alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR .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. 04-40110 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus HUGO ISRAEL ZACARIAS-CARBAJAL, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. M-03-CR-838-1

-------------------- Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and PICKERING, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Hugo Israel Zacarias-Carbajal appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United States after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Zacarias-Carbajal contends that the "felony" and "aggravated felony" provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1) and (2) are unconstitutional. He therefore argues that his conviction must be reduced to one under the lesser included offense found in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), his judgment must be reformed to reflect a United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## F I L E D August 18, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III ClerkNo. 04-40110 -2- conviction only under that provision, and his sentence must be vacated and the case remanded for resentencing to no more than two years' imprisonment and one year of supervised release.
In Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of separate offenses. The Court further held that the sentencing provisions do not violate the Due Process Clause. Id. at 239-47. Zacarias-Carbajal acknowledges that his arguments are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres , but he asserts that the decision has been cast into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). He seeks to preserve his arguments for further review. 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). This court must follow Almendarez-Torres "unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule it." Dabeit , 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED.
### §7381g. Definitions

In this part:

#### (1) Director

The term "Director" means the Director of Science, Engineering, and Mathematics Education.

#### (2) National Laboratory

The term "National Laboratory" has the meaning given the term in section 15801 of this title.

(Pub. L. 101–510, div. C, title XXXI, §3170, as added Pub. L. 110–69, title V, §5003(d)(3), Aug. 9, 2007, 121 Stat. 603.)

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

#### Consultation

Pub. L. 110–69, title V, §5003(b), Aug. 9, 2007, 121 Stat. 602, provided that: "The Secretary [of Energy] shall—

"(1) consult with the Secretary of Education and the Director of the National Science Foundation regarding activities authorized under subpart B of the Department of Energy Science Education Enhancement Act [this part] (as added by subsection (d)(3)) to improve science and mathematics education; and

"(2) otherwise make available to the Secretary of Education reports associated with programs authorized under that section."
*The Honor able Joseph M. Hood, Senior United States District J udg e for the Easter

n District of Ke ntucky , sitti ng by desig nation. NO T R EC OM M EN DE D F OR F UL L- TEX T P UB LIC AT ION File Na me: 08a0296n.06 Filed: May

28, 2008 NOS. 06-4523 & 07-3523 UN ITED STA TES C OU RT OF AP P EA LS F OR THE SI XT H C IR CU IT
UNI TED STATES OF AMERI CA, ) ) Plaintif f-Appellee

, ) ON APPEALFROM THE U NI TED ) STA TE S DI STR I CT C OU RT F OR v. ) THE SOUTHERN D I STRI CT OF ) O H IO AMADOR B RAMBI L A GONZ AL ES and ) SI L VESTRE BRAMB I LA, ) ) De fe nd an ts- Ap pe lla nts
. )

Be fore : KENNEDYand MARTI N, Circuit J udg es; and HO OD, Senior District Judge. * PER CU RI AM . D e fe nd ants -A pp e lla nts Am a do r B ra

mbi la Go nza le s and

Silv e str e B ra

mbi la (“D efe ndants”) a

ppeal their

sentenc es as unr easona b le. B oth further challeng e the tria l judge ’s attempt to stay

their per iods of supervised r elea se unl es s an d u n til they re- enter this country

afte r deportation. Havinghad the be nefit of br iefing and havinghear d oral arg ument, we find that the sentence s i mp o s ed we re re as o n ab l e. I ni mp o s i n g p er i o d s o f i mp ri s o n m en to nDe fe n d an t s , t h e t ri al j u d ge
c o n s id e r e d

th e a d v is o r

y G u id e li n e r an g e an d

th e f a c to r s s e t f

o rth i n1 8 U
. S. C. § 3 5 5 3 ( a )
. We the re fo re a ff

ir m th e ir se nte nc e s o f i mpr iso nme nt. Howeve r, apply ing this Court’s direc tion in United States v. Ossa-G allegos , 491 F.3d 5372

