alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED August 17, 2005 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-41068 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus PEDRO BANEGAS-VALDEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:04-CR-184-ALL

-------------------- Before BENAVIDES, CLEMENT, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Pedro Banegas-Valdez (Banegas) appeals the 33-month sentence imposed after he pleaded guilty to one count of illegal reentry into the United States. See 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Banegas contends that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) is unconstitutional and that this court should vacate his sentence and remand his case for resentencing to no more than two years in prison under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). As he concedes, this contention is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224 (1998).No. 04-41068 -2- Banegas also contends that he is entitled to resentencing because the district court sentenced him under a mandatory application of the federal sentencing guidelines contrary to the rule of United States v. Booker , 125 S. Ct. 738, 756-57, 769 (2005). We review for plain error. See United States v. Valenzuela-Quevedo , 407 F.3d 728, 732 (5th Cir. 2005), petition for cert. filed (July 25, 2005) (No. 05-5556). Although there was an error, Banegas has failed to demonstrate a sufficient probability “that the district judge would have imposed a different sentence” under advisory guidelines. See id. at 733; United States v. Mares , 402 F.3d 511, 502, 521-22 (5th Cir. 2005), petition for cert. filed (Mar. 31, 2005) (No. 04-9517). Banegas thus fails to show that the error affected his substantial rights as he must do to meet the plain-error standard. See Mares , 402 F.3d at 521-22. The judgment of the district court is 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.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [Disaster Declaration #11798 and #11799]

# AGENCY:

U.S. Small Business Administration.

# ACTION:

Amendment 1.

# SUMMARY:

This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of Kansas (FEMA-1848-DR), dated 06/24/2009.

*Incident:*                         Severe Winter Storm and Record and Near Record Snow.                    

*Incident Period:*                         03/26/2009 through 03/29/2009.                    

*Effective Date:*                         07/24/2009.                    

*Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         08/24/2009.                    

*Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         03/24/2010.                    

# ADDRESSES:

Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing And Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for Private Non-Profit organizations in the State of Kansas, dated 06/24/2009, is hereby amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster.

*Primary Counties:*                     Morris.                

All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008)

James E. Rivera,

Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.

[FR Doc. E9-18229 Filed 7-30-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
426 A.2d 1190

#### COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Calvin JOHNSON, Appellant.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

Submitted Nov. 14, 1980.

Filed March 13, 1981.

*159John H. Corbett, Jr., Pittsburgh, for appellant.

Robert L. Eberhardt, Deputy District Attorney, Pittsburgh, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Before SPAETH, JOHNSON and POPOVICH, JJ.

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from an order dismissing a pro se petition filed under the Post Conviction Hearing Act, Act of January 25, 1966, P.L. (1965) 1580, 19 P.S. § 1180-1 *et seq.*The trial court concluded that appellant’s claim was frivolous and was without a trace of support in the record, and the court dismissed the petition without the requested ap*160pointment of counsel. Because the trial court erred when it dismissed appellant’s petition without appointing counsel, we must remand the matter to the trial court.

Under the provisions of Rule 1503(a) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Criminal Procedure, the trial court may not dismiss summarily a petition filed by an indigent without the appointment of counsel, if counsel is requested, unless the same issues have been adjudicated in a previous counseled petition which was determined adversely to the petitioner or where the petitioner has waived the right to the assistance of counsel knowingly.1 See *Commonwealth v. Blair,*470 Pa. 598, 369 A.2d 1153 (1977) and *Commonwealth v. Adams,*465 Pa. 389, 350 A.2d 820 (1976). Accord *Commonwealth v. Sinwell,*259 Pa.Super. 544, 393 A.2d 959 (1978). Additionally, cases in Pennsylvania have adopted a strict construction of the language of Rule 1503(a). *Id.*

Because appellant requested the appointment of counsel, and because appellant has not filed a previous counseled post-conviction hearing petition, counsel should have been appointed.2 See *Commonwealth v. Sinwell,*supra. Accordingly, the matter is remanded to the trial court for the appointment of counsel, and upon request, appellant is entitled to amend his petition. See *Commonwealth v. Sinwell,*supra.

In view of our disposition of this appeal, we need not address appellant’s alternative argument that the prosecution’s failure to provide appellant with a trial transcript for his appeal constituted reversible error.

The order of the trial court denying post-conviction relief is vacated and the matter is remanded to the trial court for the appointment of counsel. Jurisdiction is transferred to the trial court.

1

. The trial court did appoint counsel to represent appellant in this appeal.

2

. It is undisputed that appellant is indigent.
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 Itec Environmental Group, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ending March 31, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Michael E. Hofmann, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 result of operations of the Company.


