alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 19-41014

Conference Calendar

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Manuel Joe Reyes, 

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:17-CR-446-2

Before King, Southwick, and Ho, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

The attorney retained to represent Manuel Joe Reyes 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). 

Reyes has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the 

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited 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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 1, 2021

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 19-41014 Document: 00515805299 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/01/2021
No. 19-41014

2

relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s 

assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate 

review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is 

GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and 

the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42. 

Case: 19-41014 Document: 00515805299 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/01/2021
Case 4:20-cv-00148-RH-MAF   Document 1-9   Filed 03/20/20   Page 1 of 4

Case 4:20-cv-00148-RH-MAF   Document 1-9   Filed 03/20/20   Page 2 of 4

Case 4:20-cv-00148-RH-MAF   Document 1-9   Filed 03/20/20   Page 3 of 4

Case 4:20-cv-00148-RH-MAF   Document 1-9   Filed 03/20/20   Page 4 of 4
#### § 2810.1 General statement.

This part is issued in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) to provide guidance for the general public as to Office of Operations (OO) organization and functions.
Exhibit 10.7


 


Compensation
of Non-Employee Directors. During 2004, directors who were not full time employees of Trinity or
Los Alamos National Bank were paid as follows:


 


Trinity Capital
Corporation


 




	
  Director

  	
   

  	
  $500.00
  per month

  
	
  Chairman of the Board

  	
   

  	
  Additional
  $500.00 per month

  
	
  Vice-Chairman of the Board

  	
   

  	
  Additional
  $300.00 per month

  






 


Los Alamos National Bank


 




	
  Director

  	
   

  	
  $1,000.00
  per month

  






 


Title Guaranty &
Insurance Company


 




	
  Director

  	
   

  	
  None
§ 301.92-7 Availability of inspectors; assembly for inspection. ( a ) Any person (other than a person authorized to issue certificates under § 301.92-5(c)) who desires to move a regulated or associated article or non-host nursery stock interstate accompanied by a certificate must notify an inspector[1] as far in advance of the desired interstate movement as possible, but no less than 48 hours before the desired time of inspection.
( b ) The regulated or associated article or non-host nursery stock must be assembled at the place and in the manner the inspector designates as necessary to comply with this subpart.
[72 FR 8597, Feb. 27, 2007, as amended at 84 FR 16194, Apr. 18, 2019; 87 FR 80019, Dec. 29, 2022] Footnotes -
301.92-7
[1] See footnote 2 in § 301.92-4.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

THOMAS DESPART,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 4:20cv253-MW/MAF

STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL,

ASHLEY MOODY, and

FLORIDA GOVERNOR,

RON DESANTIS,

Defendants.

______________________________/

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This Court has considered, without hearing, the Magistrate Judge’s Report 

and Recommendation, ECF No. 19. Upon consideration, no objections having been 

filed by the parties,

IT IS ORDERED:

The report and recommendation is accepted and adopted, as this Court’s 

opinion. The Clerk shall enter judgment stating, “This action is DISMISSED for 

failure to comply with court orders pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) 

and Local Rule 41.1 and for want of prosecution.” The Clerk shall close the file. 

SO ORDERED on November 16, 2020.

s/Mark E. Walker 

Chief United States District Judge

Case 4:20-cv-00253-MW-MAF Document 20 Filed 11/16/20 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

DAVID REN MOORE,

Petitioner,

v. Case No. 5:19cv400-TKW-MAF

MARK S. INCH, Secretary, Florida

Department of Corrections,

Respondent.

_________________________________/

ORDER

This case is before the Court based on the magistrate judge’s Report and 

Recommendation (Doc. 12). No objections were filed. Upon due consideration of 

the Report and Recommendation and the case file, I agree with the magistrate 

judge’s determination that this case is due to be dismissed based on Petitioner’s 

failure to comply with court orders. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED, and the Clerk shall close the file.

DONE and ORDERED this 1st day of May, 2020.

T. Kent Wetherell, II 

T. KENT WETHERELL, II

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 5:19-cv-00400-TKW-MAF Document 13 Filed 05/01/20 Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 13.1

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

In connection with the annual report of Widescope Resources Inc. (the "Company")
on Form  20-F  for the  period  ending  December  31,  2007 as  filed  with  the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Edward
Dolejsi,  President  and CEO 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: June 23, 2008


/s/ Edward Dolejsi
------------------------------
Edward Dolejsi
President and CEO

* 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.
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

v. CASE NO. 1:88-cr-01026-MP-AK

CHARLES L DAVIS,

Defendant.

___________________________/

O R D E R 

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 3436, Emergency Motion to Extend Deadline for

Self-Surrender by Sixty Days. The motion is denied.