(6th Cir. 2007), we c onclude that the tr ial judge err ed in staying both Def endants’ periods of super v is e d u n le s s an d u n ti l th e y r e - e n te r th is c o u n tr y . We th e r e f

o r e v a c a te th is a s p e c t o f ea ch Def endants’ se ntence
. Acc ording ly , we AF F IR M IN P AR T and VACATE AND REMAND IN P ART for the limit ed purpose of setting lawful c onditions of each D efe ndants’ per iod of supervised r elea se.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-50882

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JOSE LOPEZ-SOLIS, also known as Jose Luis Lopez,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 3:07-CR-540-1

Before REAVLEY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

*

Jose Lopez-Solis pleaded guilty to illegal reentry after deportation and was

sentenced to 24 months of imprisonment and 3 years of supervised release. This

court vacated the sentence and remanded the matter for resentencing. United

States v. Lopez-Solis, 330 F. App’x 497 (5th Cir. 2009). Lopez-Solis was released

from prison on August 21, 2009, and was deported on August 22, 2009. On

September 16, 2009, the district court sentenced him in absentia, over defense

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

October 15, 2010

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

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.

Case: 09-50882 Document: 00511264262 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/15/2010
No. 09-50882

counsel’s objections, to 21 months of imprisonment and 3 years of supervised

release.

On appeal, Lopez-Solis’s counsel argues that the district court erred in

sentencing Lopez-Solis in absentia. The Government concedes that the inabsentia sentencing was error but argues that the appeal is moot because there

is no relief that the court is able to grant to Lopez-Solis. Lopez-Solis’s counsel

seeks to have the erroneous sentence vacated, but such an action necessarily

includes a remand for a correct sentencing. We cannot grant what counsel

requests because resentencing would require Lopez-Solis to be present at a

hearing to consider a new sentence and his deportation bars such an appearance.

See United States v. Rosenbaum-Alanis, 483 F.3d 381, 383 (5th Cir. 2007).

Notwithstanding the conceded error in the in-absentia proceeding, the appeal of

Lopez-Solis’s sentence is moot.

The appeal is DISMISSED.

2

Case: 09-50882 Document: 00511264262 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/15/2010
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Darwin Resources, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarter ended September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned Richard Astrom, Chief Executive Officer, Treasurer, Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer of Darwin        Resources, Inc., 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.  |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Dated: November 17, 2010 |   | /s/ Richard Astrom                                      |   |
|--------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                     |   | Richard Astrom                                               |   |
|                     |   | Chief Executive Officer, Treasurer, Principal Financial |   |
|                     |   | Officer and Principal Accounting Officer                |   |
### §5189b. Date of eligibility; expenses incurred before date of disaster

Eligibility for Federal assistance under this subchapter shall begin on the date of the occurrence of the event which results in a declaration by the President that a major disaster exists; except that reasonable expenses which are incurred in anticipation of and immediately preceding such event may be eligible for Federal assistance under this chapter.

(Pub. L. 93–288, title IV, §424, as added Pub. L. 100–707, title I, §106(l), Nov. 23, 1988, 102 Stat. 4706.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This chapter, referred to in text, was in the original "this Act", meaning Pub. L. 93–288, May 22, 1974, 88 Stat. 143. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 5121 of this title and Tables.
# United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit Chicago, Illinois 60604 August 8, 2006 Before Hon. RICHARD D. CUDAHY, Circuit Judge Hon. RICHARD A. POSNER, Circuit Judge Hon. DIANE P. WOOD, Circuit Judge Nos. 05–3412 K EYSTONE C ONSOLIDATED I NDUSTRIES , I NC ., and V ALHI , I NC ., Plaintiffs–Appellants
v. E MPLOYERS I NSURANCE C OMPANY OF W AUSAU ( F/ K / A E MPLOYERS M UTUAL L IABILITY I NSURANCE C OMPANY OF W ISCONSIN ) Defendant–Appellee
. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois No. 03–1201 5292 Michael M. Mihm Judge
.

