alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Michael Raymond NIELSEN, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 06-10485.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted June 7, 2007.

Filed June 12, 2007.

*404Michael K. Kawahara, Esq., USH-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Honolulu, HI, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Pamela E. Tamashiro, Esq., Honolulu, HI, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: ALARCÓN, BERZON, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM *

Michael Nielsen appeals the district court’s denial of his suppression motion. He argues that the discovery of methamphetamine in his truck parked at the Honolulu Airport was the fruit of an unconstitutional seizure and therefore must be suppressed. We disagree with this contention and affirm the district court.

Although Nielsen argues on appeal that he was seized for Fourth Amendment purposes between the time that the police officers completed the search of his checked luggage at the baggage carousel and when they instructed him not to leave the taxi stand, he did not make this argument before the district court. The argument is thus waived. *See United States v. Hawkins,*249 F.3d 867, 872 (9th Cir.2001).

In any event, the district court’s finding that interaction between Nielsen and the officers was consensual until they instructed him not to leave the taxi stand is not clearly erroneous. During this period, the officers merely followed behind Nielsen through public sections of the airport and allowed Nielsen to take steps to leave the airport. “[T]aking into account all of the circumstances surrounding the encounter, the police conduct would [not] ‘have communicated to a reasonable person that he was not at liberty to ignore the police presence and go about his business.’ ” *Florida v. Bostick,*501 U.S. 429, 437, 111 S.Ct. 2382, 115 L.Ed.2d 389 (1991) (quoting *Michigan v. Chesternut,*486 U.S. 567, 569, 108 S.Ct. 1975, 100 L.Ed.2d 565 (1988)). It does not matter whether the officers intended to allow Nielsen to leave the airport, so long as they did not communicate this intention to him. *See United States v. Woods,*720 F.2d 1022, 1026 (9th Cir.1983). Moreover, Nielsen asked at the taxi stand whether he was *then*being detained, indicating his understanding that he was not detained before that.

AFFIRMED.

*

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
#### § 958.70 Effective time.

The provisions of this subpart, or any amendment thereto, shall become effective at such time as the Secretary may declare and shall continue in force until terminated in one of the ways specified in this subpart.
T h i s proc ee di n g a r i s es ou t of Cau s e N o. 2007- CR
- 9689, s t y l ed The St at e of Te xas v . J

es us Es pi noz a , pe nd i ng 1 i n t he 1 4 4 t h Jud i ci al D i st ri ct C o urt , B exar C o unt y , T exas , t he H o no rable C at heri ne T o rr es- Stahl p res i d i ng. i i i i i i



### MEM ORA ND UM OP INION
No
. 04 -0 8- 00 57 0- CR IN RE Jesu s ESPINOZ A Orig inal Mandamus Proce eding 1 PER C URI AM Sitt ing: Kar en Ang elini, J ustice

Phy lis J . Speedlin , J ustice Steven C. Hilbig, Just ice Deliver ed and F iled: August 27, 2008 PETI TI ON F OR WR I T OF MANDAMUS DEN I ED ; APPL I CATI ON F OR WR I T OF HAB EAS CORPUS DI SMI SSED FOR LACK OF J URI SDI CTI ON On August 4, 2008, Espinoz a filed pro s e or ig ina l pe tit ion s r e qu e sti ngthe iss ua nc e of a wr it of h a b e a s c o r p u s an d a w r it o f ma n d amu s . E s p in o za

c h ie f ly c o mp la in s o f

th e tr ia l c o urt’ s r e fusal to set his c as e for trial. Espinoz a is repr esente d by counsel in the trial c ourt. Be cause Espinoza’s complaints relate to his pending c riminal case , we c onclude that tria l counsel is Espinoza’s counsel for a ny mandamus proc eedingon the issues prese nted. Espinoza has no rig ht to pr ocee d pro s e and be re prese nted by counsel at the s ame time. See Patrick v. State, 90 6 S. W.2 d 4 81 , 4 98 (T e x. Cr im. App. 19 95 ); Gray v . Shipley, 8 7 7 S
. W
. 2 d 8 0 6 , 8 0 6 (T ex . Ap p . —Ho u s t o n[ 1 s tDi s t . ] 1 9 9 4 , o ri g.04
- 08
- 00 57 0- CR

