alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to 5TH 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH C IR . R. 47.5.4.

1 There is no dispute that the 50-month sentence imposed is within a properly calculated guideline range. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED April 23, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-40945 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JORGE ALBERTO SALAVERRIA, Defendant-Appellant.

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

USDC No. 2:06-CR-40

-------------------- Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Jorge Alberto Salaverria appeals the 50-month term of imprisonment imposed after his guilty plea to an indictment charging him with illegal re-entry following deportation. Salaverria contends that the district court reversibly erred by imposing a guidelines sentence without considering his reasons for coming to this country in light of the sentencing factors listed in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). 1 The record reflects that the district court considered the statutory sentencing factors;No. 06-40945 -2- Salaverria has not shown that the sentence was unreasonable or that this court should not defer to the district court’s determinations at sentencing. See United States v. Mares , 402 F.3d 511, 519 (5th Cir. 2005). Salaverria contends that the enhancement provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 1326 are unconstitutional on their face and as applied in this case. He argues, in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000), that his 50-month term of imprisonment exceeds the statutory maximum sentence allowed for the § 1326(a) offense charged in his indictment. He challenges the constitutionality of § 1326(b)’s treatment of prior felony and aggravated felony convictions as sentencing factors rather than elements of the offense that must be found by a jury. Salverria’s constitutional challenge is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998). Although he contends that Almendarez-Torres was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule Almendarez-Torres in light of Apprendi , we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that Almendarez-Torres remains binding. See United States v. Garza-Lopez , 410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 126 S. Ct. 298 (2005). Salverria properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed in light of Almendarez-Torres and circuit precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for further review.
AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 32.2





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SS.1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Annual Report of IR BioSciences Holdings, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John N. Fermanis, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.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.





IR BIOSCIENCES HOLDINGS, INC.Date: April 15, 2010
By:
/s/ John N. FermanisJohn N. FermanisChief Financial Officer





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, an other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
§ 1789.157 Consultant contract. ( a ) The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), 48 CFR Ch. 1, and the Agriculture Acquisition Regulation (AGAR), 48 CFR Ch. 4, shall apply to all Consultant Contracts entered into pursuant to this part except as provided in this section. ( 1 ) Contracts for Legal Consultants shall provide for a technical representative from OGC.
( 2 ) All Consultant Contracts shall provide for an escrow account funding mechanism pursuant to this part and for the government's sole discretion in determining whether payments are to be made from the Escrow Account to the Consultant.
( 3 ) All Consultant Contracts shall provide that payment of all obligations for work performed thereunder must be satisfied by amounts available in the Escrow Account; with the exception of the annual retainer fee, if any, Consultants shall not be entitled to any payments from the government.
( b ) The provisions of paragraph (a) of this section shall be given prominent emphasis in requests for proposals issued under this part.
#### In the Matter of Roosevelt Taxi, Inc., Petitioner, v. Commissioner of Public Safety of the City of Yonkers, Respondent.

Petition granted to the extent that the determination of respondent, dated March 18, 1966, is annulled and respondent is directed to approve petitioner’s application for transfer to it of the taxicab license and medallion in suit; and proceeding otherwise dismissed, without costs. In our opinion, substantial proof to warrant denial of the transfer is lacking. Ughctta, Brennan and Hopkins, JJ., concur; Beldoek, P„ J., and Benjamin, J., concur in the limited dismissal of the proceeding, but otherwise dissent and vote to confirm respondent’s determination, with the following memorandum by Beldoek, P. J., in which Benjamin, J., concurs: The principal issue in this proceeding is whether there is substantial evidence to support respondent Commissioner’s determination, which denied petitioner’s application for approval of a transfer of a taxicab license and medallion to petitioner. The record discloses that petitioner’s president permitted his brother, who had a criminal record, to frequent his taxi office (petitioner’s president operated a taxi service under his own name) and at times to answer telephones and dispatch taxicabs. The basis of the denial of the application was the character of the brother, whom the Commissioner found to have participated in the operation of a taxi business by petitioner’s president. It is well settled that a licensing officer’s “exercise of discretion in refusing to grant a license, if not otherwise arbitrary or capricious, may be interfered with by the courts ‘only when it is clearly shown that refusal is based solely upon grounds which as matter of law may not control [his] discretion’” (Ma*tter of Barton Trucking Corp.*v. *O’Connell,*7 N Y 2d 299, 308). It is not the function of the court to substitute its judgment for that of the licensing officer, where the administrative determination finds support in the record, has a reasonable basis in law and is neither arbitrary nor capricious. In my opinion, the Commissioner was clearly entitled to give consideration to the fact that a known criminal was permitted to participate *754in the operation of a most sensitive area of public service. I cannot say that there was no rational basis for the conclusion by the Commissioner and, accordingly, I would confirm his determination.
Exhibit
      32.2




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 of Chardan South China Acquisition
      Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2007
      (the “Report”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
      hereof, I, Dr. Richard D. Propper, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary of
      the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
      Sec. 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, as amended; and




