alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1 Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-40137 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JOEL MOLINA,

Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. L-01-CR-1057-ALL

-------------------- October 29, 2002 Before JONES, DUHÉ, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: 1

Joel Molina appeals from his conviction by guilty plea of

illegal reentry. He argues, for the first time on appeal, that the

district cou r t’s failure to admonish him regarding the

applicability of the Sentencing Gu idelines and regarding the

unavailability of parole at his plea hearing constituted p lain

error. When an appellant allows an error in a guilty-plea colloquy

to pass without objection, this court reviews for plain error only.

United States v. Vonn

, 122 S. Ct. 1043, 1046 (2002). To establish2

plain error, an appellant bears the burden to show: (1) there is

a n error (2) that is clear or obvious and (3) that affects his

substantial rights. U nited States v. Calverley

, 37 F.3d 160,

162-64 (5th Cir. 1994) (en banc) (citing United States v. Olano

,

507 U.S. 725, 731-37 (1993)). If these factors are established,

the decision to correct the forfeited error is within the sound

discretion of the court, and the court will not exercise that

discretion unless the error seriousl y affects the fairness,

integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings. O lano

, 507

U.S. at 735-36.

The district court erred by failing to advise Molina that it

was required to consider the Se ntencing Guidelines when imposing

sentence and that it could depart from the guidelines under certain

circumstances. S ee F ED

. R. C RIM

. P. 11(c)(1). The district court

was not required to advise Molina that he was not eligible for

parole.

The district court’s error did not affect Molina’s substantial

rights. Molina has not shown any likelihood that he would have

pleaded not guilty and proceeded to trial had he been properly

advised. S ee United States v. Vasquez-Bernal

, 197 F.3d 169, 171

(5th Cir. 1999), cert. denied , 528 U.S. 1130 (2000).

Molina does not allege that his possible psychiatric

difficulties, which first came to light in his presentence report

(PSR), affected his ability to understand the proceedings, and it3

is not self-evident from the mention of the disorders in the PSR

that such might be the case. To the extent that Molina may seek to

argue that his disorders affected his mental state at the time of

his offense, any such argument is irrelevant to the validity of his

guilty plea.

AFFIRMED.
DATE

DRONE INFORMATION

COMMENTS REFERENCE KEY 

CR CALIBRATION REQUIRED

HZ HAZARD

PP PEOPLE AND PROPERTY

AT AIR TRAFFIC

MI MECHANICAL ISSUE

TI TECHNICAL ISSUE

PIC PILOT IN COMMAND

FLIGHT INFORMATION

IN OUT TOTAL

FLIGHT FLIGHT CONDITIONS OPERATIONAL ISSUES REMARKS & COMMENTS PILOT TIME

NO.

TOTAL HOURS THIS PAGE

TOTAL FORWARDED

TOTAL TO DATE

I CERTIFY THAT THE FOREGOING ENTRIES ARE TRUE AND CORRECT:BY: _____________________________ DATE: _______________________________________

HOEGGER COMMUNICATIONS PILOT LOG

Date: 5.15.2015 Revision: Original
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This  schedule  contains  summary  financial   infomration  extracted  from
     JACKAL INDUSTRIES, INC. June 30, 1996 financial statements and is qualified
     in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<CIK>                         0000894538
<NAME>                        JACKAL INDUSTRIES, INC.

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996

<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1996

<CASH>                                                   0
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                            0
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                         0
<PP&E>                                                   0
<DEPRECIATION>                                           0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                           0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                    0
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             1,000
<OTHER-SE>                                          (1,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                             0
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                         0
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                            0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                          0
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                      0
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                             0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                            0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            0
        


</TABLE>
### **CHAPTER 154—SPECIAL HABEAS CORPUS PROCEDURES IN CAPITAL CASES**

Sec.
2261.
Prisoners in State custody subject to capital sentence; appointment of counsel; requirement of rule of court or statute; procedures for appointment.
2262.
Mandatory stay of execution; duration; limits on stays of execution; successive petitions.
2263.
Filing of habeas corpus application; time requirements; tolling rules.
2264.
Scope of Federal review; district court adjudications.
2265.
Certification and judicial review.
2266.
Limitation periods for determining applications and motions.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

Pub. L. 109–177, title V, §507(c)(2), Mar. 9, 2006, 120 Stat. 251, substituted "Certification and judicial review" for "Application to State unitary review procedure" in item 2265.
#### § 128.301 Where must an application be filed?