- 2- pr oc e e din g ). Thus , E sp ino za’ s mand amus pe tit ion wi ll b e tr e ate d a s p re se nti ngno thi ng fo r t his court’s r eview. Additionally , the Court of Criminal Appea ls, the district courts, and the co u n t y co u rt s are authorized to issue writs of habeas corpus in criminal matters. SeeT EX . C ODE C R IM . P RO . ANN . a rt . 11.05 (Ve rnon 2005). How ever , this cou rt h as no orig inal habea s corpus jurisdiction in criminal matters. See W

atson v. State, 96 S.W. 3d 49 7, 50 0 ( Te x. Ap p. —A mari llo 20 02 , p e t. r e f’ d) ; Ex pa rte H e a r o n, 3 S. W.3 d 6 50 , 6 50 (T e x. Ap p. —Wa c o 1 99 9, or ig . p ro c e e din g ); Dodson v. State, 988 S.W .2d 833, 835 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1999, no pet.). Acc ording ly , the mandamus petition is denied and the habea s co rpus petition is dism issed for lac k of jurisdiction. PER C URI AM DO NO T PU B L I SH
|T H E   W H I T E   H O U S E

Bulletin No. 99-07, Supplement 1

Help

Text Only | T H E   W H I T E   H O U S E    | Bulletin No. 99-07, Supplement 1 | Help

Text Only
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------- | -------------------------------- | ---------------
|T H E   W H I T E   H O U S E                                                    | Bulletin No. 99-07, Supplement 1 | Help

Text Only                 

|
|

|October 21, 1999 
 
BULLETIN NO. 99-07, Supplement No. 1 
 
TO THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND ESTABLISHMENTS 
 
SUBJECT:  Apportionment Under the Extension of the Continuing Resolution for Fiscal 
Year 2000 
 
1. Purpose and background.  H. J. Res. 71 extends the continuing 
resolution through October 29, 
1999. 
 
2. Apportionment.  I am extending the automatic apportionment specified 
in section 2 of OMB 
Bulletin No. 99-07 to October 29, 1999.  The portion of the year covered is now 7.9 percent. 
 
The continuing resolution extension includes a provision clarifying the authority of agencies 
to both do the work necessary to issue mandatory payments due on or about November 
1st and to make the payments. 
 
If you can justify amounts greater than the amount automatically apportioned, please submit 
a written request for apportionment. 
 
Jacob J. LewDirectorThe Budget
 | 
Legislative Information
 | 
Management Reform/GPRA
 | 
Grants Management
Financial Management
 | 
Procurement
        Policy
 | 
Information &
        Regulatory Policy

Privacy Statement
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
52.247-56 Transit Arrangements.

As prescribed in 47.305-13 (a)(3)(ii), insert the following provision in solicitations when benefits may

accrue to the Government because transit arrangements may apply:

Transit Arrangements (Apr 1984)

The lowest appropriate common carrier transportation costs, including offeror’s through transit

rates and charges when applicable, from offeror’s shipping points, via the transit point, to the

ultimate destination will be used in evaluating offers.

Transit Point(s) Destination(s)

_______________ _______________

_______________ _______________

(End of clause)

Parent topic: 52.247 [Reserved]
#### ATKINS v. TROWBRIDGE et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

June 19, 1914.)

Action by Elizabeth J. Atkins against James A. Trowbridge and others.

No opinion. Motion denied, with $10 costs. Order filed. See, also, 148 N. Y. Supp. 181.
Editorial Note on Part 91
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 91 appear at 61 FR 51350, Oct. 2 1996.

§ 91.34 When an appeal of a laboratory service may be refused. An application for an appeal of a laboratory service may be refused if: ( a ) The reasons for the appealed laboratory service are frivolous or not substantial;
( b ) The quality or condition of the commodity product has undergone a material change since the laboratory service covering the commodity product on which the appealed laboratory service is requested;
( c ) The lot in question is not, or cannot be made accessible for sampling;
( d ) The lot relative to which the appealed laboratory service is requested cannot be positively identified as the lot from which samples were previously drawn and originally analyzed; or
( e ) There is noncompliance with the regulations in this part. Such applicant shall be notified promptly of the reason for such refusal.
208.7305 Contract clause.       (a)  Use the clause at                 252.208-7000             , Intent to Furnish Precious Metals as Government-Furnished Material, in all solicitations and contracts except—          (1)  When the contracting officer has determined that the required precious metals are not available from DSCP;          (2)  When the contracting officer knows that the items being acquired do not require precious metals in their manufacture; or          (3)  For acquisitions at or below the simplified acquisition threshold.          (b)  To make the determination in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, the contracting officer shall consult with the end item inventory manager and comply with the procedures in Chapter 11, DoD 4160.21-M, Defense Materiel Disposition Manual.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 208.73 - USE OF GOVERNMENT-OWNED PRECIOUS METALS
#### The People of the State of New York v. The Knickerbocker Life Insurance Company.

(Argued June 17,1884;

decided June 24, 1884.)

*Raphael J. Moses, Jr.,*for appellant.

*John O. Keeler*for respondent.

Agree to affirm ; no opinion.

All concur.

Order affirmed.
#### § 65.180 Imported for immediate slaughter.