/s/ Michael E. Hofmann
----------------------
Michael E. Hofmann
Chief Financial Officer

February 6, 2004
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 232 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 232

   To congratulate the Houston Rockets for winning the 1994 National 
                  Basketball Association Championship.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                June 23 (legislative day, June 7), 1994

  Mr. Gramm (for himself and Mrs. Hutchison) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
   To congratulate the Houston Rockets for winning the 1994 National 
                  Basketball Association Championship.

Whereas the Houston Rockets began the 1993-94 season with a 15-0 start, tying an 
        NBA record;
Whereas the Rockets finished the 1993-94 season with a 58-24 record, second best 
        in the NBA, and won the Midwest Division for the second consecutive 
        year;
Whereas second-year coach Rudy Tomjanovich and his assistants helped transform 
        the Rockets from a solid playoff team into the NBA's best;
Whereas Hakeem Olajuwon was named the NBA's most valuable player for the regular 
        season, defensive player of the year, and most valuable player of the 
        NBA Finals;
Whereas the Rockets won a hard-fought seven game series with the New York Knicks 
        in which each game was decided by less than ten points; and
Whereas the Rockets gave the city of Houston its first NBA Championship, a 
        unique and special accomplishment in Houston sports history: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate congratulates the Houston Rockets for 
their outstanding heart, resolve, and determination in winning the 1994 
National Basketball Association Championship.

                                 <all>
```
[4910-13-PI

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ~ruRRhNCES

ROOm'G SYMOO~

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR ParI 39

IDocket No. FAA-2009-1108j Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-13l-ADj Amendme

39!.'?1.f£ 2010_.~~~05

RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A330-200, A330-300, and A340-300 Series

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation

(DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

1l(P- V.L!.

Vr~ m

211z/fO

Aj\\W\' 1-

IN""'l->""G

C.C-4-

DATE

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the products list

'"HITING ,I"MOOL

above. This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness infonnation (MeAl)

originated by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe

condition 011 an aviation product. The MeAl describes the unsafe condition as:

,

It was noticed in production that in the area between frame (FR) C53.9

and FR C55 RH [right-hand], the distance between the route 9R of the 111-

Flight Entertainment system and the wire harness for the Lower DeckMobile Crew Rest system provisions is too small.

This limited distance may cause chafing between the affected electrical

harness 6581 VB and the harness 5495VB or 6938VB.

This condition, ifnot corrected, could lead to lhe short circuit of wires

dedicated 10 oxygen, which, in case of emergency, could result in a large

number of passenger oxygen masks not being supplied with oxygen,

possibly causing personal injuries .

WI- \\t..\

INITIAcs.'SIG

~ 111.01- ,~ ~,\To

SI /..If I I D

KOU'riNG 'I'Mool.

0\

(0

o

tmNGSy

~rrlAlS.'Sl(i

• • • * • * *
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 106 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 106

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           December 19, 1995

   Received and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Concurrent resolution permitting the use of the rotunda of the Capitol 
for a ceremony as part of the commemoration of the days of remembrance 
                      of victims of the Holocaust.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That the rotunda of the Capitol is authorized to be used from 8 o'clock 
ante meridiem until 3 o'clock post meridiem on April 16, 1996, for a 
ceremony as part of the commemoration of the days of remembrance of 
victims of the Holocaust. Physical preparations for the ceremony shall 
be carried out in accordance with such conditions as the Architect of 
the Capitol may prescribe.

            Passed the House of Representatives December 19, 1995.

            Attest:

                                                ROBIN H. CARLE,

                                                                 Clerk.

                              By Linda Nave,

                                                          Deputy Clerk.
```
| (logo) WELLS FARGO | **Corporate Trust Services**

  MAC R1204-010  9062 Old Annapolis Road  Columbia, MD 21045  Tel: 410 884 2000  Fax: 410 715 2380 |
|--------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

Re: Annual Statement ofCompliance for Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities, Inc., CommercialMortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2015-NXS2

 

Per the Pooling and ServicingAgreement dated as of July 1, 2015 (the "Agreement"), theundersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., asCertificate Administrator ("Wells Fargo"), hereby certifies asfollows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2016 (the "ReportingPeriod"):

 

(a) A review of Wells Fargo'sactivities during the Reporting Period and of its performance under theAgreement has been made under such officer's supervision; and

 

(b) To the best of suchofficer's knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of itsobligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout theReporting Period.