An application for certification as a VOSB or SDVOSB must be electronically filed according to the instructions on SBA's website at *www.sba.gov.* Upon receipt of the Applicant's electronic submission, an acknowledgment message will be dispatched to the concern containing estimated processing time and other information.
Composite Exhibit 9

Case 0:20-cv-61404-DPG Document 1-10 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/13/2020 Page 1 of 4
Case 0:20-cv-61404-DPG Document 1-10 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/13/2020 Page 2 of 4
Case 0:20-cv-61404-DPG Document 1-10 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/13/2020 Page 3 of 4
Case 0:20-cv-61404-DPG Document 1-10 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/13/2020 Page 4 of 4
#### Iris W. Lord *v.*Eleftherios Stavrakis

*Kenneth E. Taylor,*in support of the petition.

*Ann E. Fisher,*jn opposition.

Decided March 12, 1986

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 6 Conn. App. 161, is denied.
### §1141. Coercive interference

It shall be unlawful for any person through the use of fraud, force, violence, or threat of the use of force or violence, to restrain, coerce, intimidate, or attempt to restrain, coerce, or intimidate any participant or beneficiary for the purpose of interfering with or preventing the exercise of any right to which he is or may become entitled under the plan, this subchapter, section 1201 of this title, or the Welfare and Pension Plans Disclosure Act [29 U.S.C. 301 et seq.]. Any person who willfully violates this section shall be fined $100,000 or imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both.

(Pub. L. 93–406, title I, §511, Sept. 2, 1974, 88 Stat. 895; Pub. L. 109–280, title VI, §623(a), Aug. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 979.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Welfare and Pension Plans Disclosure Act, referred to in text, is Pub. L. 85–836, Aug. 28, 1958, 72 Stat. 997, which was classified generally to chapter 10 (§301 et seq.) of this title, and was repealed by Pub. L. 93–406, title I, §111(a)(1), Sept. 2, 1974, 88 Stat. 851 (Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974), effective Jan. 1, 1975. Such section 111(a)(1) also provided that the Welfare and Pension Plans Disclosure Act should continue to apply to any conduct and events which occurred before Jan. 1, 1975 (see section 1031 of this title). For complete classification of the Welfare and Pension Plans Disclosure Act to the Code prior to such repeal, see Tables.

#### Amendments

2006—Pub. L. 109–280 substituted "$100,000" for "$10,000" and "10 years" for "one year".

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 2006 Amendment

Pub. L. 109–280, title VI, §623(b), Aug. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 979, provided that: "The amendments made by this section [amending this section] shall apply to violations occurring on and after the date of the enactment of this Act [Aug. 17, 2006]."

#### Regulations

Secretary authorized, effective Sept. 2, 1974, to promulgate regulations wherever provisions of this subchapter call for the promulgation of regulations, see section 1031 of this title.
-       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2023-09-05T07:50:49-0400
      - Government Publishing Office, Washington, DC 20401
      - Government Publishing Office
      - Government Publishing Office attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by Government Publishing Office
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsBeam rider for an Articulated Robot Manipulator (ARM) accurate positioning of long flexible manipulatorsLaser beam positioning and beam rider modules were incorporated into the long hollow flexible segment of an articulated robot manipulator (ARM). Using a single laser beam, the system determined the position of the distal ARM endtip, with millimetric precision, in six degrees of freedom, at distances of up to 10 meters. Preliminary designs, using space rated technology for the critical systems, of a two segmented physical ARM, with a single and a dual degree of freedom articulation, were developed, prototyped, and tested. To control the positioning of the physical ARM, an indirect adaptive controller, which used the mismatch between the position of the laser beam under static and dynamic conditions, was devised. To predict the behavior of the system and test the concept, a computer simulation model was constructed. A hierarchical artificially intelligent real time ADA operating system program structure was created. The software was designed for implementation on a dedicated VME bus based Intel 80386 administered parallel processing multi-tasking computer system.Document ID19900017265Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsMalachowski, M. J.*(Cellulose Conversion Enterprises Berkeley, CA, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateApril 1, 1990Subject CategoryCyberneticsReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.26:185151NASA-CR-185151Accession Number90N26581Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NAS3-25917Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19900017265.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-10814 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus FLORENCIO ZUNIGA-SOLIS, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 6:00-CR-33-ALL-C

