alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Ida Gorin et al., Respondents, v. John B. Arnold, Appellant, et al., Defendants.

Present — Crosby, P. J., Taylor, Dowling, Harris and McCurn, JJ.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan GONZALEZ-RUIZ, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 05-20034.

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided March 13, 2006.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern Dis*921trict of Texas, Houston, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.

Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Laura Fletcher Leavitt, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Juan Gonzalez-Ruiz (Gonzalez) appeals his conviction and sentence for illegal reentry following deportation. Gonzalez argued that the district court committed reversible error 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 Sentencing Guidelines. The Government concedes that Gonzalez 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, Gonzalez’s sentence is vacated, and this case is remanded for resentencing.

Gonzalez also argues that the district court erred in ordering, as a condition of supervised release, that he cooperate with collection of a DNA sample. Gonzalez acknowledges that this court determined this issue is not ripe for review in *United States v. Riascos-Cuenu,*428 F.3d 1100, 1102 (5th Cir.2005), *petition for cert, filed,*(Jan. 9, 2006) (No. 05-8662), but raises it to preserve it for further review. Accordingly, this issue is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Gonzalez’s constitutional challenge to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) is foreclosed by *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998). Although Gonzalez 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). Gonzalez 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.

CONVICTION AFFIRMED; SENTENCE VACATED; REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING; APPEAL DISMISSED IN PART.

*

 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.
### §1505. Cross references

**(1) For suspension of running of statute of limitations when notice in respect of a deficiency is mailed to one corporation, see section 6503(a)(1).**

**(2) For allocation of income and deductions of related trades or businesses, see section 482.**

(Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 370.)
- Skip to Primary Navigation
    - Skip to Main Content
    - Skip to Footer

        -   
        -   
        -   
        -   
        -   
        -   
        -   

      -  Water & Power          - Dams
        - Powerplants
        - Projects
        - Agrimet/Hydromet
        - Water Operations 
      -  Resources & Research          - Programs
        - Technical Service Center
        - Research & Development
        - Reclamation Manual
        - Reclamation Information Sharing Environment (RISE)
        - Environmental Resources/Reports
        - Library 
      -  About Us          - Mission
        - Fact Sheet
        - Commissioner
        - Addresses/Contacts
        - Organizational Chart
        - Leadership Bios
        - Employment
        - Contact 
      -  Recreation & Public Use          - Find Recreation
        - Recreation.gov
        - Public Use 
      -  News & Multimedia          - News Releases
        - News Stories
        - Speeches
        - Congressional Testimony
        - Fact Sheets
        - Photos
        - Multimedia
        - Social Media 

# California-Great Basin

Welcome to the Bureau of Reclamation California-Great Basin

            - Reclamation
            - California-Great Basin
            - CVP
            - Ratesetting
            - CVP Annual Ratebooks & Schedules
            - CVP Ratebooks - Irrigation, 2006

Region 10              - Region 10 Home
              - About Us
              - Area Offices
              - Central Valley Project (CVP)                  - About the CVP
                - Water Info Links
                - Ratesetting
                - Projects/Activities
                - Consultation on the Coordinated Long-Term Operation          of the CVP and SWP
                - Laws/Regs/Links
                - Financial Information 
                - Long-Term Water Transfer Program
                - Central Valley Project Improvement Act (CVPIA) 
              - Programs & Activities
              - Projects & Facilities
              - Doing Business with Reclamation
              - Public Affairs 
              - Employment
              - Recreation
              - Site Index
              - Contact Us

## CVP Ratebooks - Irrigation, 2006

*Note:  Documents in Portable Document Format (PDF) require Adobe Acrobat Reader 5.0 or higher to view, download Adobe Acrobat Reader*
*Last Updated: 8/6/21*

## More Information about the Bureau of Reclamation

## Stay in Touch

            -   
            -   
            -   
            -   
            -   
            -   
            -   

            - Contact Us
            - Site Index
            - Accessibility
            - Disclaimer
            - DOI
            - FOIA
            - No Fear Act
            - Notices
            - Privacy Policy
            - Quality of Information
            - Recreation.gov
            - USA.gov
#### Liberty Mutual Insurance Company v. J. J. Fisher Company, Inc.

