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

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 15-1035

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

Brett Charles Roach

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the District of South Dakota - Aberdeen

____________

 Submitted: September 22, 2015

Filed: September 25, 2015

[Unpublished]

____________

Before WOLLMAN, BYE, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Brett Roach directly appeals the judgment of the district court entered upon 1

a jury verdict finding him guilty of an assault charge, in violation of 18 U.S.C.

The Honorable Charles B. Kornmann, United States District Judge for the

1

District of South Dakota.
§§ 113(a)(6), 1153, and 3559(f). On appeal, in a brief filed under Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Roach’s counsel argues (1) that jurisdiction was

lacking because the alleged assault may not have taken place in Indian country, as

charged in the indictment, an argument that Roach repeats in his pro se supplemental

brief; (2) that the evidence wasinsufficient to establish the victim suffered a “serious

bodily injury” as charged in the indictment; and (3) that Roach received ineffective

assistance of counsel in several respects. 

First, at trial Roach stipulated that the alleged offense occurred in Indian

country. Therefore, he waived any right to argue on appeal that jurisdiction was

lacking because the alleged offense did not occur in Indian country. See United

States v. Hawkins, 215 F.3d 858, 860 (8th Cir. 2000). Second, the testimony of the

medical professionals amply established that the victimsuffered serious bodilyinjury. 

See United States v. Iron Hawk, 612 F.3d 1031, 1036-37 (8th Cir. 2010). Third, we

do not consider the ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims in this direct criminal

appeal, assuch claims are best raised in possible proceedings under 28 U.S.C. § 2255,

where the record can be developed as necessary. See United States v. McAdory, 501

F.3d 868, 872-73 (8th Cir. 2007). Finally, having independently reviewed the record

pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), we have found no nonfrivolous

issue. The judgment is affirmed, and counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.

______________________________

-2-
§ 20.1304 Rule 1304. Request for a change in representation. ( a ) *Request for a change in representation within 90 days following Notice of Disagreement.* An appellant and his or her representative, if any, will be granted a period of 90 days following receipt of a Notice of Disagreement, or up to and including the date the appellate decision is promulgated by the Board, whichever comes first, during which they may submit a request for a change in representation.
( b ) *Subsequent request for a change in representation.* Following the expiration of the period described in paragraph (a) of this section, the Board will not accept a request for a change in representation except when the appellant demonstrates on motion that there was good cause for the delay. Examples of good cause include, but are not limited to, illness of the appellant or the representative which precluded action during the period; death of an individual representative; illness or incapacity of an individual representative which renders it impractical for an appellant to continue with him or her as representative; and withdrawal of an individual representative. Such motions must be in writing and must include the name of the veteran; the name of the claimant or appellant if other than the veteran (*e.g.,* a veteran's survivor, a guardian, or a fiduciary appointed to receive VA benefits on an individual's behalf) or the name of any substitute claimant or appellant; the applicable Department of Veterans Affairs file number; and an explanation of why the request for a change in representation could not be accomplished in a timely manner. Such motions must be filed at the following address: Board of Veterans' Appeals, P.O. Box 27063, Washington, DC 20038. Depending upon the ruling on the motion, action will be taken as follows: ( 1 ) *Good cause not shown.* If good cause is not shown, the request for a change in representation will be referred to the agency of original jurisdiction for association with the appellant's file for any pending or subsequently received claims upon completion of the Board's action on the pending appeal without action by the Board concerning the request.
( 2 ) *Good cause shown.* If good cause is shown, the request for a change in representation will be honored.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 5902, 5903, 5904, 7105, 7105A)
[84 FR 191, Jan. 18, 2019]
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 on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
June 30, 2011 of AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company (the "Company") as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Richard S. Dziadzio, Senior 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:


        (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/ Richard S. Dziadzio
                                        -----------------------
                                        Richard S. Dziadzio
                                        Senior Executive Vice President and
                                        Chief Financial Officer
         Date: August 11, 2011
JUDGMENTS.

[Hamilton Circuit Court,

January Term, 1886.]

Cox, Smith and Swing, JJ.

#### W. H. Pope v. Martha Pollock.

1. Judgment by Default must be Set Aside upon Proper Affidavit.

When an affidavit is filed with a magistrate under Revised Statutes, section 0578, to set aside a judgment by default rendered against a defendant in his absence, it is imperative on the magistrate to set it aside, if the affidavit sets forth a good and sufficient reason for the absence of the defendant, and he otherwise complies with the statute. The word “ may ” in the statute is to read as “ shall.”

