jobs that are related to their vocational training and that pay wages that allow for self-sufficiency;
( 2 ) Higher education; or
( 3 ) Advanced training programs, including apprenticeship programs.
( b ) Placement service levels for students may vary, depending on whether the student is a graduate or a former student.
( c ) Procedures relating to placement service levels are issued by the Secretary.
(June 15, 1943.)

#### Murray J. Moskowitz, Appellant, v. Benjamin Rothblum et al., Respondents.

No opinion. Hagarty, Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Lewis, JJ., concur.