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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR .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. 01-41110 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus GERALD GALLAWAY, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:00-CR-62-1

-------------------- May 23, 2002 Before DAVIS, BENAVIDES and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Gerald Gallaway appeals his 151-month sentence following his jury-trial conviction for conspiracy to distribute and possession with the intent to distribute cocaine base and heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846. Gallaway contends that his sentence was imposed in violation of Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000).No. 01-41110 -2- Gallaway did not challenge his sentence on these grounds in the district court, thus, this court reviews his assertion for plain error only. See United States v. Vasquez-Zamora , 253 F.3d 211, 213 (5th Cir. 2001). Because Gallaway was sentenced below the statutory maximum for the offense charged in his indictment, there was no Apprendi violation. See United States v. Keith , 230 F.3d 784, 787 (5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied , 531 U.S. 1182 (2001); United States v. Randle , 259 F.3d 319, 322 (5th Cir. 2001). Gallaway has not shown plain error; indeed, he has not shown any error at all. Accordingly, we AFFIRM.
AFFIRMED.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

April 2, 2014

N o. 04

- 14

- 00061

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF D.S.O., a Child,

From the 288th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012

- PA

- 014 23

Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

The Appellant R.S. ’ s Second Motion for Extension of Timed to File Brief is GRANTED.

The brief is due on April 7, 2014.

_________________________________ Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF , I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 2nd day of April, 2014

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
§ 1218.303 May I credit rental towards royalty? ( a ) ( 1 ) For Class II leases as defined in § 1206.351 of this chapter, and for Class III leases as defined in that section that elect under 43 CFR 3200.7(a)(2) to be subject to all of the BLM regulations promulgated for leases issued after August 8, 2005 you may credit the annual rental that you paid before the first day of the year for which the annual rental is owed against the royalty due for the lease year for which the rental was paid. You may not apply any annual rental paid in excess of the royalty due for a particular lease year as a credit against any royalty due in any subsequent lease year.
( 2 ) For purposes of this section, the term “royalty” includes any advanced royalty payable under 30 U.S.C. 1004(f) for a cessation of production.
( b ) If portions of your lease are located both within and outside of a participating area, you may credit against royalty under paragraph (a) only that percentage of the rental you paid that corresponds to the percentage of the lease within the participating area on a per-acre basis.
[72 FR 24468, May 2, 2007]
#### Will County Produce Company, plaintiff in error, v. Joseph Freedman, defendant in error.

Gen. No. 7,053.

Suit in justice of the peace court. Judgment for plaintiff. Error to the Circuit Court of Will county; the Hon. Dorranee Dibell, Judge, *626presiding. Heard in this court at the April term, 1922.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed August 13, 1923.

Hjalmar Rehn, for plaintiff in error. Daniel Harrington, for defendant in error.

Mr. Justice Jones

delivered the opinion of the court.
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

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

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

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

In connection with the Annual Report of HouseValues, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K forthe year ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, John Zdanowski, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adoptedpursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements ofsection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and 

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

Dated: March 10, 2006
### §2103. Supremacy

The provisions of this chapter shall prevail over any general or specific provisions of territory law, State law, or regulation that is inconsistent with this chapter.

(Pub. L. 114–187, §4, June 30, 2016, 130 Stat. 551.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This chapter, referred to in text, was in the original "this Act", meaning Pub. L. 114–187, June 30, 2016, 130 Stat. 549, known as the Puerto Rico Oversight, Management, and Economic Stability Act and also as PROMESA, which is classified principally to this chapter. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 2101 of this title and Tables.
### subpart a—assistance for planning and construction of public telecommunications facilities
Back to 10Q


Exhibit 32.1
 
  The following certifications are being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and in accordance with SEC Release No. 33-8238. These certifications shall not be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, nor shall they be incorporated by reference in any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, whether made before or
after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.











Certification of Chief Executive Officer





Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Schiff Nutrition International, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the Company), hereby certifies, to his knowledge, that:





(i)  the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended November 30, 2008 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended; and





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








Dated: January 9, 2009
By:
/s/ Bruce J. WoodBruce J. WoodChief Executive Officer





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Schiff Nutrition International, Inc. and will be retained by Schiff Nutrition International, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.