2. Reviewing Court will Pass on Affidavit.

Error will lie for refusal to set aside a judgment in such case, and the reviewing court will pass on the sufficiency of the affidavit.

Pope was sued before a magistrate at Wyoming, -some ten miles from Cincinnati, on an account, and demanded a trial by jury. The case was set for tiial at *6^2*o’clock p. M. Pope was engaged in business in Cincinnati, his only means of reaching the place of trial being by railroad. Mistaking the hour oí the train, he was unable to reach in time, but from the depot at Cincinnati telegraphed the magistrate that he would be out on the next train, some forty minutes later, and would waive a. jury and try the case before him. The magistrate not receiving the dispatch before the end of the hour, rendered judgment against Pope by default in his absence. Pope, within ten days, filed an affidavit, setting forth his reasons for being absent at the trial, confessed judgment for the costs and asked that the judgment be set aside. This the magistrate refused to do. Error was prosecuted in the court of common pleas, and the judgment of the magistrate was affirmed. This proceeding is to reverse the judgment of the common pleas.

It is contended, first, that under section 6578, Revised Statutes, it is entirely within the discretion of-the magistrate to set aside the judgment, even if a sufficient showing be made, and second, that the affidavit did not show a sufficient reason for the absence of defendant from the trial. *

W. H. Pope, for plaintiff in error.

Reuben Tyler, for defendant in error.

Cox, J.

We think the statute is imperative. Although the language is, ‘ ‘ *may set aside,"*yet that it should be construed as if written “ *shall set aside."*The affidavit in this case, showing 'in our opinion a good and sufficient reason for the absence of the defendant at the trial, the magistrate should have set the judgment aside. Judgment reversed.
# Official Journal L 59/3 Ma

| | ISSN 1725-2555 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 59 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 523 March 2009 |

ISSN 1725-2555

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 59

English edition

Legislation

Volume 523 March 2009

---

| Contents | | II   Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is not obligatory | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | DECISIONS |
| | | Council |
| | | 2009/156/EC |
| | * | Council Decision of 21 November 2008 on the signature and provisional application of the stepping stone Economic Partnership Agreement between Côte d'Ivoire, of the one part, and the European Community and its Member States, of the other part | 1 |
| Stepping stone Economic Partnership Agreement between Côte d'Ivoire, of the one part, and the European Community and its Member States, of the other part | 3 |

Contents

II   Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is not obligatory

page

DECISIONS

Council

2009/156/EC

*

Council Decision of 21 November 2008 on the signature and provisional application of the stepping stone Economic Partnership Agreement between Côte d'Ivoire, of the one part, and the European Community and its Member States, of the other part

1

Stepping stone Economic Partnership Agreement between Côte d'Ivoire, of the one part, and the European Community and its Member States, of the other part

3

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
#### Akerly v. Zoning Board of Appeals

*S. A. Sisson,*for appellant.

*J. B. Held, city solicitor,*for appellee.

November 23, 1955.

Evans, P. J.,

Before us here is an appeal from an order of the zoning administrator of the City of Erie, affirmed by the zoning board of appeals denying appellant the right to conduct in his home a small business operation which consists of making and fitting trusses and belt braces.

The appellant is about 70 years of age, and for many years as a partner in a drugstore specialized in this type of work. After the sale of this drugstore interest he equipped a room in the basement of his home to continue his specialty with no assistants or employes. *518His equipment consists of a sewing machine, an assortment of shears, knives, vises and wrenches. The operation causes no noise or disturbance to the neighborhood, and no objections by the neighbors were registered with the zoning administrator or this court. An average of six customers per day call to purchase, and have fitted, trusses and braces. At times elastic hosiery is also sold.

Under the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Erie appellant’s residence is located in “B” residential district and accessory permitted uses thereof under section 204 of said ordinance are as follows: “An office such as that of a physician, dentist, musician, artists, or other professional person when located within or directly attached to his or her building which is primarily used as a dwelling; and similar home occupations such as dressmaking or millinery.”

Appellant contends that his occupation as a truss and brace fitter is similar to “home occupations such as dressmaking or millinery”. With this we reluctantly must disagree. Were this use to be permitted, it might well be extended to include the making of crutches and possibly wheel chairs for invalids. It would logically follow that one could repair locks or guns, make bicycle repairs, or conduct any small business as an incidental use of his dwelling. Such construction of the ordinance would open the entire city to establishment of small business throughout residential areas.