Present—■ Martin, P. J., Townley, Glemnon, Untermyer and Dore, JJ.
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 Health and Human Services

###### Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Price Connor, Ph.D., NIOSH Health Scientist, 1600 Clifton Road, NE, Mailstop E-20, Atlanta, Georgia 30333, telephone 404/498-2511, fax 404/498-2569. 

                        The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been delegated the authority to sign                         **Federal Register**                         notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities for both CDC and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.                     

Dated: September 20, 2004. 

Alvin Hall, 

Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 

[FR Doc. 04-22347 Filed 10-4-04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4163-19-P
#### Lylese Sands, Respondent, v. Austin L. Sands, Sr., Appellant.

Order of Domestic Belations Court of the City of New York (Family Court), County of Kings, directing, as amended, appellant to pay $50 a month toward the support of a grandchild, reversed on the law and the facts and the proceeding dismissed, without costs. There is no proof in this record that the child is likely to become a public charge or that its parents are without means or are unable to earn sufficient to support the child. (N. Y. City Dom. Bel. Ct. Act, § 101, subd. 2; L. 1933, ch. 482.) In the absence of such proof a grandparent, whose statutory liability is secondary (N. Y. City Dom. Bel. Ct. Act, § 101, subd. 3), may not be required to make payments for the support of such a grandchild. *(Matter of LarTcin*v. *Larkin,*262 App. Div. 868.) Lewis, P. J., Cars-well, Johnston, Adel and Sneed, JJ., concur.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Miami Division

Case Number: 20-21773-CIV-MORENO

GUSTAVO PEREZ, 

Plaintiff,

vs.

FLORIDA BEAUTY FLORA, INC., a Florida 

for Profit Corporation, RONEN KOUBI, an 

individual, and RALPH MILMAN, an 

individual,

Defendants.

_________________________________________/

ORDER OF REFERRAL TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE GOODMAN REGARDING 

Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment and Incorporated Memorandum of Law 

THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon a sua sponte review of the record.

PURSUANT to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)A) and the Magistrate Judge Rules of the S.D. Fla. 

L.R., the above-captioned Cause is referred to United States Magistrate Judge Jonathan 

Goodman to submit a Report and Recommendation to this Court on Defendants' Motion for

Summary Judgment and Incorporated Memorandum of Law (D.E. No. 25, filed on January 11, 

2021. The Court notes that this Cause is currently scheduled for trial for the two-week period 

beginning April 26, 2021.

All motions for extension or enlargement of time that relate to such motion are included 

with this referral. Any applications for extension or modification of pretrial deadlines or the trial 

date shall be made by the District Judge.

It shall be the responsibility of the respective parties in this case to note on all motions and 

submissions pertaining to the referenced matters the name of Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 29th of January 2021.

______________________________________

FEDERICO A. MORENO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:20-cv-21773-FAM Document 37 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/29/2021 Page 1 of 2
2

Copies furnished to: United States Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman, Counsel of Record

Case 1:20-cv-21773-FAM Document 37 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/29/2021 Page 2 of 2
11BirectoranbjfacultpofWnmannebl)ebirlealltubomtbesepresentsmapcome,WbereasWillAdriancompleteba42bourintensibesbortcourse.WeunbertbeautboritpJnbestebinus,boberebpconferaQCertificate·ofQCompletioninUAVBasicFlightTrainingStudenthascompleteda16hourgroundschool,received10hoursofTraininginasmallUAVsjmulatorand16hoursofflighttrainingDean,SchoolofFlightTrainingProvost4803803v1(63686.1)...,.'.'·'
#### Harry E. WALKUP, Jr., Petitioner—Appellant, v. William HAINES, Warden, Respondent—Appellee.

