alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 18

- 10183 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
GONZALO DE LA HOYA

- SANCHEZ , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:17

- CR

- 411

- 1

Before DENNIS, CLEMENT, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Gonzalo De La Hoya

- Sanchez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). De La Hoya

- Sanche z has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the

* 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 R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR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. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED January 4, 2019

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 18-10183 Document: 00514781703 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/04/2019No. 18

- 10183

2 record reflected therein, as well as De La Hoya

- Sanchez ’s response. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appel late review. To the extent that De La Hoya

- Sanchez’s response challenges the Bureau of Prisons’ calculation of his release date based on his award of one

- month credit in the district court’s sentence, his remedy should be sought in a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. See Padilla v. United States , 416 F.3d 424, 426 (5th Cir. 2005). Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42. 2. Case: 18-10183 Document: 00514781703 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/04/2019
### §8514. Judicial review

#### (a) State actions

(1) Any State may institute an action in the appropriate district court of the United States, including actions for declaratory judgment, for judicial review of—

(A) any target established by the President under section 8511(a) of this title;

(B) any finding by the President under section 8513(b)(1)(A) of this title, relating to the achievement of the emergency energy conservation target of such State, or 8513(b)(2) of this title, relating to the achievement of the emergency energy conservation target of such State or the failure to carry out the assurances regarding implementation contained in an approved plan of such State; or

(C) any determination by the Secretary disapproving a State plan under section 8512(c) of this title, including any determination by the Secretary under section 8512(c)(1)(B) of this title that the plan is likely to impose an unreasonably disproportionate share of the burden of restrictions of energy use on any specific class of industry, business, or commercial enterprise, or any individual segment thereof.

Such action shall be barred unless it is instituted within 30 calendar days after the date of publication of the establishment of a target referred to in subparagraph (A), the finding by the President referred to in subparagraph (B), or the determination by the Secretary referred to in subparagraph (C), as the case may be.

(2) The district court shall determine the questions of law and upon such determination certify such questions immediately to the United States court of appeals for the circuit involved, which shall hear the matter sitting en banc.

(3) Any decision by such court of appeals on a matter certified under paragraph (2) shall be reviewable by the Supreme Court upon attainment of a writ of certiorari. Any petition for such a writ shall be filed no later than 20 days after the decision of the court of appeals.

#### (b) Repealed. Pub. L. 98–620, title IV, §402(42), Nov. 8, 1984, 98 Stat. 3360

#### (c) Injunctive relief

With respect to judicial review under subsection (a)(1)(A), the court shall not have jurisdiction to grant any injunctive relief except in conjunction with a final judgment entered in the case.

(Pub. L. 96–102, title II, §214, Nov. 5, 1979, 93 Stat. 764; Pub. L. 98–620, title IV, §402(42), Nov. 8, 1984, 98 Stat. 3360.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1984—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 98–620 struck out subsec. (b) which required the court of appeals to advance on the docket and to expedite to the greatest possible extent the disposition of any matter certified under subsec. (a)(2).

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

#### Effective Date of 1984 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 98–620 not applicable to cases pending on Nov. 8, 1984, see section 403 of Pub. L. 98–620, set out as an Effective Date note under section 1657 of Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure.
EPA Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0927 

 The following information is located in the confidentiality files of the Director, Climate 

Change Division and the Director, Stratospheric Protection Division, U. S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Washington DC. This information is confidential pending final 

determination by the Administrator and is not available for public inspection. 

 Fluorinated Gas Production Threshold Analysis Background Data: 

• 2007 and 2008 production of CFCs and HCFCs reported by U.S. producers to the 

Stratospheric Protection Division. 

• 2006 production of HFCs, PFCs, SF6, and NF3 voluntarily reported by U.S. producers 

(through the Alliance for Responsible Atmospheric Policy) to the Climate Change 

Division. 

 The spreadsheet notes contain information on the facility production data for fluorinated 

gas production processes, including fluorinated GHG production and CFC and HCFC production 

processes. The confidential material is comprised of 4 pages.
*The Honorable Joseph M. Hood, Senior United States District Judge for the Eastern

District of Kentucky, sitting by designation.

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION

File Name: 08a0296n.06

Filed: May 28, 2008

NOS. 06-4523 & 07-3523

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

)

Plaintiff-Appellee, ) ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED

) STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR

v. ) THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF

) OHIO

AMADOR BRAMBILA GONZALES and )

SILVESTRE BRAMBILA, )

 )

Defendants-Appellants. )

Before: KENNEDY and MARTIN, Circuit Judges; and HOOD, Senior District Judge.*

PER CURIAM. Defendants-Appellants Amador Brambila Gonzales and Silvestre Brambila

(“Defendants”) appeal their sentences as unreasonable. Both further challenge the trial judge’s

attempt to stay their periods of supervised release unless and until they re-enter this country after

deportation. 