Certification of Chief Financial Officer





Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Schiff Nutrition International, Inc. a Delaware, corporation (the Company), hereby certifies, to his knowledge, that:





(iii)  the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended November 30, 2008 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended; and





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








Dated: January 9, 2009
By:
/s/ Joseph W. BatyJoseph W. BatyChief Financial Officer





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Schiff Nutrition International, Inc. and will be retained by Schiff Nutrition International, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### § 1241.73 May ONRR reduce my penalty once it is assessed?

ONRR's Director or his or her delegate may compromise or reduce a civil penalty assessed under this part.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsGame Changing Development Program - Next Generation Life Support Project: Oxygen Recovery From Carbon Dioxide Using Ion Exchange Membrane Electrolysis TechnologyThis report summarizes the Phase I research and development work performed during the March 13, 2015 to July 13, 2016 period. The proposal for this work was submitted in response to NASA Research Announcement NNH14ZOA001N, "Space Technology Research, Development, Demonstration, and Infusion 2014 (SpaceTech-REDDI-2014)," Appendix 14GCD-C2 "Game Changing Development Program, Advanced Oxygen Recovery for Spacecraft Life Support Systems Appendix" The Task Agreement for this Phase I work is Document Control Number: GCDP-02-TA-15015. The objective of the Phase I project was to demonstrate in laboratories two Engineering Development Units (EDU) that perform critical functions of the low temperature carbon dioxide electrolysis and the catalytic conversion of carbon monoxide into carbon and carbon dioxide. The low temperature carbon dioxide electrolysis EDU was built by the University of Delaware with Dr. Feng Jiao as the principal investigator in charge of this EDU development (under NASA Contract NNC15CA04C). The carbon monoxide catalytic conversion EDU was built by the NASA Glenn Research Center with Kenneth Burke as the principal investigator and overall project leader for the development of both EDUs. Both EDUs were successfully developed and demonstrated the critical functions for each process. The carbon dioxide electrolysis EDU was delivered to the NASA Johnson Space Center and the carbon monoxide catalytic conversion EDU was delivered to the NASA Marshall Spaceflight Center.Document ID20160014804Acquisition SourceGlenn Research CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsBurke, Kenneth A.*(NASA Glenn Research Center Cleveland, OH United States)*Jiao, Feng*(Delaware Univ. Newark, DE, United States)*Date AcquiredDecember 22, 2016Publication DateDecember 1, 2016Subject CategoryMan/System Technology And Life SupportReport/Patent NumberGRC-E-DAA-TN36443NASA/TM-2016-219436E-19324Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NNC15CA04CWBS: WBS 453797.04.03.04.01Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightPublic Use Permitted.KeywordsOxygen RecoveryCarbon DioxideAvailable DownloadsNameType20160014804.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 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-10712

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

HECTOR JAIME MENDEZ-PEREZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:08-CR-72-2

Before DAVIS, SMITH, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Hector Jaime Mendez-Perez appeals the sentence imposed following his

guilty plea conviction for transporting illegal aliens and aiding and abetting in

violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(ii) and 18 U.S.C. § 2. He contends that the

district court clearly erred when it denied him a minor role reduction pursuant

to U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2(b). Mendez-Perez argues that he was essentially just

another customer of co-defendant Ernesto Hernandez-Perez and that his sole

participation in the alien-trafficking offense was to temporarily drive the vehicle

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

March 10, 2010

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

Case: 09-10712 Document: 00511047754 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/10/2010
No. 09-10712

2

in which the aliens were secreted in hopes of lowering his own smuggling fee.

According to Mendez-Perez, the district court clearly erred in finding that this

isolated act made him a full participant in the scheme.

The district court must apply the Guidelines and calculate the advisory

range correctly. United States v. Williams, 520 F.3d 414, 422 (5th Cir.), cert.

denied, 129 S. Ct. 111 (2008). Whether the defendant is a minor participant is

a factual determination that is reviewed for clear error. United States v.

Villanueva, 408 F.3d 193, 203 (5th Cir. 2005). “A factual finding is not clearly

erroneous if it is plausible in light of the record read as a whole.” Id.