No. 05-7627.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Feb. 23, 2006.

Decided: March 3, 2006.

Harry E. Walkup, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Dawn Ellen Warfield, Office of the Attorney General of West Virginia, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Harry E. Walkup, Jr., filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition challenging his West Virginia state court convictions. He seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and denying Walkup’s motion to excuse exhaustion of state court remedies, granting Respondent’s motion to dismiss with respect to Walkup’s motion to excuse exhaustion, and giving Walkup twenty days to file an amended § 2254 petition containing only exhausted claims or to withdraw his § 2254 petition in its entirety.* 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 Walkup seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we 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*

*

 The district court entered its order on September 30, 2005. Walkup has neither filed an amended § 2254 petition nor withdrawn his § 2254 petition, and no final order has been issued.
EXHIBIT 32.

                Certifications Pursuant to U. S. C. Section 1350

         The  undersigned,  who are the chief  executive  officer  and the chief
financial officer of Community Bankshares,  Inc., each hereby certifies that, to
the best of his  knowledge,  the  accompanying  Form  10-Q of the  issuer  fully
complies  with the  requirements  of Sections  13(a) or 15(d) of the  Securities
Exchange  Act of 1934,  and that  information  contained  in the  report  fairly
presents,  in all material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and results of
operations of the issuer.

May 12, 2008


/s/ Samuel L. Erwin
--------------------------------------------
Samuel L. Erwin
Chief Executive Officer


/s/ William W. Traynham
---------------------------------------------
William W. Traynham
President and Chief Financial Officer
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                             WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

                                    FORM 8-K
                                 CURRENT REPORT
                       PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
                       THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

         Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported): May 23, 2002

                                United Pan-Europe
                               Communications N.V.
             (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

                                 The Netherlands
                 (State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation)

                                    000-25365
                            (Commission File Number)

                                   98-0191997
                     (I.R.S. Employer Identification Number)

                                Boeing Avenue 53
                             1119 PE, Schiphol Rijk
                                 The Netherlands
              (Address and zip code of principal executive offices)

                                (31) 20-778-9840
              (Registrant's telephone number, including area code)
<PAGE>

Item 5.  Other Events

     On May 23, 2002, United Pan-Europe Communications N.V. (the "Company")
issued a press release confirming that its ordinary shares, which currently
trade on the Nasdaq National Market in the form of American Depositary Receipts
("ADRs") will, as expected, trade on the Over The Counter Bulletin Board ("OTC
BB") from the opening of business on May 24, 2002. The Company's ticker symbol
on the OTC BB will remain "UPCOY." The full text of the press release is
attached as Exhibit 99.1 hereto.

Item 7.  Exhibits

         Exhibit Number       Description

         99.1                 Press Release dated May 23, 2002.
<PAGE>

                                   SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned hereunto duly authorized.



                                       UNITED PAN-EUROPE COMMUNICATIONS N.V.

                                       By: /s/ ANTON A.M. TUIJTEN
                                          --------------------------------------
                                       Name:  Anton A.M. Tuijten
                                       Title:  Member of the Board of Management
                                               and General Counsel

Dated: May 23, 2002
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Anthony Bravata, Appellant.

In our opinion the proof did not establish beyond a reasonable doubt defendant’s guilt of the crime charged. Carswell, Acting P. J., Johnston, Adel, Wenzel and MacCrate, JJ., concur.
#### The People of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Edward Huff, Defendant-Appellant.

(No. 57460;

First District (2nd Division)

May 28, 1974.

*926James J. Doherty, Public Defender, of Chicago (Bradley Harris and Justine I. Knipper, Assistant Public Defenders, of counsel), for appellant.

Bernard Carey, State’s Attorney, of Chicago (Kenneth L. Gillis and Barry Rand Elden, Assistant State’s Attorneys, of counsel), for the People.