 

 

February 27, 2017

 

/s/ Brian Smith

BRIAN SMITH

Vice President

 

 

| Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. | (logo) Together we’ll  go far |
|------------------------|-------------------------------------|
§ 1.723-1 Basis of property contributed to partnership. The basis to the partnership of property contributed to it by a partner is the adjusted basis of such property to the contributing partner at the time of the contribution. Since such property has the same basis in the hands of the partnership as it had in the hands of the contributing partner, the holding period of such property for the partnership includes the period during which it was held by the partner. See section 1223(2). For elective adjustments to the basis of partnership property arising from distributions or transfers of partnership interests, see sections 732(d), 734(b), and 743(b). See § 1.460-4(k)(3)(iv)(B)( 2 ) for rules relating to adjustments to the basis of contracts accounted for using a long-term contract method of accounting that are acquired in certain contributions to which section 721(a) applies. [T.D. 6500, 25 FR 11814, Nov. 26, 1960; 25 FR 14021, Dec. 31, 1960, as amended by T.D. 9137, 69 FR 42558, July 16, 2004]
#### § 1.509(d)-1 Definition of support.

For purposes of section 509(a)(2), the term *support* does not include amounts received in repayment of the principal of a loan or other indebtedness. See, however, section 509(e) as to amounts received as interest on a loan or other indebtedness.

[T.D. 7212, 37 FR 21924, Oct. 17, 1972]
§ 1.469-3 Passive activity credit. ( a ) - ( d ) [Reserved]
( e ) *Coordination with section 38(b).* Any credit described in section 38(b) ( 1 ) through ( 5 ) is taken into account in computing the current year business credit for the first taxable year in which the credit is subject to section 469 and is not disallowed by section 469 and the regulations thereunder.
( f ) *Coordination with section 50.* In the case of any cessation described in section 50(a) (1) or (2), the credits allocable to the taxpayer's activities under § 1.469-1(f)(4) shall be adjusted by reason of the cessation.
( g ) [Reserved]
[T.D. 8417, 57 FR 20758, May 15, 1992]
III

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 256

To authorize the use of funds available to the Committee on Energy and

Natural Resources for consultants.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 19 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 12), 1994

Mr. JOHNSTON (for himself and Mr. WALLOP) submitted the following

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration

RESOLUTION

To authorize the use of funds available to the Committee

on Energy and Natural Resources for consultants.

1 Resolved, That section 9(c) of the Omnibus Commit2 tee Funding Resolution for 1993 and 1994 (S. Res. 71;

3 103d Congress, 1st Session) is amended by adding before

4 the period the following: ‘‘of which amount not to exceed

5 $100,000 may be expended for the procurement of the

6 services of individual consultants, or organizations thereof

7 (as authorized by section 202(i) of the Legislative Reorga8 nization Act of 1946, as amended)’’.

Æ
39155.

#### NATIONAL SURETY CORPORATION v. HUNT, Executor, *et al.*

Eberhaedt, Judge.

The original petition in this case was filed in Elbert Superior Court September 12, 1958, against three defendants. One defendant, Hunt, filed his general demurrer to the petition October 9, 1958, and another, Eaves, filed his general demurrer October 10, 1958. On November 18, 1960, Hunt filed a written renewal of his general demurrer to the petition, “as amended.” However, there was no amendment to the petition filed or allowed until June 26, 1961, when a material amendment was allowed and filed. On August 12, 1961, an order was entered sustaining the general demurrer of Hunt, and on the same date the general demurrer of Eaves was likewise sustained. Nothing in the record, or in the orders, indicates that the demurrers were renewed at any time after the allowance and filing of the amendment. “A demurrer to the original petition does not cover the petition after it has been materially amended [citation]. If the demurrer is still relied upon, it should be renewed or insisted upon *after the amendment has been allowed.”*(Emphasis supplied). *General Acc. Fire &c. Corp. v. Way,*20 Ga. App. 106 (2) (92 SE 650). “A bill having been demurred to and an amendment made in regard to material matters, the original demurrer does not relate forward and cover both bill and amendment.” *Powell v. Cheshire,*70 Ga. 357 (2b) (48 AR 572). “The fact that the judge in overruling the demurrers considered them as covering the amended petition is immaterial.” *Satlof v. State of Georgia,*52 Ga. App. 208 (182 SE 864). (A fortiori, in the sustaining of a demurrer). And see *Atlanta*&c. *R. Co. v. McDonald,*88 Ga. App. 515, 516 (76 SE2d 825); Leverett, Hall, Christopher, Georgia Procedure & Practice § 9-11. Failure to renew a demurrer after the petition is materially amended will be treated as an abandonment of the demurrer. *Collins v. Louisville*&c. *R. Co.,*92 Ga. App. 814, 816 (89 SE2d 908). (However, the renewal or re-insistence upon the demurrer may be done orally as well as in writing. *Pollock v. City of Albany,*88 Ga. App. 737, 740, 77 SE2d 579). Thus, the sustaining of the general demurrers to the original petition did not dispose of or have the effect of dismissing the petition as amended here, *102and there is no final judgment reviewable in this court upon the bill of exceptions. *Code*§ 6-701^ as amended. “This court is without jurisdiction to entertain a bill of exceptions which fails to except to a final judgment.” *Southern Ry. Co. v. Floyd County,*37 Ga. App. 689, 691 (141 SE 497); *Willis v. Daniel,*39 Ga. App. 670 (148 SE 301).