ORDER Page 8 of the slip opinion issued in this cas e on August 3, 2006, is amended as follows: in line 24, the word “employer’s” should be deleted and replaced with the word “insurer’s.”
### SUBCHAPTER XXXIII—SALMON FALLS DIVISION, UPPER SNAKE RIVER PROJECT, IDAHO
### §8235h. Revoking approval of plans and terminating financial assistance

The Secretary shall revoke the approval of any plan under section 8235a(a) of this title for the establishment of a prototype residential energy efficiency program, and shall terminate the provision of financial assistance under section 8235a(c) of this title to carry out such plan, if the Secretary determines, in consultation with the Federal Trade Commission and after notice and the opportunity for a hearing, that carrying out such plan—

(1) causes unfair methods of competition;

(2) has a substantial adverse effect on competition in the portion of the service area of the public utility designated by the contract entered into under the plan; or

(3) provides a supplier or contractor of energy conservation measures with an unreasonably large share of the contracts for the supply or installation of such measures under such plan in the service area of the public utility designated by the contract entered into under such plan.

(Pub. L. 95–619, title II, §269, as added Pub. L. 96–294, title V, §562, June 30, 1980, 94 Stat. 751.)
Exhibit 99.2









Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Management of Protective Life Insurance Company and The Bank of New York, as Indenture Trustee of Protective
Life Secured Trust 2004-30, (collectively the "Management")
and Wilmington Trust Company, as Trustee of Protective Life Secured Trust 2004-30 (the "Trust"):

We have examined Management's assertion, included in the accompanying "Management Assertion Regarding the Collection and Distribution of Trust Money by The Bank of New York (Indenture Trustee)," that the collection of payments on the funding agreements and distribution of payments to the noteholders has occurred as required by Section 5.02 of the Indenture agreement dated November 7, 2003 between the Trust and the Indenture Trustee during the year ended December 31, 2004.  Management is responsible for the assertion.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the assertion based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting management's assertion and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances.  We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, Management's assertion referred to above is fairly stated, in all material respects, based on the criteria defined in the accompanying "Management Assertion Regarding the Collection and Distribution of Trust Money by The Bank of New York (Indenture Trustee)."



PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Birmingham, AlabamaMarch 30, 2005











Management Assertion Regarding the Collection and Distribution of Trust
Money by The Bank of New York (Indenture Trustee)





Management of the Trust asserts that it has collected payments on the funding agreements and distributed payments to the noteholders as required by Section 5.02 of the Indenture agreement dated November 7, 2003 between the Trust and the Indenture Trustee for the year ended December 31, 2004.  This assertion is based on the following criteria:

1. The payments made by Protective Life on the funding agreements that secured the Notes, for the year ended December 31, 2004, are included in Protective Life's Secured Trusts P & I Payments: 1/1/04 through 12/31/04 (P & I Payments report).
2. The payments made by Protective Life on the funding agreements that secured the Notes, for the year ended December 31, 2004, are included in the Indenture Trustee's History of Transactions List.
3. The amounts due on the Notes are reported as a component of the charges from Cede & Co., the nominee of the Depository Trust Company, on the Indenture Trustee's Payment Obligation Report System (PORS Report).
4. Charges from Cede & Co. are included in the Indenture Trustee's screen prints titled The Depository Trust Company Activity History Details, which represent the charge confirmations to Cede & Co., the nominee of the Depository Trust Company.
### §2421. Definitions

In this subchapter:

#### (1) Indian tribe

The term "Indian tribe" has the meaning given the term in section 5304 of title 25.

#### (2) Lender

The term "lender" means—

(A) a non-Federal qualified institutional buyer (as defined in section 230.144A(a) of title 17, Code of Federal Regulation 1 (or any successor regulation), known as Rule 144A(a) of the Securities and Exchange Commission and issued under the Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. 77a et seq.)); or

(B) a clean renewable energy bond lender (as defined in section 54(j)(2) 2 of title 26 (as in effect on December 22, 2006)).

#### (3) Loan guarantee

The term "loan guarantee" has the meaning given the term "loan guarantee" in section 661a of title 2.

#### (4) Non-Federal borrower

The term "non-Federal borrower" means—

(A) a State (including a department, agency, or political subdivision of a State); or

(B) a conservancy district, irrigation district, canal company, water users' association, Indian tribe, an agency created by interstate compact, or any other entity that has the capacity to contract with the United States under Federal reclamation law.