DONE AND ORDERED this 10th day of April, 2006

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge

Case 1:88-cr-01026-MP-AK Document 3438 Filed 04/10/06 Page 1 of 1
Executive Compensation Schedule



 Exhibit 10.24 
  
 Named Executive Officer Compensation Schedule 
  
 On March 14, 2005, the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of Westlake Chemical Corporation (the “Company”) set 2005
base salaries and bonus targets for certain executive officers of the Company and determined the amount of 2004 bonuses payable in 2005 to such executive officers. Set forth below are the amounts for the “named executive officers” of the
Company to be included in the Notice and Proxy Statement relating to the Company’s 2005 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held on May 19, 2005. 
  

							
	 Name/Position

	  	2005
Annual
Base Salary

	  	2005 Bonus
Target
(% of Base Salary)

	  	2004 Bonus
Payable in 2005


	 Albert Chao
 President and Chief Executive Officer
	  	$450,000	  	70%	  	$182,474
				
	 James Chao
 Chairman of the Board
	  	$330,000	  	70%	  	$152,061
				
	 Ruth I. Dreessen
 Sr. Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
	  	$297,000	  	40%	  	$199,113
				
	 Wayne D. Morse
 Sr. Vice President
 Vinyls
	  	$270,000	  	40%	  	$126,539
				
	 David R. Hansen
 Sr. Vice President
 Administration
	  	$240,000	  	35%	  	$116,876

  
 The 2005 bonus targets set forth above
relate to the Company’s EVA Incentive Plan (the “EVAIP”). The EVAIP provides for awards that are principally contingent upon the attainment of specific targeted EVA® results. EVA, or “economic value added,” is a measure of financial performance based upon the achievement of
returns for shareholders above the invested cost of capital. Under the plan, if the expected improvement in EVA is met in 2005, participants will be awarded a cash bonus equal to one times their target bonus. This is referred to as a 1X bonus. If
2005 results exceed the expected improvement, awards will be granted at a rate corresponding to the rate of increase above expectation. Similarly, if 2005 results do not meet the expected improvement, the awards will be correspondingly lower. The
gross EVA declared bonus is subject to modification by an Individual Performance Factor as recommended by management and approved by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors.
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 International
Packaging and Logistics Group, Inc.,(the “Company”) on Form 10K for the
year ending December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, DAVID P.
LIEBERMAN, Chief Financial Officer 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 to the best of the undersigned’s knowledge and
belief:





(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 result of operations of the
Company.








/s/DAVID P. LIEBERMAN





DAVID P. LIEBERMAN


Chief
Financial Officer, Director





April
15, 2010
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs. CASE NO.: 4:03-CR-061-SPM

MELVIN MARTIN,

Defendant.

_______________________________/

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR REDUCTION OF SENTENCE

Pending before the Court is Defendant’s motion for reduction of sentence

under Title 18, United States Code, Section 3582(c)(2). As grounds for his

motion, Defendant relies on the amendment to section 5G1.3(b) of the

sentencing guidelines. Defendant argues that he should receive credit for the jail

time he served in state prison. On October 8, 2008, this Court issued an

amended judgment stating that Defendant’s 207 month federal sentence should

run concurrent with his state sentence. To date, the Bureau of Prisons has not

credit Defendant with his state sentence time. Defendant now requests that this

Court vacate his sentence and issue a new sentence that incorporates a

reduction for the time served in state prison, in accordance with Section 5G1.2(b)

of the United States Sentencing Guidelines. 

However, the Government responded that since Defendant’s motion was

Case 4:03-cr-00061-MW-CAS Document 60 Filed 04/23/09 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

 Case No.: 5:00cr29-SPM

filed, the Bureau of Prisons has adjusted Defendant’s sentence calculation in

accordance with defendant’s request and this Court’s amended judgment. 

Therefore, this issue had been resolved through the coordination efforts of the

Government and the Bureau of Prisons. Petitioner appears to have received the

relief requested in his motion. Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant’s motion to render credit

(doc. 54) is denied as moot.

 DONE AND ORDERED this twenty-third day of April, 2009.

 s/ Stephan P. Mickle 

Stephan P. Mickle

United States District Judge

Case 4:03-cr-00061-MW-CAS Document 60 Filed 04/23/09 Page 2 of 2
**Exhibit 21**

**BERNARD CHAUS, INC.**

**List of Subsidiaries**

 

| **Name of Company**                           |   | **State of Incorporation/Formation** |
|-----------------------------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------|
| Bernard Chaus International (Hong Kong), Inc. |   | Delaware                             |
| Bernard Chaus International (Korea), Inc.     |   | Delaware                             |
| Bernard Chaus International (Taiwan), Inc.    |   | Delaware                             |
| Chaus Retail, Inc.                            |   | New Jersey                           |
| S.L. Danielle Acquisition, LLC.               |   | New York                             |
| Cynthia Steffe Acquisition, LLC.              |   | New York                             |

 

 

----
#### § 301.48-5 Inspection and disposal of regulated articles and pests.