2.  The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.




/s/
      Richard D. Propper  Dated:
      May 21, 2007


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


Dr.
      Richard D. Propper


Chief
      Financial Officer


(Principal
      Accounting and Financial Officer)







16
Editorial Note on Subchapter B of Chapter XIV
Editorial Note: For Federal Register citations to regulations affecting previous program years not included in this volume, see the List of CFR Sections Affected, which appears in the Finding Aids section of the printed volume and at *www.govinfo.gov .*

§ 1434.12 Liens. ( a ) CCC's security interest in the honey pledged as collateral is first and superior to all other security interests.
( b ) The county office will file or record, as required by State law, all financing statements needed to perfect a security interest in honey pledged as collateral for a loan. The cost of filing and recording will be for the account of CCC.
( c ) If there are any other security interests, liens, or encumbrances on the honey, CCC will obtain waivers that fully protect the interest of CCC even though the security interests, liens, or encumbrances are satisfied from the loan proceeds. No additional security interests, liens, or encumbrances will be placed on the honey after the loan is approved.
[66 FR 15177, Mar. 15, 2001, as amended at 80 FR 141, Jan. 2, 2015]
§ 1599.17 Suspension and termination of agreements. ( a ) An agreement or subagreement may be suspended or terminated in accordance with 2 CFR 200.338 or 200.339. FAS may suspend or terminate an agreement if it determines that: ( 1 ) One of the bases in 2 CFR 200.338 or 200.339 for termination or suspension by FAS has been satisfied;
( 2 ) The continuation of the assistance provided under the agreement is no longer necessary or desirable; or
( 3 ) Storage facilities are inadequate to prevent spoilage or waste, or distribution of the donated commodities or procured commodities will result in substantial disincentive to, or interference with, domestic production or marketing in the target country.
( b ) If an agreement is terminated, the recipient: ( 1 ) Is responsible for the security and integrity of any undistributed donated commodities or procured commodities and must dispose of such commodities only as agreed to by FAS;
( 2 ) Is responsible for any sale proceeds, FAS-provided funds, interest, or program income that have not been disbursed and must use or return them only as agreed to by FAS; and
( 3 ) Must comply with any closeout and post-closeout procedures specified in the agreement and 2 CFR 200.343 and 200.344.
§ 1752.19 Debt settlement. Debts will not be settled directly by the Agency if: ( a ) Referral to the Office of Inspector General and/or to Office of General Counsel is contemplated or pending because of suspected criminal violation;
( b ) Civil action to protect the interest of the Government is contemplated or pending;
( c ) An investigation for suspected fiscal irregularity is contemplated or pending;
( d ) The Borrower is uncooperative in resolving the delinquency or the Agency has reason to believe the Borrower is not acting in good faith; or
( e ) The debt has been referred to the Department of Justice, such as in bankruptcy proceedings.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 24.8

                               POWER OF ATTORNEY

         KNOWN ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned hereby
constitutes and appoints each of Beverly L. Brown, Robert K. Kretzman, Lawrence
E. Kreider and Joram C. Salig or any of them, each acting alone, his true and
lawful attorney-in-fact and agent, with full power of substitution, for him and
his name, place and stead, in any and all capacities, in connection with the
THE COSMETIC CENTER, INC. (the "Corporation") Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 27, 1997 (the "Form 10-K") under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, including, without limiting the generality of
the foregoing, to sign the Form 10-K in the name and on behalf of the
Corporation or on behalf of the undersigned as a director or officer of the
Corporation, and any amendments to the Form 10-K and any instrument, contract,
document or other writing, of or in connection with the Form 10-K or amendments
thereto, and to file the same, with all exhibits thereto, and other documents
in connection therewith, including this power of attorney, with the Securities
and Exchange Commission and any applicable securities exchange or securities
self-regulatory body, granting unto said attorneys-in-fact and agents, each
acting alone, full power and authority to do and perform each and every act and
thing requisite and necessary to be done in and about the premises, as fully to
all intents and purposes as he might or could do in person, hereby ratifying
and confirming all that said attorneys-in-fact and agents, each acting alone,
or his substitute or substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue
hereof.

       IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has signed these presents this
17th day of February, 1998.

                             /s/ HARVEY ROSENTHAL
                             ------------------------------------
                             HARVEY ROSENTHAL
Exhibit 32.2

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 Annual Report of Candela Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending
June 27, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert E. Quinn, Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



/s/ ROBERT E. QUINN Robert E. Quinn Chief Financial OfficerOctober 1, 2009


---



QuickLinks
N OTE : This order is nonprecedential. 