The term “home occupation” is any lawful occupation customarily conducted in a dwelling as an incidental use. The manufacture, fitting and sale of trusses and braces is not one customarily conducted in one’s home, and this conclusion reached by the zoning board of appeals is not so arbitrary and unreasonable as to justify our interference.

*519This conclusion is supported in the recent case of Taddeo v. Zoning Board of Adjustment, 3 D. & C. 2d 454.

And now, to wit, November 23, 1955, the appeal filed October 21, 1955, in the above entitled matter is dismissed.
FORMAT_NAME

:DD173 3045

DISTRIBUTION

:

DRAFTERS_NAME

:T. LYNN WAWRZYNIAK

DRAFTERS_OFFICE

:COMM (703) 325-8800 DSN 221-8800

RELEASERS_NAME

:W.B. TIRRELL, SR PDC, 325-8800

SPECIAL_INSTRUCTIONS

:

PAGE_OF

:

DTG

:010430Z

MONTH

:OCT

YEAR

:98

PRECEDENCE_ACTION

:RR

PRECEDENCE_INFO

:RR

CLASS

:UUUU

FL12A_DUMMY

:

SPECAT

:

LMF

:

CIC

:ZYUW

OMI

:

BOOK

:NO

MSG_HANDLING

:

FROM

:PER DIEM TVL AND TRANS ALW COMTE ALEXANDRIA VA

TO

:AIG 111

:AIG 890

:AIG SIX EIGHT FIVE ZERO

:AIG 7008

:AIG 7300

:AIG 7305

:AIG 7407

:AIG 7447

:AIG 7598

:AIG 8622

:AIG 8626

:AIG 8927

:AIG 8995
:AIG 9226

:AIG 9413

:AIG NINE NINE THREE SEVEN

INFO

:PER DIEM TVL AND TRANS ALW COMTE ALEXANDRIA VA

:ARSTAF

XMT

:CDRTAPC ALEXANDRIA VA//TAPC-EPK/TAPC-EPL/

:TAPC-EPM/TAPC-EPO/TAPC-RM//

ACCT

:

TEXT

:UNCLAS

SUBJECT: FY99 GOVERNMENT MEAL RATES

1. THIS CHANGE AFFECTS UNIFORMED PERSONNEL TRAVELING IAW THE JFTR

(MAP ITEM 38-98) AND CIVILIAN PERSONNEL TRAVELING IAW THE JTR (CAP

ITEM 38-98).

2. CINCS PASS TO COMPONENT COMMANDERS AS APPROPRIATE. USDAO'S PASS

TO SUPPORTING BUDGET AND FISCAL OFFICERS. PLEASE NOTIFY ALL COS,

PAYING FOS AND ITOS OF ALL OTHER ELEMENTS OF UNIFORMED SERVICES

CONCERNED.

3. OSD COMPTROLLER HAS ANNOUNCED A GOVERNMENT MEAL RATE OF $7.50

EFFECTIVE 1 OCTOBER 1998.

4. THE NEW STANDARD GOVERNMENT MEAL RATE IS $7.50. THE DISCOUNTED

GOVERNMENT MEAL RATE IS $6.15.

5. THESE CHANGES ARE SCHEDULED TO APPEAR IN PRINTED CHANGE NUMBER

144, OF THE JFTR, VOL 1, AND CHANGE NUMBER 398 OF THE JTR, VOL 2,

DATED 1 DECEMBER 1998, AND EFFECTIVE 1 OCTOBER 1998.

6. QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS MESSAGE SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO THE

MILITARY ADVISORY PANEL (MAP) MEMBER OR CIVILIAN ADVISORY PANEL (CAP)

MEMBER FOR THE APPROPRIATE SERVICE. THEIR ADDRESSES ARE

FOUND IN THE JFTR (FOR MILITARY) AND THE JTR (FOR CIVILIANS)

INTRODUCTIONS UNDER FEEDBACK REPORTING.

7. FOR ADDITIONAL TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION INFORMATION PLEASE SEE

OUR WEBSITE AT: HTTP://WWW.DTIC.MIL/PERDIEM/.
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION

I, Matthew Farrell, Chief Financial Officer of Alpharma Inc., certify that:



1.	I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of Alpharma Inc.;



2.	Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;



3.	Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4.	The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:



(a)	Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;



(b)	Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



(c)	Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect , the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and



5.	The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):



(a)	All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and



(b)	any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls over financial reporting.