-------------------- February 21, 2002 Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Florencio Zuniga-Solis appeals the 51-month term of imprisonment imposed following his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United States after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Zuniga-Solis contends that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) define separate offenses.
He argues that the aggravated felony conviction that resulted in his increased sentence was an element of the offense under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) that should have been alleged in his indictment. Zuniga-Solis notes that he pleaded guilty to anNo. 01-10814 -2- indictment which recited only facts and elements supporting a charge of simple reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), and argues that his sentence exceeds the two-year maximum term of imprisonment which may be imposed for that offense. Zuniga-Solis acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by the Supreme Court’s decision in Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224 (1998), but seeks to preserve the issue for Supreme Court review in light of the decision in Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000). Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres

. See Apprendi , 530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit , 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied , 531 U.S. 1202 (2001). ZunigaSolis’s argument is foreclosed. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. In lieu of filing an appellee’s brief, the Government has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal. The Government’s motion to dismiss is DENIED. However, in light of our decision to affirm the district court’s judgment, the Government need not file an appellee’s brief. AFFIRMED; MOTION TO DISMISS DENIED.
# Úřední věstník C 290/23.

| | ISSN 1725-5163 |
| --- | --- |
| Úřední věstník
  Evropské unie | C 290 |
| | |
| České vydání | Informace a oznámení | Svazek 4823. listopadu 2005 |

ISSN 1725-5163

Úřední věstník

Evropské unie

C 290

České vydání

Informace a oznámení

Svazek 4823. listopadu 2005

---

| Oznámeníč. | Obsah | Strana |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Informace |
| | Komise |
| 2005/C 290/1 | Směnné kurzy vůči euro | 1 |

Oznámeníč.

Obsah

Strana

I   Informace

Komise

2005/C 290/1

Směnné kurzy vůči euro

1

| CS | |
| --- | --- |

CS

---

I Informace

Komise

| 23.11.2005 | CS | Úřední věstník Evropské unie | C 290/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.11.2005

CS

Úřední věstník Evropské unie

C 290/1

---

Směnné kurzy vůči euro (1)

22. listopadu 2005

(2005/C 290/01)

1 euro=

| | měna | směnný kurz |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | americký dolar | 1,1701 |
| JPY | japonský jen | 139,72 |
| DKK | dánská koruna | 7,4605 |
| GBP | britská libra | 0,68465 |
| SEK | švédská koruna | 9,5426 |
| CHF | švýcarský frank | 1,5471 |
| ISK | islandská koruna | 73,82 |
| NOK | norská koruna | 7,8505 |
| BGN | bulharský lev | 1,9555 |
| CYP | kyperská libra | 0,5736 |
| CZK | česká koruna | 29,270 |
| EEK | estonská koruna | 15,6466 |
| HUF | maďarský forint | 254,18 |
| LTL | litevský litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | lotyšský latas | 0,6960 |
| MTL | maltská lira | 0,4293 |
| PLN | polský zlotý | 3,9772 |
| RON | rumunský lei | 3,6642 |
| SIT | slovinský tolar | 239,52 |
| SKK | slovenská koruna | 38,700 |
| TRY | turecká lira | 1,6030 |
| AUD | australský dolar | 1,5965 |
| CAD | kanadský dolar | 1,3850 |
| HKD | hongkongský dolar | 9,0726 |
| NZD | novozélandský dolar | 1,7052 |
| SGD | singapurský dolar | 1,9907 |
| KRW | jihokorejský won | 1 221,99 |
| ZAR | jihoafrický rand | 7,7656 |
| CNY | čínský juan | 9,4590 |
| HRK | chorvatská kuna | 7,4030 |
| IDR | indonéská rupie | 11 771,21 |
| MYR | malajsijský ringgit | 4,423 |
| PHP | filipínské peso | 63,630 |
| RUB | ruský rubl | 33,7510 |
| THB | thajský baht | 48,241 |

měna

směnný kurz

USD

americký dolar

1,1701

JPY

japonský jen

139,72

DKK

dánská koruna

7,4605

GBP

britská libra

0,68465

SEK

švédská koruna

9,5426

CHF

švýcarský frank

1,5471

ISK

islandská koruna

73,82

NOK

norská koruna

7,8505

BGN

bulharský lev

1,9555

CYP

kyperská libra

0,5736

CZK

česká koruna

29,270

EEK

estonská koruna

15,6466

HUF

maďarský forint

254,18

LTL

litevský litas

3,4528

LVL

lotyšský latas

0,6960

MTL

maltská lira

0,4293

PLN

polský zlotý

3,9772

RON

rumunský lei

3,6642

SIT

slovinský tolar

239,52

SKK

slovenská koruna

38,700

TRY

turecká lira

1,6030

AUD

australský dolar

1,5965

CAD

kanadský dolar

1,3850

HKD

hongkongský dolar

9,0726

NZD

novozélandský dolar

1,7052

SGD

singapurský dolar

1,9907

KRW

jihokorejský won

1 221,99

ZAR

jihoafrický rand

7,7656

CNY

čínský juan

9,4590

HRK

chorvatská kuna

7,4030

IDR

indonéská rupie

11 771,21

MYR

malajsijský ringgit

4,423

PHP

filipínské peso

63,630

RUB

ruský rubl

33,7510

THB

thajský baht

48,241

---

(1)

Zdroj: referenční směnné kurzy jsou publikovány ECB.

