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

No. 18

- 50777 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v. CLOVIS JOSEPH SCHEXNAYDER , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 5:17

- CR

- 106

- 1

Before BARKSDALE, ELROD, and HO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Clovis Joseph Schexnayder pleaded guilty to failure to register as a sex offender, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2250(a) , and received a sentence of , inter alia , 46

- months ’ i mprisonment

. In his sole issue o n appeal, he challenges the imposition of a six

- level enhancement pursuant to Sentencing Guideline § 2A3.5(b)(1)(A) ( applies if “defendant committed .

. 

### . a sex offense against someone other than a minor ”) , based on the district court ’s finding he had

* Pursuant to 5 th 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. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 th Cir. R

. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED June 7, 2019 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 18-50777 Document: 00514987857 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/07/2019No. 18

- 50777

2 committed a sex offense during the time he had failed to register. In that regard, Schexnayder asserts the court erred in its finding his involvement in that offen s e based on a preponderance of the evidence , rather than the reasonable

- doubt , standard. Although post

- Booker , the Sentencing Guidelines are advisory only, the district court must avoid significant procedural error, such as improperly calculating the Guidelines sentencing range. Gall v. United States , 552 U.S. 38, 48

– 51 (2007). If no such procedural error exists, a properly preserved objection to an ultimate se ntence is reviewed for substantive reasonableness under an abuse

- of

- discretion standard. Id. at 51; United States v. Delgado

Martinez , 564 F.3d 750, 751

– 53 (5th Cir. 2009). In that respect, for issues preserved in district court, its application of the G uidelines is reviewed de novo ; its factual findings, only for clear error. E.g. , United States v. Cisneros

Gutierrez , 517 F.3d 751, 764 (5th Cir. 2008). As discussed, only procedural error is claimed. “The sentencing judge is entitled to find by a pre ponderance of the evidence all the facts relevant to the determination of a Guidelines sentencing range.” United States v. Lewis , 476 F.3d 369, 389 (5th Cir. 2007) (citation omitted) . This standard applies even if the issue involves defendant’s commissio n of another offense. See United States v. Watts , 519 U.S. 148, 156

– 57 (1997) (per curiam). Schexnayder concedes our court has rejected his contention in binding precedent ( see Lewis ) , and raises the issue only in order to preserve it for possible furthe r review. AFFIRMED. Case: 18-50777 Document: 00514987857 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/07/2019
* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 12, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-50903

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

GABRIEL GUZMAN-VILLANUEVA,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 2:04-CR-770-ALL

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

Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Gabriel GuzmanVillanueva raises arguments that are foreclosed by AlmendarezTorres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held

that a prior conviction is a sentencing factor under 8 U.S.C. 

§ 1326(b)(2) and not a separate criminal offense. The

Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the

judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
# L_2020349EN.01000301.xml

| 21.10.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 349/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.10.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 349/3

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2020/1529

of 14 October 2020

entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (‘Colatura di alici di Cetara’ (PDO))

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Italy’s application to register the name ‘Colatura di alici di Cetara’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Italy’s application to register the name ‘Colatura di alici di Cetara’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

| (2) | As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Colatura di alici di Cetara’ should therefore be entered in the register, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Colatura di alici di Cetara’ should therefore be entered in the register,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The name ‘Colatura di alici di Cetara’ (PDO) is hereby entered in the register.

The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 1.7. – Fresh fish, molluscs and crustaceans and products derived therefrom, as listed in Annex XI to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 (3).

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 14 October 2020.

For the Commission,

On behalf of the President,

Janusz WOJCIECHOWSKI

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ C 208, 22.6.2020, p. 10.

2

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 of 13 June 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 36).

3

---
###### Editorial Note on Part 1956

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1956 appear at 80 FR 9901, Feb. 24, 2015.

#### § 1956.98 [Reserved]
```

                                                                    EXHIBIT 13.2

              SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF
                        THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002*

In connection  with the annual report of North  American  Nickel Inc.  (formerly
Widescope  Resources  Inc.) (the  "Company")  on Form 20-F for the period ending
December 31, 2011 as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Edward D. Ford,  Chief Financial  Officer of the
Company,  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  containing  the  financial  statements  of the  Company  fully
     complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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.

Date: April 27, 2012

/s/ Edward D. Ford
--------------------------------------------
Edward D. Ford
Chief Financial Officer

* A signed original of this written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
```

----
#### § 29.3006 Burley, Type 93.

That type of air-cured tobacco commonly known as Foreign-grown Burley, produced in countries other than the United States.

[49 FR 16757, Apr. 20, 1984]
First Amendment to the Re-Established Retirement Plan



 Exhibit 10.1A 
  
 KEWAUNEE SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION 
 COMPENSATION COMMITTEE MEETING 
  
 MARCH 22, 2005 
  
 PENSION PLAN RESOLUTION

  
 RESOLVED, that the Corporation’s Re-established Retirement Plan for
Salaried Employees of Kewaunee Scientific Corporation be amended to incorporate the Board of Directors February 22, 2005, decision to “freeze” the Plan. The amendments shall provide for the following: 
  

	 	•	 	As of April 30, 2005, no further benefit accruals will be earned under the Plan. 