Any properly identified inspector is authorized to stop and inspect, and to seize, destroy, or otherwise dispose of or require disposal of regulated articles and Japanese beetles as provided in sections 414, 421, and 434 of the Plant Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 7714, 7731, and 7754) in accordance with instructions issued by the Administrator.

[44 FR 24035, Apr. 24, 1979, as amended at 61 FR 32641, June 25, 1996; 66 FR 21051, Apr. 27, 2001]
Bryan W. Shaw, Ph.D., Chairman 

Buddy Garcia, CommiSsioner 

Carlos Rubinstein, Commissioner 

Mark R Vickery, P.G., Executive Director 

RECEIVED 

II t1AR 29 PH I: 52 

t:H£RHAL AFFAIRS OIVISIIN 

TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL \,lUALITY 

Protecting Texas by Reducing and Preventing Pollution 

March 25, 2011 

Docket No. 2009-1898-RlJL 

91 7108 2133 3935 2304 81b5 

Alfredo Armendariz, Ph.D. 

Regional Administrator 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency- Region 6 

1445 Ross Avenue 

Dallas, Texas 75202-2733 

Dear Dr. Armendariz: 

EJFtl\.~~;) ....••. fllttl ................ . 

EJDFtl\. fi.%1 ... EJWQ. ...•...•.••..... 

6MD .............. 6SF .......•.......... 

fiOEJ ... ·-··· .... EJRC ..........•..•.... 

6P D .O.r •. ~ ~;f.~ .1 ••• fiXA .. f'~-;-.-:t ...... . 

On September 15, 2010, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (Commission) 

adopted revisions to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) relating to the rules for the Qualified 

Facilities program and the definition of Best Available Control Technology. 

The Commission adopted amendments to§§ 116.10, 116.111, 116.116, and 116.117 and a new§ 

116.17 of 30 TAC Chapter 116, Control of Air Pollution by Permits for New Construction or 

Modification and corresponding revisions to the SIP. The adopted amendments address 

deficiencies as identified by EPA in the rules related to the qualified facility program as 

published in the April14, 2010 notice of disapproval of the program as a SIP amendment (75 

Federal Register 19468). 

By letter dated October 5, 2010, the TCEQ submitted these proposed revisions to the SIP, a 

public hearing certification, a complete record of the public hearings, and the accompanying 

order and supplement for the SIP revision. 

Enclosed, on a CD, are the submittals for the rulemakings that adopted or amended rules 

regarding the qualified facilities program, and the definition of best available control technology 

in§ 116.10, by the Commission on the following dates: February 14, 1996; June 18, 1998; 

August 9, 2ooo; and August 21, 2002. Although EPA's records contain these previous 

submittals, EPA has requested and the Commission is supplying, as part of this transmittal, 

these previously submitted rulemakings to ensure that EPA reviews the new submittal together 

with these previous submittals. 

I also bring to your attention that the commission repealed §116.118 in a separate rulemaking on 

February 23, 2011, whiclt became effective March 17, 2011. This repeal will not be submitted as 

P.O. Box 13087 Austin, Texas 78711-3087 512-239-1000 Internet address: www.tceq.state.tx.us 
a SIP revision, as the repealed rule had previously been disapproved by EPA (75 Federal 

Register 19468) and is therefore no longer before EPA as a revision to the SIP. 

I look forward to your expeditious approval of these SIP revisions. 

Sincerely, 

BWSfjbh 

Enclosures
#### § 29.1054 Semicured.

Tobacco in the process of being cured or which is partially but not thoroughly cured. Semicured includes tobacco which contains fat stems, swelled stems, frozen tobacco, frozen stems, or stems that have not been thoroughly dried in the curing process. (See Rule 23.)

[42 FR 21092, Apr. 25, 1977. Redesignated at 47 FR 51721, Nov. 17, 1982, 48 FR 29671, June 28, 1983, 49 FR 16756, Apr. 20, 1984, and 51 FR 25027, July 10, 1986]
#### § 1719.1 Purpose.