Opinion by

Mr. JUSTICE DOWNING.
,OS74)it.W-iUNITEDSTATESENVIRONMENTALPROTECTIONAGENCY0REGIONIX75HawthorneStreetSanFrancisco,CA94105-3901December23,2011Mr.EricPorterU.S.FishandWildlifeOffice6010HiddenValleyRoadCarlsbad,California92011-Re:RequestforFormalConsultationunderSection7ofFederalEndangeredSpeciesActforProposedPioPicoEnergyCenterDearMr.Porter:Bythisletter,theUnitedStatesEnvironmentalProtectionAgency,Region9(“Region9”)requestsinitiationofformalconsultationunderSection7ofthefederalEndangeredSpeciesAct(“ESA”)fortheproposedPioPicoEnergy.Center(“PPEC”),tobelocatedinanunincorporatedareaofSanDiegoCounty,CaliforniaknownasOtayMesa.PioPicoEnergyCenter,LLChasappliedtoRegion9foraPreventionofSignificantDeterioration(“PSD”)permitasrequiredbyPartCoftheCleanAirActandregulationsat40C.F.R.

§52.21.Region9isresponsibleforcomplyingwithESASection7requirementswithrespecttofederalPSDpermitting,andmustensurethatissuanceofthePSDpermitforthePPECisnotlikelytojeopardizethecontinuedexistenceofanyFederally-listedendangeredorthreatenedspecies,orresultinthedestrncionoradversemodificationofcriticalhabitatofsuchspecies.TheapplicantandRegion9haveparticipatedininformalconsultationwithU.S.FishandWildlifeService(“FWS”)regardingPPEC.ThisrequestforformalconsultationismadeinaccordancewithourdiscussionwithyouonOctober26,2011.FWSindicatedthatfbrmalconsultationwouldberequiredbecausenitrogendepositionfi-omthePPECmayaffectthreefederallylistedspecies:theOtayTarplant(Deinandraconjugens),theQuino(.‘heckerspotButterfly(Euphydiyasedithaquino),andtheCoastalCalifornia(Inatcatcher(Folioptilacafl/àrnicacali/örnica).Theapplicant,actingthroughitsauthorizedrepresentativesincludingURSCorp.,compiledandsubmittedaBiologicalAssessment(“BA”)toRegion9onDecember1,2011.TheBAprovidesinfbrmationabouttheprojectanditseffectsonlistedspeciesandtheircriticalhabitat,aswellasproposedconservationmeasuresintendedtominimizeandcompensateforprojectnitrogendepositioneffectsontheOtayTarplant,QuinoCheckerspotButterfly,andCoastalCalifhrniaGnatcatcheranddesignatedcriticalhabitatforthesespecies.WesentyouacopyoftheBAtodayviaemail;ahardcopyisavailableuponrequest.WhiletheBApreparedbytheapplicantconcludesthatEPA’sproposedactionisnoTlikeiytoadverselyaffecttheFederally-listedspeciesatissueorcriticalhabitat,Region9cannotdeterminethatthatconclusionisappropriateatthistimebasedontheinFormationprovidedinPrintedonRecycledPapertheBA.WethereforerequesttheinitiationofformalconsultationonEPA’sproposedPSI)permittingactionforthePPECtoaddresspotentialimpactstotheOtayTarpiant,theQuinoCheckerspotButterfly,andtheCoastalCaliforniaGnatcatcher,andrequestthatwereceiveacopyofthedraftBiologicalOpinionpreparedaspartofthatconsultationforourreview.Welookforwardtoworkingwithyouonthismatter.Ifyouhaveanyquestions,pleasehaveyourstaffcontactRogerKoimofourAirPermitsOfficeat(415)972-3973;oryoumaycontactmeat(415)972-3974.Sincerely,4cGerardoC.RiosChief,AirPermitsOfficecc:DavidJenkins,PioPicoEnergyCenter,LLC(viaemail)LincolnHulse,URS(viaemail)SteveHill,SierraResearch(viaemail)AnnCrisp,CaliforniaEnergyCommission(viaemail)
#### Charles Ehrlicher, Appellant, v. Sanford C. Peters, Respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. All concurred.
**Exhibit10.7**