Mendez-Perez has not shown that the district court clearly erred in

determining that he was not entitled to a minor role reduction pursuant to

§ 3B1.2(b). See id. Notwithstanding that his role in temporarily driving the

vehicle may have been only part of a larger alien smuggling scheme,

Mendez-Perez pleaded guilty to transporting illegal aliens for private financial

gain. As a driver, his role was central to the transportation of the illegal aliens

and clearly “coextensive with the conduct for which he was held accountable.”

United States v. Garcia, 242 F.3d 593, 598-99 (5th Cir. 2001). Further, although

Mendez-Perez may have been less culpable than Hernandez-Perez, his activities

were not peripheral to the advancement of the illicit activity. See Villanueva,

408 F.3d at 203-04. Because Mendez-Perez was not substantially less culpable

than the average participant, the district court did not clearly err when it denied

him a two-level reduction pursuant to § 3B1.2(b). See id. Accordingly, the

district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED. 

Case: 09-10712 Document: 00511047754 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/10/2010
§ 1243.7 What must a person do when posting a bond or other surety instrument or demonstrating financial solvency on behalf of an appellant? If you assume an appellant's responsibility to post a bond or other surety instrument or demonstrate financial solvency under § 1243.5, you: ( a ) Must notify ONRR in writing at the address specified in § 1243.200(a) that you are assuming the appellant's responsibility under this part;
( b ) May not assert that you are not otherwise liable for royalties or other payments under 30 U.S.C. 1712(a), or any other theory, as a defense if ONRR calls your bond or requires you to pay based on your demonstration of financial solvency; and
( c ) May end your voluntarily-assumed responsibility for posting a bond or other surety instrument only after the appellant under this part either: ( 1 ) Pays or posts a bond or other surety instrument; or
( 2 ) Demonstrates financial solvency.
#### § 908.101 Purpose.

The purpose of this part is to require Public Housing Agencies (PHAs), including Moving-to-Work (MTW) PHAs, that operate Public Housing, Indian Housing, or Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher (HCV), Rental Voucher, and Moderate Rehabilitation programs to electronically submit certain data to HUD for those programs. These electronically submitted data are required for HUD forms: HUD-50058, including the Family Self-Sufficiency (FSS) Addendum. Applicable program entities must retain at a minimum, the last three years of the form HUD-50058, and supporting documentation, during the term of each assisted lease, and for a period of at least 3 years from the end of participation (EOP) date, to support billings to HUD and to permit an effective audit. Electronic retention of form HUD-50058 and HUD-50058-FSS and supporting documentation fulfills the record retention requirement under this section.

[74 FR 68934, Dec. 29, 2009, as amended at 89 FR 38293, May 7, 2024]
Editorial Note on Part 250
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 250 appear at 77 FR 50891, Aug. 22, 2012.

§ 250.867 Temporary quarters and temporary equipment. ( a ) You must equip temporary quarters with all safety devices required by API RP 14C, Appendix C (incorporated by reference as specified in § 250.198). The District Manager must approve the safety system/safety devices associated with the temporary quarters prior to installation.
( b ) The District Manager may require you to install a temporary firewater system for temporary quarters in production processing areas or other classified areas.
( c ) Temporary equipment associated with the production process system, including equipment used for well testing and/or well clean-up, must be approved by the District Manager.
( d ) The District Manager must approve temporary generators that would require a change to the electrical one-line diagram in § 250.842(a).
[81 FR 60918, Sept. 7, 2016, as amended at 83 FR 49259, Sept. 28, 2018]
§ 1204.205 How do I obtain accounting and auditing relief? ( a ) To take cumulative reports and payments relief under § 1204.202, you must notify ONRR in writing by January 31 of the calendar year for which you begin taking your relief. ( 1 ) Your notification must contain: ( i ) Your company name, ONRR-assigned payor code, address, phone number, and contact name; and
( ii ) The specific ONRR lease number and agreement number, if applicable.
( 2 ) You may file a single notification for multiple marginal properties.
( b ) To obtain other relief under § 1204.203, you must file a written request for relief with ONRR. ( 1 ) Your request must contain: ( i ) Your company name, ONRR-assigned payor code, address, phone number, and contact name;
( ii ) The ONRR lease number and agreement number, if applicable; and
( iii ) A complete and detailed description of the specific accounting or auditing relief you seek.
( 2 ) You may file a single request for multiple marginal properties if you are requesting the same relief for all properties.
§ 883.314 Broadband infrastructure. Any new construction or substantial rehabilitation, as substantial rehabilitation is defined by 24 CFR 5.100, of a building with more than 4 rental units and that is subject to a Housing Assistance Payments contract executed or renewed after January 19, 2017 must include installation of broadband infrastructure, as this term is also defined in 24 CFR 5.100, except where the owner determines and documents the determination that: ( a ) The location of the new construction or substantial rehabilitation makes installation of broadband infrastructure infeasible;
( b ) The cost of installing broadband infrastructure would result in a fundamental alteration in the nature of its program or activity or in an undue financial burden; or
( c ) The structure of the housing to be substantially rehabilitated makes installation of broadband infrastructure infeasible.
[81 FR 92638, Dec. 20, 2016]
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-6034

