alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

No. 04

- 13

- 00628

- CR

EX PARTE Nelson Leon KING

From the 175th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012CR9642

Honorable Mary D. Roman, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE BARNARD

, JUSTICE MARTINEZ , AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is

AFFIRMED. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

SIGNED January 8, 2014.

_____________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice
* Senior District Judge of the Western District of Louisiana,

sitting by designation.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 91-2432

LAWRENCE M. BAREFORD, Individually, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants,

versus

GENERAL DYNAMICS CORPORATION, ET AL., Defendants-Appellees,

and

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Intervenor-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

( October 14, 1992 )

On Petition for Rehearing and Suggestion

for Rehearing En Banc

(Opinion September 16, 1992, 5th Cir.

1992, --- F.2d ---)

Before HIGGINBOTHAM and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges, and HUNTER, * District Judge.

PER CURIAM:

We vacate part V of our opinion in Bareford v. General

Dynamics Corp.

, --- F.2d

--- (5th Cir. 1992), and substitute the

following therefor:2

Plaintiffs challenge on First Amendment grounds the district

court order to the parties not to communicate any information about

the litigation to anyone except essential legal staff. We are

persuaded that the maintenance of this order is a matter that must

be remanded to the district court to examine in the first instance

in light of this Court's rulings.

In all other respects, the order of the district court,

dismissing plaintiffs' claims, is AFFIRMED.

The Petition for Rehearing is DENIED and no member of this

panel nor Judge in regular active service on the Court having

requested that the Court be polled on rehearing en banc, (Federal

Rules of Appellate Procedure and Local Rule 35) the Suggestion for

Rehearing En Banc is DENIED.
§ 201.5 Attendance fees and mileage. ( a ) *Deponents and witnesses.* Any person compelled to appear in person to depose or testify in response to a subpoena shall be paid the same fees and mileage as are paid witnesses in the courts of the United States: Provided, that salaried employees of the United States summoned to depose or testify as to matters related to their public employment, irrespective of at whose instance they are summoned, shall be paid in accordance with applicable Government regulations.
( b ) *Responsibility.* The fees and mileage referred to in this section shall be paid by the party at whose instance deponents or witnesses appear: Provided, that when it is the Commission, one or more Commissioners, or one of its employees at whose instance deponents or witnesses appear, such fees and mileage shall be paid by the Commission.
[41 FR 17710, Apr. 27, 1976]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0001046135
<NAME> DIVERSIFIED HOLDINGS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                            1000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    1000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       5000000
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      1000
<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>                                      0.0
        

</TABLE>
#### Andrew Wheeler, Jr., an Infant, by Andrew Wheeler, His Guardian ad Litem, et al., Respondents, v. National Transportation Co., Inc., et al., Appellants.

Present — Martin, P. J., Glennon, Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.; Cohn and Callahan, JJ., dissent and vote to affirm.
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION I

 475 Allendale Road

 King of Prussia, PA 19406

No. I-01-037 June 19, 2001

CONTACT: Diane Screnci, (610) 337-5330/e-mail: dps@nrc.gov

Neil A. Sheehan, (610) 337-5331/e-mail: nas@nrc.gov

NRC TO MEET WITH CONSTELLATION NUCLEAR TO DISCUSS

 PERFORMANCE AT CALVERT CLIFFS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with representatives of Constellation Nuclear

on Tuesday, June 26, to discuss the results of the agencyís annual assessment of safety performance at

the Calvert Cliffs nuclear power plant in Lusby, Md.

The meeting, which will be open to the public for observation, is scheduled to begin at 2 p.m.

at the Calvert Cliffs Visitor and Education Center at the plant, which is located off Routes 2 and 4. 

NRC officials will be available afterward to answer questions.

The performance period to be discussed is April 1, 2000, to March 31, 2001. Overall, the NRC

found that the plant operated in a manner that preserved public health and safety and fully met all

cornerstone objectives during the period. A letter sent from the NRC Region I office to Constellation

Nuclear addresses plant performance during the period and will serve as the basis for the meeting

discussion. It is available on the NRC web site at: www.nrc.gov/OPA/ppr/calvert_eoc2001.pdf

Current performance information for the Calvert Cliffs 1 plant is available on the NRC web site

at: www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/CALV1/calv1_chart.html