Having had the benefit of briefing and having heard oral argument, we find that the sentences

imposed were reasonable. In imposing periods of imprisonment on Defendants, the trial judge

considered the advisory Guideline range and the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). We

therefore affirm their sentences of imprisonment.

However, applying this Court’s direction in United States v. Ossa-Gallegos, 491 F.3d 537
2

(6th Cir. 2007), we conclude that the trial judge erred in staying both Defendants’ periods of

supervised unless and until they re-enter this country. We therefore vacate this aspect of each

Defendants’ sentence.

Accordingly, we AFFIRM IN PART and VACATE AND REMAND IN PART for the

limited purpose of setting lawful conditions of each Defendants’ period of supervised release.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsPropagation of high frequency jet noise using geometric acousticsSpherical directivity of noise radiated from a convecting quadrupole source embedded in an arbitrary spreading jet is obtained by ray-tracing methods of geometrical acoustics. The six propagation equations are solved in their general form in a rectangular coordinate system. The noise directivity in the far field is calculated by applying an iteration scheme that finds the required radiation angles at the source resulting in propagation through a given observer point. Factors influencing the zone of silence are investigated. The caustics of geometrical acoustics and the exact locations where it forms is demonstrated by studying the variation in ray tube area obtained from transport equation. For a ring source convecting along the center-axis of an axisymmetric jet, the polar directivity of the radiated noise is obtained by an integration with respect to azimuthal directivity of compact quadrupole sources distributed on the ring. The Doppler factor is shown to vary slightly from point to point on the ring. Finally the scaling of the directivity pattern with power -3 of Doppler factor is investigated and compared with experimental data.Document ID19930006386Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeConference PaperAuthorsKhavaran, A.*(Sverdrup Technology, Inc. Brook Park, OH., United States)*Krejsa, E. A.*(NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateJanuary 1, 1993Subject CategoryAcousticsReport/Patent NumberAIAA PAPER 93-0147NAS 1.15:106013E-7471NASA-TM-106013Meeting InformationMeeting: Aerospace Sciences Meeting and ExhibitLocation: Reno, NVCountry: United StatesStart Date: January 11, 1993End Date: January 14, 1993Sponsors:AIAAAccession Number93N15575Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 537-02-23Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19930006386.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
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                           5,448
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,020
<ALLOWANCES>                                       408
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                10,828
<PP&E>                                           4,717
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,253
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  13,330
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,312
<BONDS>                                             25
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            10
<OTHER-SE>                                      10,983
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    13,330
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 5,525
<CGS>                                            1,081
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,963
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    32
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   1
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,545
<INCOME-TAX>                                       564
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       981
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Case 3:09-cv-01484-SI Document 107 Filed 06/04/10 Page 1 of 6
Case 3:09-cv-01484-SI Document 107 Filed 06/04/10 Page 2 of 6
Case 3:09-cv-01484-SI Document 107 Filed 06/04/10 Page 3 of 6
Case 3:09-cv-01484-SI Document 107 Filed 06/04/10 Page 4 of 6
Case 3:09-cv-01484-SI Document 107 Filed 06/04/10 Page 5 of 6
6/4/10

7/1/10

6/18/10

7/2/10

7/9/10

7/23/10

8/24/10

Case 3:09-cv-01484-SI Document 107 Filed 06/04/10 Page 6 of 6
#### Raffele Sposito, Appellant, v. Thomas J. Martin, Individually and Doing Business as Martin’s Restaurant, Respondent.

Judgment unanimously' affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party. (Appeal from judgment of Onondaga Trial Term dismissing the complaint on the merits, on motion by defendant at the end of plaintiff’s case, in a negligence action.) Present — Bastow, J. P., Goldman, Halpern, McClusky and Henry, JJ.
September 17, 2015

Mr. Marc Fairstein 47 Old Forge Road Millington, NJ 07946

Dear Mr. Fairstein :

This is in response to your letter sent to the docket ( No. FAA

− 20 1 5

− 2277 )

on June 16, 2015

, petitioning the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for an exemption

from Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations ( 14 CFR)

. You requested to conduct aerial videography, photography

, and cinematography using an unmanned aerial system

.

The information you submitted did not comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 11.81. On June 25, 2015 , the FAA sent you a letter stating that we were unable to process your request

without further information. Specifically, we asked you t o provide the follo wing:

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief and the extent of the relief you seek.

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you seek an exemption.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your r equest.

On June 25, 2015 , the FAA received additional information. The FAA has reviewed the information and finds that you did not provide the sections from which you seek relief and why granting the request would be in the public interest or t he reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety

.