  

	 	•	 	As of April 30, 2005, participants will become 100% vested under the Plan. 

  

	 	•	 	As of April 30, 2005, no other employees shall become participants in the Plan. 

  

	 	•	 	Notwithstanding the freeze, the Plan will continue to comply in form and operation with 401(a) and the applicable provisions of ERISA. 

  
 FURTHER RESOLVED, that said amendments shall be implemented as soon as administratively
feasible after the adoption of the foregoing resolution. (Targeted implementation date is April 30, 2005.) 
  
 FURTHER RESOLVED, that the officers of the Corporation are authorized to take such action as they may determine to be necessary or appropriate to implement the foregoing resolutions.
MISCELLANEOUS DISMISSALS

98-1077.

#### GeCep Corp. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision.

Board of Tax Appeals, Nos. 96-S-438 and 96-S-439. This cause is pending as an appeal from the Board of Tax Appeals. Upon consideration of the joint motion for remand' to the Board of Tax Appeals for the purpose of entering a stipulation and order reflecting the parties’ settlement of this cause pursuant to this court’s Pilot Mediation Program,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion for remand be, and hereby is, granted, and this cause is remanded to the Board of Tax Appeals.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that this cause be, and hereby is, dismissed.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsAn analysis of the contact sintering process in III-V solar cellsThe possibility of eliminating the gross mechanical changes that take place during sintering while retaining the processes that reduce contact resistivity is investigated. Before considering the electrical aspects, however, it is necessary to understand the relevant metallurgy. As the sintering process proceeds in the InP-Au system, dramatic color changes occur that enable a precise measurement of the kinetics of each step. A detailed insight into the processes that control each stage in the InP-Au interaction has resulted. It is shown that contact sintering in the InP-Au system consists of three consecutive stages, each of which is controlled by a separate mechanism.Document ID19900016104Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeConference PaperAuthorsWeizer, Victor G.*(NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH., United States)*Fatemi, Navid S.*(Sverdrup Technology, Inc., Brook Park OH., United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateJanuary 1, 1990Subject CategoryEnergy Production And ConversionReport/Patent NumberE-5556NAS 1.15:103179NASA-TM-103179Meeting InformationMeeting: Photovoltaics Specialists ConferenceLocation: Kissimmee, FLCountry: United StatesStart Date: May 21, 1990End Date: May 25, 1990Sponsors:IEEEAccession Number90N25420Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NAS3-25266PROJECT: RTOP 506-41-11Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19900016104.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
#### In re HANSEN.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

July 12, 1906.)

In the matter of Dethlef 0. Hansen.

No opinion. Reference ordered. Settle order on notice.
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DANIEL ELOY ROMERO, Plaintiff - Appellant,
v. GAY; ARIZONA ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondents - Appellees. No. 07-16353 D.C. No. CV-04-00825-FJM
MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Frederick J. Martone, District Judge, Presiding Submitted January 12, 2011 ** San Francisco, California Before: HUG, SCHROEDER, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges. Arizona state prisoner Daniel Eloy Romero appeals from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition as untimely. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm. 

# FILED
JAN 19 2011 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 The district court did not err by finding that Romero’s federal habeas petition is barred by the one-year statute of limitations of 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1). Romero is not entitled to statutory tolling under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(2) because his February 2003 letter requesting sentence cl arification can not be construed as a “properly filed application for State pos t-conviction relief or other collateral review . . . .” 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(2). Furthermore, Romero is not entitled to equitable tolling because he has faile d to demonstrate the existence of extraordinary circumstances beyond his control that made it impossible for him to file a petition on time. Spitsyn v. Moore , 345 F.3d 796, 799 (9th Cir. 2003). In light of the foregoing disposition, we decline to consider the merits of Romero’s argument regarding the de nial of earned release credits. AFFIRMED.
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.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### U.S. Customs and Border Protection

# AGENCY:

U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

# ACTION:

Notice of accreditation and approval of Inspectorate America Corporation, as a commercial gauger and laboratory.

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13, Inspectorate America Corporation, 2501 SE Columbia Way, STE 300, Vancouver, WA 98661, has been approved to gauge and accredited to test petroleum and petroleum products for customs purposes, in accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13. Anyone wishing to employ this entity to conduct laboratory analyses and gauger services should request and receive written assurances from the entity that it is accredited or approved by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct the specific test or gauger service requested. Alternatively, inquires regarding the specific test or gauger service this entity is accredited or approved to perform may be directed to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection by calling (202) 344-1060. The inquiry may also be sent to                         *cbp.labhq@dhs.gov.*                         Please reference the Web site listed below for a complete listing of CBP approved gaugers and accredited laboratories.                         *http://cbp.gov/​xp/​cgov/​import/​operations_​support/​labs_​scientific_​svcs/​commercial_​gaugers/​.*

# DATES:

The accreditation and approval of Inspectorate America Corporation, as commercial gauger and laboratory became effective on August 02, 2010. The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for August 2013.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Anthony Malana, Laboratories and Scientific Services, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 20229, 202-344-1060.