Date: May 5, 2005

/s/ Matthew FarrellMatthew Farrell 
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
#### § 15.101 Purpose.

The purpose of this regulation is to effectuate section 119 of the Rehabilitation, Comprehensive Services, and Developmental Disabilities Amendments of 1978, which amended section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 to prohibit discrimination on the basis of handicap in programs or activities conducted by Executive agencies or the United States Postal Service.
In the Senate of the United States,

December 3, 2007.

Resolved, That the bill from the House of Representatives (H.R. 238) entitled ‘‘An Act to repeal a prohibition on

the use of certain funds for tunneling in certain areas with

respect to the Los Angeles to San Fernando Valley Metro

Rail project, California.’’, do pass with the following

AMENDMENT:

On page 2, after line 4, insert:

1 SEC. 2. URBANIZED AREA FORMULA GRANTS.

2 Section 5307(b)(2) of title 49, United States Code, is

3 amended—

4 (1) in the heading, by striking ‘‘2007’’ and insert5 ing ‘‘2009’’;

6 (2) in subparagraph (A), by striking ‘‘2007’’ and

7 inserting ‘‘2009’’; and

8 (3) by adding at the end the following:

9 ‘‘(E) MAXIMUM AMOUNTS IN FISCAL YEARS

10 2008 AND 2009.—In fiscal years 2008 and 2009—
 †

2

HR 238 EAS

1 ‘‘(i) amounts made available to any

2 urbanized area under clause (i) or (ii) of

3 subparagraph (A) shall be not more than 50

4 percent of the amount apportioned in fiscal

5 year 2002 to the urbanized area with a

6 population of less than 200,000, as deter7 mined in the 1990 decennial census of pop8 ulation;

9 ‘‘(ii) amounts made available to any

10 urbanized area under subparagraph (A)(iii)

11 shall be not more than 50 percent of the

12 amount apportioned to the urbanized area

13 under this section for fiscal year 2003; and

14 ‘‘(iii) each portion of any area not des15 ignated as an urbanized area, as deter16 mined by the 1990 decennial census, and el17 igible to receive funds under subparagraph

18 (A)(iv), shall receive an amount of funds to

19 carry out this section that is not less than

20 50 percent of the amount the portion of the
†

3

HR 238 EAS

1 area received under section 5311 in fiscal

2 year 2002.’’.

Attest:

Secretary.
110TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 238

AMENDMENT
# Official Journal C 97A/2 Ap

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 97A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 572 April 2014 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 97A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 572 April 2014

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | V   Announcements |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | European Medicines Agency |
| 2014/C 097A/01 | Recruitment for the European Medicines Agency (London) | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Medicines Agency

2014/C 097A/01

Recruitment for the European Medicines Agency (London)

1

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| 2014/C 097A/02 | Review of ‘Competition’ C A Official Journals | 2 |

2014/C 097A/02

Review of ‘Competition’ C A Official Journals

2

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
### Page 1 of 3 **Disposition Comments Docket No:**  

### FAA - 201 4 - 0190 These comments are in **Directorate ID:** 

### 201 2 -NM - 1 88 - AD response to an SNPRM Originating Office Tracking No.: 

### 2012 - 0211 **Next Step:** FRAN SNPRM 

### N o C omments/Only

Supportive Comments Received

– If this box is checked, no signatures are required. No 

### Has the reference d service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? I f ye s, list latest revision and attach a cop y. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance. Instructions: Summarize all comments **by issue** (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of each issue. **All comments relating to the sam e issue should be discussed together.**  Do not list all of the issues from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA - IR- M - 8040.1C Chapter 9. **ISSUE 1:** Select one o

f the following : If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because

Make the following changes to the AD: If **NO** , we don’t agree because **ISSUE 2**  **:** Select one of the following :

If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree w ith because We disagree with because Make the following changes to the AD:

### Page 2 of 3

If **NO** , we don’t agree because **For additional issues, do uble**  **- click**  **here**

### Page 3 of 3 **S ignature Section**  Signature indicates concurrence with this action. Originating Office Tracking No.: **ASE** Printed Name **: Date** 

**Branch Man ager**  **Date**