Because your petition lacks sufficient information to proceed, the FAA has close d your exemption request. Should you wish to provide the additional information

, please resubmit your petition for exempti on to the public docket.2

Sincerely,

/s/

Lirio Liu

Director

, Office of Rulemaking
EXHIBIT 32.1

                    Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350,
      As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

     In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of HomeCom
Communications, Inc. (the "Registrant") for the period ended September 30, 2003,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Timothy R. Robinson, the Executive Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer of the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that, to my knowledge:

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


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


                                               By: /s/ Timothy R. Robinson
                                               ---------------------------
                                               Name:  Timothy R. Robinson
                                               Date:  October 29, 2003


     This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Registrant for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as amended. A signed original
of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to HomeCom
Communications, Inc. and will be furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
### SUBCHAPTER XXXVI—POLECAT BENCH AREA, SHOSHONE EXTENSIONS UNIT, PICK-SLOAN MISSOURI BASIN PROGRAM, WYOMING
### §9209. Utilization of capabilities and facilities

The Secretary shall utilize the technological and management capabilities, equipment, and facilities of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration to the maximum extent practicable in carrying out his duties under this chapter, and shall enter into such additional agreements with the Administrator of such Administration as may be necessary for this purpose.

(Pub. L. 96–345, §10, Sept. 8, 1980, 94 Stat. 1145.)
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TREANDOUS COTTON,

Plaintiff,

 v.

MATTHEW CATE, et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 09-00385 WHA

REQUEST RE STIPULATION

TO EXTEND DEADLINES

The parties have filed a joint stipulation to extend discovery deadlines. No declarations

explaining good cause for the proposed extensions were provided. The parties have until 

APRIL 30 AT NOON, to file declarations in support of their joint stipulation.

Dated: April 27, 2015. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:09-cv-00385-WHA Document 119 Filed 04/27/15 Page 1 of 1
### §1474g. Department of the Interior Nonrecurring Expenses Fund

There is hereby established in the Treasury of the United States a fund to be known as the "Department of the Interior Nonrecurring Expenses Fund" (the Fund): Provided, That unobligated balances of expired discretionary funds appropriated for this or any succeeding fiscal year from the General Fund of the Treasury to the Department of the Interior by this or any other Act may be transferred (not later than the end of the fifth fiscal year after the last fiscal year for which such funds are available for the purposes for which appropriated) into the Fund: Provided further, That amounts deposited in the Fund shall be available until expended, and in addition to such other funds as may be available for such purposes, for information and business technology system modernization and facilities infrastructure improvements and associated administrative expenses, including nonrecurring maintenance, necessary for the operation of the Department or its bureaus, subject to approval by the Office of Management and Budget: Provided further, That amounts in the Fund may not be obligated without written notification to and the prior approval of the Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate in conformance with the reprogramming guidelines described in this Act.

(Pub. L. 118–42, div. E, title I, §124, Mar. 9, 2024, 138 Stat. 250.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

"This Act", referred to in text, means div. E of Pub. L. 118–42, Mar. 9, 2024, 138 Stat. 220, see Definitions note set out below. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Tables.

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

#### Definitions

For definition of "this Act" as used in this section, see section 3 of Pub. L. 118–42, set out as a note under section 1 of Title 1, General Provisions.
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.                  

###### International Trade Commission

          - [Investigation Nos. 701-TA-463 and 731-TA-1159 (Second Review)]

## Determinations

                    On the basis of the record [1]                                          developed in the subject five-year reviews, the United States International Trade Commission (“Commission”) determines, pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (“the Act”), that revocation of the countervailing and antidumping duty orders on oil country tubular goods from China would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time.                

## Background

The Commission instituted these reviews on April 1, 2020 (85 FR 18268, April 1, 2020) and determined on July 6, 2020 that it would conduct expedited reviews (85 FR 64161, October 9, 2020).

                    The Commission made these determinations pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)). It completed and filed its determinations in these reviews on November 20, 2020. The views of the Commission are contained in USITC Publication 5136 (November 2020), entitled                     *Oil Country Tubular Goods from China: Investigation Nos. 701-TA-463 and 731-TA-1159 (Second Review).*

By order of the Commission.

Issued: November 20, 2020.

Lisa Barton,

Secretary to the Commission.

# Footnotes

1.                             The record is defined in § 207.2(f) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.2(f)).                    
        Back to Citation      

[FR Doc. 2020-26141 Filed 11-25-20; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

G:\JLALL\CASES\CIVIL\09-1827\30daydismissal.wpd 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Brandon Sanders,

Plaintiff,

v.

County of Mendocino, et al.,

Defendants.

________________________________/

No. C 09-1827 JL

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

The parties hereto, by their counsel, having advised the court that they have agreed

to a settlement of this cause, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this cause of action be

dismissed with prejudice; provided, however that if any party hereto shall certify to this

court, within thirty days, with proof of service thereof, that the agreed consideration for said

settlement has not been delivered over, the foregoing order shall stand vacated and this

cause shall forthwith be restored to the calendar to be set for trial.

DATED: April 16, 2010 

__________________________________

 James Larson

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:09-cv-01827-JL Document 42 Filed 04/16/10 Page 1 of 1