Information for the Calvert Cliffs 2 plant is available at:

www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/CALV2/calv2_chart.html

###
§ 123.2 Penalty for failure to report arrival or for proceeding without a permit. ( a ) *Persons.* Any person arriving otherwise than by conveyance who enters the U.S. at other than a designated port of entry, or Customs station if authorization exists for entry at that station, who fails to report arrival as required in § 123.1(a) of this part, or who departs from the port of entry or Customs station without authorization by the appropriate Customs officer, whether or not intentionally, shall be subject to such civil and criminal penalties as are prescribed under 19 U.S.C. 1459 and provided for in § 123.1 of this part.
( b ) *Vessels.* The penalty provisions applicable to vessels for failure to report arrival or for proceeding without a permit are those as provided in § 4.3a.
( c ) *Vehicles* — ( 1 ) *Civil penalties.* The person in charge of any vehicle who— ( i ) Enters the vehicle into the U.S. at other than a designated port of entry, or Customs station if authorization exists for entry at that station;
( ii ) Fails to report arrival and present the vehicle and all persons and merchandise (including baggage) on board for inspection as required in § 123.1(b) of this part;
( iii ) Fails to file a manifest or any other document required to be filed in connection with arrival in the U.S. under this part; or
( iv ) Without authorization by the appropriate Customs officer, removes such vehicle from the port of entry or Customs station or discharges any passenger or merchandise (including baggage) shall be subject to such civil penalties as are prescribed in section 436, Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1436), and any conveyance used in connection with any such violation shall be subject to seizure and forfeiture. The person also may be subject to an additional civil penalty equal to the value of the merchandise on the conveyance which was not entered or reported as required by § 123.1(b) of this part, and that merchandise may be subject to seizure and forfeiture unless properly entered by the importer or consignee. If the merchandise consists of any controlled substances, additional penalties may be assessed, as prescribed in section 584, Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1584).
( 2 ) *Criminal penalties.* Upon conviction, any person in charge of a vehicle who intentionally commits any of the violations described in paragraph (c)(1) of this section shall, in addition to the penalties described therein, be subject to such additional criminal penalties as are prescribed in section 436, Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1436). If the vehicle has or is discovered to have had on board any merchandise (other than sea stores or the equivalent for conveyances other than vessels) the importation of which into the U.S. is prohibited, the person in charge of the vehicle is subject to such additional criminal penalties as are prescribed in section 436, Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1436).
[T.D. 93-96, 58 FR 67318, Dec. 21, 1993]
#### § 144.2 Liability of importers and sureties.

The importer of merchandise entered for warehouse is liable for the payment of all unpaid duties not only as principal on the bond filed on Customs Form 301, containing the bond conditions set forth in § 113.62 of this chapter, but also by reason of his personal liability as consignee. Under the conditions of the bond, the sureties on the bond shall be held liable for the payment of duties and Customs charges not paid by the principal on the bond, whether such duties and charges are finally ascertained before the merchandise is withdrawn from Customs custody or thereafter. Liability may be transferred in part along with the right to withdraw the merchandise, in accordance with Subpart C of this part.

[T.D. 73-175, 38 FR 17464, July 2, 1973, as amended by T.D. 84-213, 49 FR 41185, Oct. 19, 1984]
#### § 177.3 Nonconforming requests for rulings.

A person submitting a request for a ruling that does not comply with all of the provisions of this part will be so notified in writing, and the requirements that have not been met will be pointed out. Except in the case of ruling requests submitted to Area or District offices, such person will be given a period of thirty (30) days from the date of the notice (or such longer period as the notice may provide) to supply any additional information that is requested or otherwise conform the ruling request to the requirements referred to in the notice. The Customs Service file with respect to ruling requests which are not brought into compliance with the provisions of this part within the period of time allowed will be administratively closed and the request removed from active consideration until such time as the deficiencies cited in the notice are corrected. A request for a ruling that is removed from active consideration by reason of failing to comply with the provisions of this part may be treated as withdrawn. In the case of ruling requests made to Area or District offices, a failure to comply with the provisions of this part will result in the return of the ruling request with the notice specifying the deficiencies and such requests will not be considered as having been filed until such deficiencies are corrected.

[T.D. 89-74, 54 FR 31515, July 31, 1989]
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2



The Board of Directors
Raindance Communications, Inc.:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements (No.
333-44348 and 333-82266) on Form S-8 of Raindance Communications, Inc. of our
report dated February 8, 2002, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of
Raindance Communications, Inc. and subsidiary as of December 31, 2000 and 2001,
and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity
(deficit) and comprehensive loss, and cash flows for each of the years in the
three-year period ended December 31, 2001, which report appears in the December
31, 2001 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Raindance Communications, Inc.