Decided November 20, 1961

Rehearing denied December 12, 1961.

*I. A. Blanch, J. B. McGinty,*for plaintiff in error.

*Williford & Grant, J. T. Sisk,*contra.

Accordingly, the bill of exceptions must be, and it is hereby

*Dismissed.*

*Carlisle, P. J., and Custer, J., concur.*
From: "Frey, Nathan J." <Nathan_J._Frey@omb.eop.gov>

To: Lydia W egman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Karen Martin/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA Cc: Rosalina Rodriguez/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA Date: 06/01/2012 02:29 PM Subject: RE: PM NAAQs Interagency Briefing



### Thanks Lydia. That’s ok. Just touched base with Rosalina which was helpful. **From:** Lydia Wegman [mailto:Wegman.Lydia@epamail.epa.gov] **Sent:** Friday, June 01, 2012 2:21 PM **To:** Frey, Nathan J.; Karen Martin **Subject:** Re: PM NAAQs Interagency Briefing



### N athan, I'm still travelling and Karen isn't available right now. I may be able to call y ou around 4:30. Sorry about not being able to talk right now.

**From:** "Frey , Nathan J." [Nathan_J._Frey @omb.eop.gov] **Sent:** 06/01/2012 05:59 PM GMT **To:** Lydia Wegman; Karen Martin **Subject:** RE: PM NAAQs I nteragency Briefing Just checking in again. Do either of you have time for a quick call? **From:** Frey, Nathan J. **Sent:** Friday, June 01, 2012 12:21 PM **To:** Lydia Wegman; Karen Martin **Subject:** RE: PM NAAQs I nteragency Briefing 

### Lydia

– I assume since you are out of the office this week that I should be coordinating logistics etc through Karen. If this is the case, Karen

-- it would be great to talk via phone at your earliest convenience. Please let me know when and what number is best to reach you. Many thanks, Nathan **From:** Lydia Wegman [mailto:Wegman.Lydia@epamail.epa.gov] **Sent:** Friday, June 01, 2012 12:03 PM **To:** Frey, Nathan J.; Karen Martin **Cc:** Eloise Shepherd **Subject:** Re: PM NAAQs Interagency Briefing 

### Thanks Nathan. Yes, we do have slides that we can share in advance. Hopefully we can send them out this afternoon or Monday morning.

### From: "Frey , Nathan J." [Nathan_J._Frey @omb.eop.go v]

**Sent:** 06/01/2012 03:03 PM GMT **To:** Lydia Wegman; Karen Martin **Cc:** Eloise Shepherd **Subject:** RE: PM NAAQs I nteragency Briefing Hi Lydia and Karen, It looks like we’ve settled on 1:00

- 2:30 for Monday’s interagency briefing. Does EPA have briefi ng slides prepared that can be shared with reviewers in advance? Many thanks. **From:** Frey, Nathan J. **Sent:** Thursday, May 31, 2012 3:01 PM **To:** Lydia Wegman; Karen Martin **Subject:** RE: PM NAAQs Interagency Briefing 

### Thanks Lydia. Yes, we’ve heard. What time(s) works Monday for your folks? **From:** Lydia Wegman [mailto:Wegman.Lydia@epamail.epa.gov] **Sent:** Thursday, May 31, 2012 2:22 PM **To:** Frey, Nathan J.; Karen Martin **Subject:** Re: PM NAAQs Interagency Briefing

Hi Nathan, I'm sorry I haven't been available to talk this week. I don't know if you've heard, but we got a court order today ordering the proposal to be signed by June 7. Thus, we may want to meet on Monday to sta rt discussions. Let me know what you think.

**From :**  "Frey, Nathan J." [Nathan_J._Frey@omb.eop.gov] **Sent:** 05/31/2012 06:03 PM GMT **To:** Karen Martin **Cc:** Lydia Wegman **Subject:** PM NAAQs Interagency Briefing 

### Hi Karen, Thanks for your voice mail. Would Tuesday at 11:00 am work well for scheduling the interagency briefing for PM NAAQs? Thanks, Nathan