 

**EMPLOYMENTAGREEMENT STOCK OPTION**

 

This EmploymentAgreement Stock Option (Stock Option #EO27), dated as of July 18, 2003, is by and between **MediCor Ltd. and its subsidiaries** (collectively,the “Corporation”), and **Thomas R. Moyes**(the “Employee”).

 

Effective as ofJuly 18, 2003, the Employee will receive an Employment Option (the “Option”) of**ONE HUNDRED TWENTY****THOUSAND(120,000)** shares of the Corporation’s Common Stock, at a compositeprice of **THREE DOLLARS AND EIGHTY****CENTS($3.80)** per share to be vested as follows: **25% PER YEAR FOR EACH FULL YEAR OFEMPLOYMENT FROM THE EMPLOYMENT DATE.**

 

The Option will expireseven (7) years from the Employment Date identified in the EmploymentAgreement, or upon termination of employment (as herein provided), whicheverfirst occurs.  The Option is not a partof the Corporation’s Stock Compensation Plan (if any), is not transferable andmay be exercised only by the Employee, the Employee’s executor or spouse.  Continued employment with the Corporation isa condition of the vesting of the Options. The Option may be exercised within six (6) months of the termination ofemployment of the Employee, unless the Employee’s employment is terminated “ForCause” as provided in Section 5 of the Employment Agreement, in which case theun-vested portion of the Option terminates at the date of termination of theEmployee.  The Employee will executesuch other documents and make such representations as may be required forsecurities or other regulatory compliance.

 

The number ofshares and the option price subject to the Option shall be adjusted for anystock dividend, split-up, combination or exchange of shares, or any othersimilar change.

 

In the event of aChange of Control in ownership of the Corporation (defined for the purpose ofthis Agreement as the purchase of more than fifty percent (50%) of theCorporation’s outstanding shares by a shareholder who, at the date of thisAgreement is not a shareholder of the Corporation), all shares of the Optionshall vest and be available for purchase within thirty (30) days ofnotification by the Corporation to the Employee of the Change of Control.

 

**INWITNESS WHEREOF**, the parties hereto have executed thisEmployment Agreement Stock Option to be effective as of the 18th dayof July****2003.

 
|   | **CORPORATION:** |
|--------|------------------|
|   | **MediCor Ltd.** |
|   |             |
|   | By:              |   |   |
|   |             | Donald K. McGhan |
|   | Title:           | Chairman of the Board |
|   |             |
|   | **EMPLOYEE:**    |
|   |             |
|   |             |   |
|   |             | Thomas R. Moyes |   |
|        |                  |  |  |  |  |

 

1

----
#### Ludwig Meyer v. Dayton Hedges.

Motion deified, with ten dollars costs. Present — Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Clarke and Scott, JJ.
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

 220

 215

 216

 215

 212

 223

 218

 207

 209

 207

 197

 199

 174

 173

 181

 169

 169

 183

 166

 166

 162

 153

 154

 151

 144

 144

 155

 148

 146

 148

 168

 193

 193

 189

 195

 196

 194

 199

 190

 181

 173

 168

 160

 157

 156

 156

 157

 156

 157

 154

 154

 138

 139

 139

 131

 133

 131

 129

 130

 136

 135

 140

 207

 207

 207

 209

 208

 208

 206

 200

 199

 193

 187

 176

 170

 165

 165

 164

 163

 163

 161

 159

 152

 146

 147

 142

 138

 139

 139

 140

 142

 143

 147

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

JULY 2003 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: August 7, 2003

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

VICTORIA CANAL ON THE MIDDLE RIVER