*Imported for immediate slaughter* means imported into the United States for “immediate slaughter” as that term is defined in 9 CFR 93.400, i.e., consignment directly from the port of entry to a recognized slaughtering establishment and slaughtered within 2 weeks from the date of entry.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 33 (Friday, February 19, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7471-7472]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-3101]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2232-566]


Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC; Notice of Availability of 
Environmental Assessment

February 3, 2010.
    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 
as amended, and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) 
regulations, (18 CFR Part 380), Commission staff has prepared an 
environmental assessment (EA) regarding Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC's 
(Duke), licensee for the Catawba-Wateree Project, request for approval 
of an agreement between the Town of Mooresville, North Carolina 
(Mooresville) and Duke, authorizing Mooresville to operate and maintain 
expanded water intake facilities and withdraw water from Lake Norman. 
The Catawba-Wateree Project (FERC No. 2232) is located on the Catawba 
and Wateree Rivers, in nine counties in North Carolina and five 
counties in South Carolina. Lake Norman is the fifth reservoir in the 
series of reservoirs used by the project, and is located on the Catawba 
River.
    In its application, Duke proposes to grant an expansion of 
Mooresville's water intake facilities and increase Mooresville's water 
withdrawal rate from Lake Norman. The existing water intake structure 
would be expanded by connecting a new pipe to the existing water intake 
structure and the existing pumping plant located on Mooresville-owned 
property within the project boundary. Mooresville has requested that 
the expanded facility have a gross maximum allowable water withdrawal 
rate of 18 million gallons per day (MGD), a 6 MGD increase from the 
current approved maximum withdrawal rate of 12 MGD, as approved by the 
Commission on August 23, 2005. The water intake and pump facility are 
located in Iredell County, North Carolina.
    The EA is attached to a Commission order titled, ``Order Modifying 
and Approving Non-Project Use of Project Lands and Waters,'' which was 
issued February 3, 2010, and is available for review at the 
Commission's Public Reference Room, or it may be viewed on the 
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' 
link. Enter the docket number (P-2232) in the docket number field to 
access the document. For assistance with eLibrary, contact 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#a6e0e3f4e5e9c8cacfc8c3f5d3d6d6c9d4d2e6c0c3d4c588c1c9d0"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c98f8c9b8a86a7a5a0a7ac9abcb9b9a6bbbd89afacbbaae7aea6bf">[email protected]</span></a> or

[[Page 7472]]

toll-free at (866) 208-3676; for TTY, contact (202) 502-8659.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-3101 Filed 2-18-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
EXHIBIT 32

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                            18 U. S. C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

        This certification is intended to accompany the Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q of Berkshire  Bancorp Inc. (the  "Company")  for the period ended March 31,
2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange  Commission (the "Report"),  and
is given  solely for the purpose of  satisfying  the  requirements  of 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of
2002. The undersigned, in my capacity as set forth below, hereby certifies 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.

                                              /s/ Steven Rosenberg
                                              ----------------------------------
                                              Steven Rosenberg,
                                              Chief Executive Officer, President
                                              and Chief Financial Officer

                                              May 4, 2007
Exhibit 32.2






CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)






In connection with the Annual Report of China Shuangji Cement Ltd., a Nevada corporation (the "Company"), on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), Michelle Zhu, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, does hereby certify, pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350), that to her knowledge:






(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.






April 15, 2010






/s/ Michelle Zhu





Michelle Zhu, Chief Financial Officer


(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
Part 5223 - ENVIRONMENT, ENERGY AND

WATER EFFICIENCY, RENEWABLE ENERGY

TECHNOLOGIES, OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY,

AND DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE

Subpart 5223.3 - HAZARDOUS MATERIAL IDENTIFICATION AND MATERIAL SAFETY DATA

5223.370 Safety precautions for ammunitions and explosives.

5223.370-3 Policy.

5223.370-5 Contract clauses.

Subpart 5223.4 - USE OF RECOVERED MATERIALS AND BIOBASED PRODUCTS

5223.406 Solicitation provision and contract clauses.

Subpart 5223.5 - DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE

5223.506 Suspension of payments, termination of contract, and debarment and suspension actions.

Subpart 5223.8 - OZONE-DEPLETING SUBSTANCES AND GREENHOUSE GASES

5223.802 Policy.

Subpart 5223.3 - HAZARDOUS MATERIAL IDENTIFICATION

AND MATERIAL SAFETY DATA

5223.370 Safety precautions for ammunitions and explosives.

5223.370-3 Policy.

(a) DON policy is to ensure the safe handling of all ammunition and explosives (A&E). To that end,

particular care should be paid to A&E provided to contractors as Government Furnished Material

(GFM) when the A&E contain nitrocellulose-based propellants and/or nitrate ester-based materials

(such as nitroglycerin,) or any other materials that have a tendency to become chemically unstable

over time.
5223.370-5 Contract clauses.