KPMG LLP


Boulder, Colorado
March 27, 2002
§ 11.1 Cigars, cigarettes, medicinal preparations, and perfumery. ( a ) All cigars and cigarettes imported into the United States, except importations by mail and in baggage, shall be placed in the public stores or in a designated bonded warehouse to remain until inspected, weighed, and repacked, if necessary, under the Customs and internal-revenue laws. However, if the invoice and entry presented specify all of the information necessary for prompt determination of the estimate duty and tax on the packages of cigars and cigarettes covered thereby, the port director may permit designation of less than the entire importation for examination.
( b ) After the cigars and cigarettes have been examined, weighed, and appraised, before release the inspecting officer shall verify that they are in properly constructed packages, conforming to the requirements of the regulations of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, bearing a legible imprint or a securely affixed label stating the quantity, kind, and classification for tax purposes as required by such regulations. Cigars or cigarettes must be in compliance with such requirements before being released for consumption unless specifically exempted therefrom as indicated in § 11.3.
( c ) The immediate containers of all domestic cigars, cigarettes, medicinal preparations, and perfumery, which are returned to the United States and are subject to a duty equal to an internal-revenue tax, shall be stamped by Customs. The packaging requirements set forth in paragraph (b) of this section apply to returned cigars and cigarettes of domestic origin.
[28 FR 14701, Dec. 31, 1963, as amended by T.D. 78-329, 43 FR 43454, Sept. 26, 1978]
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 24 (Thursday, February 5, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 5560]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-2381]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Library of Medicine; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Library of Medicine Special Emphasis 
Panel; R03 Review.
    Date: March 3, 2004.
    Time: 1 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Library of Medicine, 6705 Rockledge Drive, Suite 
301, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).
    Contact Person: Hua-Chuan Sim, MD, Health Science Administrator, 
National Library of Medicine, Extramural Programs, Bethesda, MD 
20892.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.879, 
Medical Library Assistance, National Institutes of Health, HHS.)

    Dated: January 28, 2004.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 04-2381 Filed 2-4-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
Editorial Note on Part 10
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 10 appear by CBP Dec. 16-26, 81 FR 93010, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 10.865 Importer obligations. ( a ) *General.* An importer who makes a claim for preferential tariff treatment under § 10.863 of this subpart: ( 1 ) Will be deemed to have certified that the good is eligible for preferential tariff treatment under the OFTA;
( 2 ) Is responsible for the truthfulness of the information and data contained in the declaration provided for in § 10.864 of this subpart; and
( 3 ) Is responsible for submitting any supporting documents requested by CBP and for the truthfulness of the information contained in those documents. CBP will allow for the direct submission by the exporter or producer of business confidential or other sensitive information, including cost and sourcing information.
( b ) *Information provided by exporter or producer.* The fact that the importer has made a claim for preferential tariff treatment or prepared a declaration based on information provided by an exporter or producer will not relieve the importer of the responsibility referred to in paragraph (a) of this section.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Brian Richard SCHWEITZER, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 01-50296.

D.C. No. CR-00-00057-VAP.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 12, 2002.*

Decided Feb. 14, 2002.

Before FERGUSON, TASHIMA, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

A jury convicted Defendant Brian Schweitzer of assaulting a federal employee, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 111. He raises two issues on appeal.

A. *Jury Instruction*

Because Defendant did not object to the instruction at trial, we review for plain error. *United States v. Burt,*143 F.3d 1215, 1217-18 (9th Cir.1998). We find none.

The district court properly instructed the jury that the government had to prove each element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. The second element was that Defendant assaulted a federal employee “while the federal ... employee was engaged in or on account of her offi*332cial duties.” That formulation correctly tracks the statute. Contrary to Defendant’s argument, the instruction was clear; a lay jury did not require additional guidance on the meaning of “engaged in ... official duties.” *See United States v. Hicks,*217 F.3d 1038, 1045 (9th Cir.) (holding that a district court need not define common, readily understandable terms), *cert. denied,*531 U.S. 1037, 121 S.Ct. 627, 148 L.Ed.2d 536 (2000).

B. *Sufficiency of the Evidence*

Defendant also argues that insufficient evidence supported his conviction because the victim, a mail carrier, was not “engaged in” her official duties when Defendant assaulted her. We disagree.

The victim was sitting in her postal truck and was in the middle of delivering mail when Defendant punched her in the face and shoulder, through the window of the truck. She did not seek out Defendant, but happened across him while making mail deliveries on her regular route. Even after seeing him assault a young woman just a few yards from the truck, the victim continued to deliver mail until the situation escalated. Then the victim told Defendant to stop punching the young woman, whereupon Defendant turned and punched her instead. In these circumstances, a rational jury could conclude that the victim was in the course of delivering the mail, and was not engaged in a personal frolic or detour, when Defendant assaulted her. *See United States v. Hohman,*825 F.2d 1363, 1364 (9th Cir.1987) (holding that a National Park Service employee was engaged in official duties even after he had completed his shift and changed clothes); *United States v. Spears,*631 F.2d 114, 117 (9th Cir.1980) (holding that a Forest Service employee was engaged in official duties even though he socialized with campers after telling them to move their campsite).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
EXHIBIT 32.3

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(SUBSECTIONS (A) AND (B) OF SECTION 1350,

CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE)

I, Gregory B. Milton, of OMNI Energy Services Corp.,
certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|(1) | the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2005 (the Periodic Report) which this statement accompanies 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 Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of OMNI Energy Services Corp.
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: March 31, 2006



/s/    GREGORY B. MILTONGregory B. Milton Chief Accounting Officer