# United States Court of Appeals **for the Federal Circuit**

__________________________ KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N.V. AND U.S. PHILIPS CORPORA TION , Plaintiffs

- Appellees
,
v. CINRAM INTERNATIONAL , INC., CINRAM, INC., CINRAM MANUFACTURING , INC., THE ADS GROUP ( formerly known as Advanced Duplication Services , LLC), AMERICAN MED IA INTERNATIONAL, LTD., CARBONITE, INC., HAL LEONARD CORP., MUSIC CITY OPTICAL MEDIA, INC., CONCORD RECORD S, INC., CONCORD MUSIC GROUP, INC., UNIVERSAL MUSIC GR OUP, AND OPTICAL EXPERTS MANU FACTURING, INC. , Defendants
, AND ENTERTAINMENT DISTRI BUTION COMPANY (USA), LLC, ENTERTAI NMENT DISTRIBUTION COMPANY, LLC, AND UMG MANUFACTURING & LOGISTICS, INC. , Defendants

- Appellants

.

__________________________ 2013

- 1482

__________________________ Case: 13-1482 Document: 15 Page: 1 Filed: 09/18/2013KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS V

. C INRAM INTERNATIONAL 2 Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York in consolidated No. 08

- CV

0515, Judge Richard G. Stearns

.

__________________________ ON MOTION

__________________________ O R D E R Upon consideration of the parties’ joint motion to di smiss th is appeal , I T I S O RDERED T HAT : (1) T he motion is granted. (2) Each side shall bear its own costs.

F OR T HE C OURT

/s/ Daniel E. O’Toole Daniel E. O’Toole Clerk

s26 ISSUED AS A MANDATE : September 18, 2013 Case: 13-1482 Document: 15 Page: 2 Filed: 09/18/2013
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 221 (Wednesday, November 17, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 70363]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-28800]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Thrift Supervision

[AC-53: OTS No. H-4756]


Minden Bancorp, Inc., Minden, LA; Approval of Conversion 
Application

    Notice is hereby given that on November 9, 2010, the Office of 
Thrift Supervision approved the application of Minden Mutual Holding 
Company and MBL Bank, Minden, Louisiana, to convert to the stock form 
of organization. Copies of the application are available for inspection 
by appointment (phone number: 202-906-5922 or e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#114164737d78723f587f777e515e45423f45637470623f767e67"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="cf9fbaada3a6ace186a1a9a08f809b9ce19bbdaaaebce1a8a0b9">[email protected]</span></a>) at the Public Reading Room, 1700 G Street, 
NW., Washington, DC 20552, and the OTS Western Regional Office, 122 W. 
John Carpenter Freeway, Suite 600, Irving, Texas 75261-9027.

    Dated: November 10, 2010.

    By the Office of Thrift Supervision.
Sandra E. Evans,
Federal Register Liaison.
[FR Doc. 2010-28800 Filed 11-16-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6720-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Editorial Note on Part 1940
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 1940 appear at 80 FR 9876, Feb. 24, 2015.

§ 1940.958 Designated agency. The Governor will appoint a State agency to provide the panel and the State coordinator with support for the daily operation of the panel. In addition to providing support, the designated agency is responsible for identifying: ( a ) Alternative sources of financial assistance for project preapplications/applications reviewed and ranked by the panel, and
( b ) Related activities within the State.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER>    1,000
<CURRENCY>      RENMINBI YUAN
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                   8.30
<CASH>                                         131,006
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,212
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     55,452
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               685,216
<PP&E>                                           6,504
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,211
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 705,113
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          383,742
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        270
<COMMON>                                            48
<OTHER-SE>                                     212,743
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   705,113
<SALES>                                      1,827,499
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,833,553
<CGS>                                        1,677,056
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,729,357
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              19,870
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 84,326
<INCOME-TAX>                                    13,991
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             35,822
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    35,822
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     9.55
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     9.54
        

</TABLE>
#### Harry A. Parslow et al., Appellants, v Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company, Respondent.

to dismiss appeal as untimely taken denied, without costs. Since the copy of the order of Special Term served on appellants’ attorney on August 22, 1979 failed to indicate the date of the order, it was defective in a material respect and therefore its service was ineffective to commence appellants’ time to appeal (see CPLR 2219, subd [a]; 5513, subd [a]; 10 Carmody-Wait 2d, NY Prac, § 70:115). Mahoney, P. J., Sweeney, Kane, Main and Mikoll, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND> This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from IFX
Corporation's Form 10-K as of June 30, 1997 and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                    YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                        JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                           JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                             JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                     3,279,300
<SECURITIES>                              46,402,200
<RECEIVABLES>                              5,837,800
<ALLOWANCES>                               (430,000)
<INVENTORY>                                        0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                          58,106,700
<PP&E>                                       269,000
<DEPRECIATION>                           (2,326,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                            56,643,200
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                     47,403,900
<BONDS>                                            0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0
<PREFERRED>                                        0
<COMMON>                                   8,249,400
<OTHER-SE>                                  (45,700)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>              56,643,200
<SALES>                                      199,200
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                          16,549,000
<CGS>                                              0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                365,700
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           9,828,400
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         3,013,600
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            6,354,900
<INCOME-TAX>                               2,235,500
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        3,183,800      
<DISCONTINUED>                                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    0
<CHANGES>                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                               3,183,800
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    .10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    .10
        
                                  
 

</TABLE>