(a) Use the clause at 5252.223-9000, DON ADDITIONAL SAFETY REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO

SPECIFIED GOVERNMENT FURNISHED AMMUNITION AND EXPLOSIVES, in solicitations and

contracts that:

(1) contain the clause at DFARS 252.223-7002; and

(2) provide as GFM any A&E containing nitrocellulose-based propellants and/or nitrate ester-based

materials (such as nitroglycerin,) or other similar A&E with a tendency to become chemically

unstable over time;

(b) The HCA may make administrative adjustments to the additional requirements (e.g. specify

activity points of contact, adjust specified lead times) or add further measures which increase safety

requirements as appropriate.

Subpart 5223.4 - USE OF RECOVERED MATERIALS AND

BIOBASED PRODUCTS

5223.406 Solicitation provision and contract clauses.

(d) When using the clause at FAR 52.223-9, contracting officers shall insert the following address

into paragraph (b) (or paragraph (c) if using Alternative (ALT I) of the clause:

Commanding Officer

Naval Facilities Engineering Service Center

Code 424 CA, 1100 23rd Avenue

Port Hueneme, CA 93043-4370

Subpart 5223.5 - DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE

5223.506 Suspension of payments, termination of contract, and debarment

and suspension actions.

(e) Submit requests for waiver to SECNAV via the HCA and DASN(P) by email at

usn.pentagon.asstsecnavrdadc.mbx.pabt@us.navy.mil with the subject “[Activity Name] FAR 23.506

– Contractor Drug-Free Workplace Violation Contract Award Waiver Request.”.
Subpart 5223.8 - OZONE-DEPLETING SUBSTANCES AND

GREENHOUSE GASES

5223.802 Policy.

Technical certification and approval requirements are set forth in Chapter 22 Section 3.6 of OPNAVM 5090.1 in accordance with OPNAV Instruction 5090.1E.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 

MAR 1 3 2014 

Mr. Dou Y an wei 

China Household Electrical Appliance Association 

Room 709, Talent International Building 

No. 80 Guang Qumen Inner Avenue 

Beijing P.R.C. 100062 

OFFICE OF 

AIR AND RADIATION 

Re: Completeness Determination for SNAP Submission for R-290 for Self-Contained Room 

Air Conditioners under the End Use Category Residential and Light-Commercial Air 

Conditioning and Heat Pumps 

Dear Mr. Y an wei: 

Thank you for China Household Electrical Appliance Association's (CHEAA) submission to the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for R-290 (propane) in air conditioning. EPA 

established the Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program to implement section 612 

of the Clean Air Act. Your submission and the additional information received October 12, 2013 

have been reviewed for completeness. We find the submission to be complete for self-contained 

room air conditioners only under the end use category residential and light commercial air 

conditioning and heat pumps. 

Here is a summary of information concerning your submission: 

Substitute name: R-290 

Substance(s) the substitute will replace: HCFC-22 

Sector: Refrigeration and Air Conditioning 

End use: Residential and light-commercial air conditioning and heat pumps, self-contained room 

air conditioners only 

New or retrofit usage: New equipment only 

Date received: April 19, 2013 

Most recent update received: October 12, 2013 

Status of submission: Complete 

Pending EPA's decision concerning the substitute's acceptability and conditions ofuse, you may 

now sell and import R-290 for use in the end use listed above. You may also sell, import and 

export equipment containing R-290 in the end use listed above. However, EPA intends to 

propose use conditions through a notice and comment rule making in spring 2014. Equipment 

that does not meet the Agency's final decision on acceptability and conditions of use will be 

Internet Address (URL) • http//www.epa.gov 

Recycled/Recyclable • Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Postconsumer. Process Chlorine Free Recycled Paper 
considered non-compliant and must be removed from the market upon the effective date of the 

final rule. 

If you have questions about your submission, please contact me at (202) 343-9445 or 

vondemhagen.rebecca@epa. gov. 

Sincerely, 

Rebecca von dem Hagen 

Alternatives and Emissions Reduction Branch 

Stratospheric Protection Division
Opinion issued May 15, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-14-00066-CR

———————————

JOSE LUIS BERNAL, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 228th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Case No. 1368683

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Jose Luis Bernal, has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal. The 

motion is signed by the appellant and his attorney, in compliance with Texas Rule 

of Appellate Procedure 42.2(a). See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.2(a). No opinion has 
2

issued, and more than 10 days have passed and no party has responded to the 

motion. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.3(a). 

Accordingly, we grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 42.2(a), 43.2(f). We dismiss all other pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Sharp, and Huddle.

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).