Dated: November 8, 2010.

Ira S. Reese,

Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services. 

[FR Doc. 2010-29172 Filed 11-18-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
EXHIBIT 23.1




               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS








ASA International Ltd.
Framingham, Massachusetts



    We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration
Statement No. 33-312933 of ASA International Ltd. on Form S-8 of our report
dated March 1, 2002, relating to the consolidated financial statements of ASA
International Ltd. appearing in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2001.


/s/ Sansiveri, Kimball & McNamee, L.L.P.


Sansiveri, Kimball & McNamee, L.L.P.


Providence, Rhode Island
March 28, 2002
#### § 28.421 Good Middling Spotted Color.

Good Middling Spotted Color is color which is better than Strict Middling Spotted Color.
149 So.2d 766

#### Succession of Samuel Burgess HARPER, Sr.

No. 46579.

Feb. 8, 1963.

' Application not considered. The applL' cation has not been filed within 30 days’ after a rehearing was denied by the Court *1013■of Appeal as required by Section 11 of Art. *7*of the Constitution and R.S. 13 :- •4450.
97- 1112.

#### Salem Med. Arts & Dev. Corp. v. Columbiana Cty. Bd. of Revision.

Board of Tax Appeals, No. 95-S-839. Reported at 82 Ohio St.3d 193, 694 N.E.2d 1324. On motion for reconsideration. Motion denied.

F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., dissent.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. Case No: 3:96cr57-03/RV

CHARLES RANDALL HARRISON

 /

ORDER AND NOTICE

This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s document submissions entitled

“Petition for Post Settlement and Closure of the Account Under Public Policy, Affidavit

of Specific Negative Averment” and “Fiduciary Responsibility to Discharge This

Commercial Debt” along with an IRS Form 1099-A. These documents have no

relevance to the criminal case against the Defendant, which has long since

concluded. Within the last four months, the Defendant has made several attempts to

file other irrelevant documents into the record of this case. The documents were

deemed deficient by the Court and returned to the defendant without filing, noting

also that the case is closed.

The Defendant in this case was found guilty by a jury of a multiple count drug

conspiracy on November 7, 1996, and sentenced on January 23, 1997. The

Defendant has pursued relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 at least three times, as well as

motions for relief under 18 U.S.C. § 3582. He pursued relief from judgment under

Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b), several times, which were denied. He filed five separate appeals,

all of which are now concluded. Accordingly, there are no further matters pending in

this case which would require, or allow, the filing of any evidentiary material. The

case is closed.

The Court will not accept any further documents from Defendant for filing in

this criminal case and the Clerk is instructed to return any and all such future

submissions without filing. This ruling does not, however, preclude the Defendant

from filing a new civil action for any legal claim he may wish to pursue.

DONE AND ORDERED this 12th day of May, 2009.

/s/ Roger Vinson 

ROGER VINSON

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:96-cr-00057-RV-MD Document 490 Filed 05/12/09 Page 1 of 1
(Rev. November 2023)

Cat. No. 63924Z

Notice 797

Notice 797 (Rev. 11-2023)

Department of the Treasury 

Internal Revenue Service

Possible Federal Tax Refund Due to 

the Earned Income Credit (EIC)

What Is the EIC? 

The EIC is a refundable tax credit for certain workers. 

What Is the Purpose of This Notice? 

Your employer sent you this notice to make you aware of an 

important federal tax benet. Even if you had no income tax 

withheld from your wages during the year, you may be 

eligible for the EIC. 

How Much Is the EIC?

For 2023, the EIC can be as much as $3,995 if you have one 

qualifying child who has a valid SSN; $6,604 if you have two 

qualifying children who have valid SSNs; $7,430 if you have 

three or more qualifying children who have valid SSNs; and 

$600 if you have no qualifying children who have a valid 

SSN.

How Do You Claim the EIC? 

To claim the EIC, you must: 

1. Be eligible for the EIC, and

2. File a 2023 tax return (including Schedule EIC if you 

have a qualifying child).

To gure out if you are eligible, see Pub. 596 or visit 

IRS.gov/EITC.

If eligible, you can claim the EIC to get a refund even if 

you had no tax withheld from your pay or owe no tax. For 

example, if you had no tax withheld in 2023 and owe no tax 

but are eligible for a credit of $800, you must le a 2023 

income tax return to get the $800 refund. 

Most people qualify for free tax preparation. If you earned 

less than $79,000, you can le for free online at 

IRS.gov/FreeFile. In addition, IRS-certied volunteers can 

prepare your return for free in person if you earned less than 

$64,000 or are age 60 or older. To nd locations, visit 

IRS.gov/VITA or call 800-906-9887.

More Information 

Refer to instructions for the tax return you are ling, 

Pub. 596, or IRS.gov/EITC for details on the EIC. You can 

download IRS forms and publications at IRS.gov/Forms,

and you can get printed copies mailed to you by going to 

IRS.gov/OrderForms or by calling 800-829-3676.