ROBERT LEE TRENT, 

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

PATRICIA R. STANSBERRY, Warden,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief

District Judge. (CA-04-753-5-FL)

Submitted: May 19, 2005 Decided: May 24, 2005

Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robert Lee Trent, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

Robert Lee Trent seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying relief in part on his petition filed pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) and dismissing without prejudice in part for

failure to exhaust administrative remedies. We have reviewed the

record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for

the reasons stated by the district court. Trent v. Stansberry, No.

CA-04-753-5-FL (E.D.N.C. filed Dec. 6, 2004; entered Dec. 16,

2004). 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.

 AFFIRMED
# Materials NotIncluded in Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket

Docket Number: FAA· 2010-0033 Directorate Identifier: 2009NM099AD

767-53AO131, R1 --- 3/12/2009 SRM 767·200 D634T201 -··8/15/06 SRM 767-300 D634T210 --- 8/15/06 SRM 767-300F D634T215 --- 8/15/06 SRM 767-400 D634T225 --- 8/15/06

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in FDMS Docket and Maintained inthe Supplemental AD Docket


### MAY BEVIEWED AT: Federal Aviation Administration Transport Airplane Directorate Rules Docket 1601 Lind Ave. SW., Renton, WA 98057 425.227.1221

### DURING THE HOURS OF: 9a.m. and 3 pm., Monday through Friday,

except Federal holidays. Form Date: 03/0512008
#### GLUCOSE SUGAR REFINING CO., Appellant, v. McKINNEY et al., Respondents.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

January 4, 1905.)

Action by the Glu-Icose Sugar Refining Company against Edward P.- McKinney and others. No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs.
Editorial Note on Part 250
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 250 appear at 77 FR 50891, Aug. 22, 2012.

§ 250.413 What must my description of well drilling design criteria address? Your description of well drilling design criteria must address: ( a ) Pore pressures;
( b ) Formation fracture gradients, adjusted for water depth;
( c ) Potential lost circulation zones;
( d ) Drilling fluid weights;
( e ) Casing setting depths;
( f ) Maximum anticipated surface pressures. For this section, maximum anticipated surface pressures are the pressures that you reasonably expect to be exerted upon a casing string and its related wellhead equipment. In calculating maximum anticipated surface pressures, you must consider: drilling, completion, and producing conditions; drilling fluid densities to be used below various casing strings; fracture gradients of the exposed formations; casing setting depths; total well depth; formation fluid types; safety margins; and other pertinent conditions. You must include the calculations used to determine the pressures for the drilling and the completion phases, including the anticipated surface pressure used for designing the production string;
( g ) A single plot containing curves for estimated pore pressures, formation fracture gradients, proposed drilling fluid weights (surface and downhole), planned safe drilling margin, and casing setting depths in true vertical measurements;
( h ) A summary report of the shallow hazards site survey that describes the geological and manmade conditions if not previously submitted; and
( i ) Permafrost zones, if applicable.
[76 FR 64462, Oct. 18, 2011, as amended at 81 FR 26017, Apr. 29, 2016; 84 FR 21973, May 15, 2019]