---
USGS Publications Warehouse - Citation View 

USGS Publications Warehouse 

1 of 3 
Publication Citation

Online Document Versions

View index pageView document

USGS Store

Currently unavailable through the USGSStore.

Publication Type USGS Numbered SeriesTitle Alaska resource data file; Tyonek QuadrangleAuthor Millholland, Madelyn; Riehle, J. R.Year 1998Series Open-File ReportSeries Number 98-525Edition -Language ENGLISHPublisher U.S. Geological Survey,ISSN 0094-9140Description 63 p. :map ;28 cm.USGS Library CallNumber (200) R29o no.98-525

USGS Publications Warehouse 

2 of 3 
Accessibility FOIA Privacy Policies and Notices

U.S. Department of the Interior | U.S. Geological SurveyURL: http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/Page Contact Information: Contact the Pubs Warehouse TeamPage Last modified: 12/01/2011 08:27:39

USGS Publications Warehouse 3 of 3
§ 3486.3 Enforcement. ( a ) If the authorized officer determines that an operator/lessee has failed to comply with the rules of this part, the terms and conditions of the Federal lease or license, the requirements of approved exploration or resource recovery and protection plans, or orders of the authorized officer, and such noncompliance does not threaten immediate and serious damage to the mine, the deposit being mined, valuable ore-bearing mineral deposits or other resources, or affect the royalty provisions of the rules of this part, the authorized officer shall serve a notice of noncompliance upon the operator/lessee by delivery in person to him or his agent, or by certified mail, return receipt requested, addressed to the operator/lessee at his last known address. Failure of the operator/lessee to take action in accordance with the notice of noncompliance within the time limits specified by the authorized officer shall be grounds for cessation of operations upon notice by the authorized officer. The authorized officer may also recommend to the authorized officer the initiation of action for cancellation of the Federal lease or license and forfeiture of any Federal lease bonds.
( b ) The notice of noncompliance shall specify in what respect(s) the operator/lessee has failed to comply with the rules of this part, the terms and conditions of the Federal lease or license, the requirements of approved exploration or resource recovery and protection plans, or orders of the authorized officer, and shall specify the action that must be taken to correct such noncompliance and the time limits within which such action must be taken.
( c ) If, in the judgment of the authorized officer, an operator/lessee is conducting activities which fail to comply with the rules of this part, the terms and conditions of the Federal lease or license, the requirements of approved exploration or resource recovery and protection plans, or orders of the authorized officer, and/or which threaten immediate and serious damage to the mine, the deposit being mined, valuable ore-bearing mineral deposits, or, regarding exploration, the environment, the authorized officer shall order the immediate cessation of such activities without prior notice of noncompliance.
( d ) A written report shall be submitted by the operator/lessee to the authorized officer when such noncompliance has been corrected. Upon concurrence by the authorized officer that the conditions which warranted the issuance of a notice or order of noncompliance have been corrected, the authorized officer shall so notify the operator/lessee in writing.
( e ) The authorized officer shall enforce requirements of SMCRA only if he finds a violation, condition, or practice that he determines to be an emergency situation for which an authorized representative of the Secretary is required to act pursuant to 30 CFR 843.11 and 843.12.
[47 FR 33179, July 30, 1982; 47 FR 53366, Nov. 26, 1982. Redesignated at 48 FR 41589, Sept. 16, 1983]
Exhibit
32(b)





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED


PURSUANT
TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002, OF THE


CHIEF
FINANCIAL OFFICER




In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Rocky Brands, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2010, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, James
E. McDonald, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial 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/ James E. McDonaldJames
      E. McDonald, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial
      OfficerAugust
      3, 2010
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk March 29, 2010

p0322 

# Order

March 29, 2010

139752

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 139752 COA: 290782 Wayne CC: 81-006517 TIMOTHY KINCAID, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the A ugust 6, 2009 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, a nd it is DENIED, because the defendant has
failed to meet the burden of establishi ng entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).