#### (5) Obligation

The term "obligation" means a loan or other debt obligation that is guaranteed under this section.

#### (6) Project

The term "project" means—

(A) a rural water supply project (as defined in section 2401(9) of this title);

(B) an extraordinary operation and maintenance activity for, or the rehabilitation or replacement of, a facility—

(i) that is authorized by Federal reclamation law and constructed by the United States under such law; or

(ii) in connection with which there is a repayment or water service contract executed by the United States under Federal reclamation law; or

(C) an improvement to water infrastructure directly associated with a reclamation project that, based on a determination of the Secretary—

(i) improves water management; and

(ii) fulfills other Federal goals.

#### (7) Secretary

The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of the Interior.

(Pub. L. 109–451, title II, §202, Dec. 22, 2006, 120 Stat. 3356.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Securities Act of 1933, referred to in par. (2)(A), is title I of act May 27, 1933, ch. 38, 48 Stat. 74, which is classified generally to subchapter I (§77a et seq.) of chapter 2A of Title 15, Commerce and Trade. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see section 77a of Title 15 and Tables.

Section 54 of title 26, referred to in par. (2)(B), was repealed by Pub. L. 115–97, title I, §13404(a), Dec. 22, 2017, 131 Stat. 2138.

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

#### Short Title

This subchapter known as the "Twenty-First Century Water Works Act", see Short Title note set out under section 2401 of this title.

1 So in original. Probably should be "Regulations".

2 See References in Text note below.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2583 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2583

   To suspend temporarily the duty on Decanedioic acid, Bis(2,2,6,6,-
                      tetramethyl-4-piperidinyl).

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 24, 2005

  Mr. Bonner introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To suspend temporarily the duty on Decanedioic acid, Bis(2,2,6,6,-
                      tetramethyl-4-piperidinyl).

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. DECANEDIOIC ACID, BIS(2,2,6,6,-TETRAMETHYL-4-PIPERIDINYL).

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following:

``      9902.34.21       Decanedioic acid,  Free         No Change        No Change        On or Before 12/  ''.
                         Bis(2,2,6,6,-                                                      31/2008
                         tetramethyl-4-
                         piperidinyl) (CAS
                         No. 52829-07-9)
                         (provided for in
                         subheading
                         2933.39.20)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
### §1452. Deputy Secretary of the Interior; appointment

The position of Deputy Secretary is established in the Department of the Interior with appointment thereto by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.

(May 9, 1935, ch. 101, §1, 49 Stat. 177; Pub. L. 101–509, title V, §529 [title I, §112(a)(2)], Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1427, 1454.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Provisions of this section which prescribed the annual rate of basic compensation of the Deputy Secretary were omitted to conform to the provisions of the Federal Executive Salary Schedule. See section 5313 of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.

Section was formerly classified to section 481a of Title 5 prior to the general revision and enactment of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees, by Pub. L. 89–554, §1, Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 378.

#### Amendments

1990—Pub. L. 101–509 substituted "Deputy Secretary" for "Under Secretary".

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

#### Effective Date of 1990 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 101–509 effective on first day of first pay period beginning on or after Nov. 5, 1990, with continued service by incumbent Under Secretary of the Interior, see section 529 [title I, §112(e)(1), (2)(B)] of Pub. L. 101–509, set out as a note under section 3404 of Title 20, Education.

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Transfer of Functions

For transfer of functions of other officers, employees, and agencies of Department of the Interior, with certain exceptions, to Secretary of the Interior, with power to delegate, see Reorg. Plan No. 3 of 1950, §§1, 2, eff. May 24, 1950, 15 F.R. 3174, 64 Stat. 1262, set out under section 1451 of this title.
#### ELKUS, Respondent, v. E. OSFER & SON, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

March 10, 1905.)

Action by Abraham Elkus against E. Osfer & Son.

PER CURIAM.

Motion to dismiss appeal denied, on condition that the appellant perfect the appeal and bring the case on for argument at the next term. In default of compliance with this condition, the motion is granted, with costs.