This part establishes policies and procedures for the implementation of the Rural Energy Savings Program (RESP) under Section 6407 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002, as amended, by the Rural Utilities Service (RUS). It is the purpose of this part to help rural families and small businesses achieve cost savings by providing loans through eligible entities to qualified consumers to implement durable cost-effective energy efficiency measures.
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
  (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 Company.
 /s/ FREDERIC SCHEERFrederic ScheerChairman, Chief Executive Officer and Director
(Principal Executive Officer / Principal Financial Officer)November 16, 2009
Exhibit 99.6

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 Petro-Canada (the "Company") on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ending December 31,
2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, E. F. H. Roberts, Executive Vice-President and 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:



|Date: March 24, 2008 |  | /s/E. F. H. ROBERTS                                                  
|-------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------
|                     |  | E. F. H. Roberts
Executive Vice-President and
Chief Financial Officer

---



QuickLinks
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 223 (Friday, November 19, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 70951]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-29378]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL COUNCIL ON DISABILITY (NCD)

Sunshine Act Meetings


 Notice, Correction

Type: Quarterly Meeting.

Summary: NCD published a Sunshine Act Meeting Notice in the Federal 
Register on November 12, 2010, notifying the public of a quarterly 
meeting in Washington, DC. The times have been changed for a portion of 
the meeting on December 3.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Quigley, Director of 
Communications, NCD, 1331 F Street, NW., Suite 850, Washington, DC 
20004; 202-272-2004 (voice), 202-272-2074 TTY; 202-272-2022 Fax.

Correction

    In the Federal Register on November 12, 2010, in FR Doc. 2010-
28647, on page 69473, correct Matters to be Considered for December 3 
to read:

December 3
    8:30 a.m.-9:30 a.m. Speaker on Fiscal/Deficit Commission
    9:30 a.m.-11:30 a.m. Continuation of NCD Open Meeting
    11:30 a.m. Adjournment

    Dated: November 17, 2010.
Aaron Bishop,
Executive Director.
[FR Doc. 2010-29378 Filed 11-17-10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6820-MA-P
In the United States Court of Federal Claims

No. 15-1411C

(Filed: September 15, 2016)

*************************************

MARK MUNNS et al., *

*

Plaintiffs, * Transfer Case; Rule to Show Cause; 

* RCFC 41(b)

v. *

*

THE UNITED STATES, *

*

Defendant. *

*************************************

William Palmer, Sacramento, CA, for plaintiff.

Sean Siekkinen, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for defendant.

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

SWEENEY, Judge

On November 23, 2015, the instant case was transferred to the undersigned from the 

United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. The record consisted of 

certified copies of the district court order, the docket sheet, and a certified copy of the mandate 

from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. That same day, the Clerk’s Office 

made an entry on the docket indicating that plaintiffs’ attorney was not admitted to practice 

before the United States Court of Federal Claims and further indicating that attorney admission 

instructions and forms were sent to counsel and were also available on the court’s website. On 

January 4, 2016, the court granted plaintiffs’ unopposed motion, pursuant to Rule 6.1 of the 

Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims (“RCFC”), for an additional thirty days 

within which to file the transfer or amended complaint and to obtain admission to the court’s bar. 

A timely transfer complaint was filed on January 29, 2016. 

On June 1, 2016, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. On June 20, 2016, the 

government moved to dismiss the amended complaint pursuant to RCFC 12(b)(1) for lack of 

jurisdiction and pursuant to RCFC 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be 

granted. Plaintiffs’ response to the motion to dismiss was due by July 21, 2016. On August 19, 

2016, the court ordered plaintiffs to show cause why their complaint should not be dismissed for 

failure to prosecute their case. 

RCFC 41(b) provides:
(b) Involuntary Dismissal; Effect. If the plaintiff fails to 

prosecute or to comply with these rules or a court order, the court 

may dismiss on its own motion or the defendant may move to 

dismiss the action or any claim against it. Unless the dismissal 

order states otherwise, a dismissal under this subdivision (b) and 

any dismissal not under this rule—except one for lack of 

jurisdiction or failure to join a party under RCFC 19—operates as 

an adjudication on the merits.

Because plaintiffs have failed to comply with the court’s order to show case, the court dismisses 

plaintiffs’ complaint for failure to prosecute, pursuant to RCFC 41(b). Costs to defendant. The 

clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Margaret M. Sweeney

MARGARET M. SWEENEY

Judge
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

The undersigned, Gary A. Reys, the Chief Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer of CellCyte Genetics Corporation, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his knowledge, the Report on Form 10-QSB of CellCyte Genetics Corporation, for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2007, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the information contained in the Report on Form 10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of CellCyte Genetics Corporation.

Date:   August 14, 2007.

| | /s/ "Gary A. Reys"                                                   
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------
| | Gary A. Reys
Chief Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer

__________
98-1866.

#### Phillips v. Morgan.

In Habeas Corpus. *Sua sponte,*cause dismissed.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.