alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.6

[LOGO] PLAYBOY ENTERPRISES, INC.                      INTEROFFICE CORRESPONDENCE

Date: May 21, 2002

To: Linda Havard

From: Howard Shapiro

Subject: Severance

This will confirm that if you are terminated at any time during the course of
your employment not for cause (as defined below), you will be entitled to
receive 12 months severance pay based on your salary at that time. "For cause"
is defined as conviction of a crime involving dishonesty, fraud or breach of
trust, or engaging in conduct materially injurious to Playboy. In the event of
such termination you will have no duty to mitigate damages, and you will be free
to accept other employment at your discretion.


           /s/ Howard Shapiro
           ------------------
           Howard Shapiro
EXHIBIT I 

Detailed Expense Records for Jenner & Block 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22892-9 Filed:11/18/22 Entered:11/18/22 18:44:13 Desc:

Exhibit I Page 1 of 9
JUNE 2022 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22892-9 Filed:11/18/22 Entered:11/18/22 18:44:13 Desc:

Exhibit I Page 2 of 9
Page 11

LAW OFFICES

JENNER & BLOCK LLP

353 N. Clark Street

CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60654-3456

(312) 222-9350

EXPENSES MATTER NUMBER - 10113

6/07/22 Postage Expense 295.22

6/07/22 B&W Copy 302.40

6/30/22 Westlaw Research 127.09

TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS $ 724.71

MATTER 10113 TOTAL $ 724.71 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22892-9 Filed:11/18/22 Entered:11/18/22 18:44:13 Desc:

Exhibit I Page 3 of 9
JULY 2022 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22892-9 Filed:11/18/22 Entered:11/18/22 18:44:13 Desc:

Exhibit I Page 4 of 9
Page 7

LAW OFFICES

JENNER & BLOCK LLP

353 N. Clark Street

CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60654-3456

(312) 222-9350

EXPENSES MATTER NUMBER - 10113

7/31/22 Westlaw Research 80.64

TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS $ 80.64

MATTER 10113 TOTAL $ 80.64 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22892-9 Filed:11/18/22 Entered:11/18/22 18:44:13 Desc:

Exhibit I Page 5 of 9
AUGUST 2022 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22892-9 Filed:11/18/22 Entered:11/18/22 18:44:13 Desc:

Exhibit I Page 6 of 9
Page 5

LAW OFFICES

JENNER & BLOCK LLP

353 N. Clark Street

CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60654-3456

(312) 222-9350

EXPENSES MATTER NUMBER - 10113

3/17/22 Other Professional Services; ALIX PARTNERS LLP; 03/17/2022 5,888.75

7/07/22 Pacer Quarterly Charges 07/07/2022 Period Cost April 01 thru June 30 

2022

22.80

8/02/22 Federal Express; FEDEX; 08/02/2022 56.82

8/31/22 Westlaw Research 111.36

TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS $ 6,079.73

MATTER 10113 TOTAL $ 6,079.73 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22892-9 Filed:11/18/22 Entered:11/18/22 18:44:13 Desc:

Exhibit I Page 7 of 9
SEPTEMBER 2022 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22892-9 Filed:11/18/22 Entered:11/18/22 18:44:13 Desc:

Exhibit I Page 8 of 9
Page 4

LAW OFFICES

JENNER & BLOCK LLP

353 N. Clark Street

CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60654-3456

(312) 222-9350

EXPENSES MATTER NUMBER - 10113

5/26/22 UPS Delivery Service Invoice# 00000613438222 20.99

5/26/22 UPS Delivery Service Invoice# 00000613438222 41.86

6/07/22 UPS Delivery Service Invoice# 00000613438242 11.38

6/07/22 UPS Delivery Service Invoice# 00000613438242 26.52

6/07/22 UPS Delivery Service Invoice# 00000613438242 6.28

6/07/22 UPS Delivery Service Invoice# 00000613438242 2.64

TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS $ 109.67

MATTER 10113 TOTAL $ 109.67 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22892-9 Filed:11/18/22 Entered:11/18/22 18:44:13 Desc:

Exhibit I Page 9 of 9
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, *v.*L. Harding Rogers, Jr., Appellant.

(Submitted October 15, 1936;

decided November 17, 1936.)

*613
      *L. Harding Rogers, Jr.,*in person, appellant.

*William Copeland Dodge, District Attorney (Abraham J. Gellinoff*of counsel), for respondent.

Judgment affirmed; no opinion.

Concur: Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien, Hubbs, Crouch, Loughran and Finch, JJ.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-7447

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

BRYANT ROGER CAIN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, District Judge.

(CR-93-277-WMN, CA-98-2297-WMN)

Submitted: March 25, 1999 Decided: March 30, 1999

Before WILKINS and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Bryant Roger Cain, Appellant Pro Se. John Francis Purcell, Jr.,

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Bryant Roger Cain seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 &

Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s

opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning

of the district court. See United States v. Cain, Nos. CR-93-277-

WMN; CA-98-2297-WMN (D. Md. Aug. 21, 1998). We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Exhibit 23.1


            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the  incorporation  by reference in  Registration  Statement  Nos.
333-119491,  333-104230,  333-82230,  333-92003  and  333-13429  on Form S-3 and
Registration  Statement Nos. 333-119474,  333-53765,  333-40472 and 333-79151 on
Form S-8 of our reports  dated  February  22,  2007,  relating to the  financial
statements and financial statement schedule of KeySpan Corporation (which report
expressed an unqualified  opinion and included an explanatory  paragraph related
to (i) the  adoption of  Statement of  Financial  Accounting  Standards  No. 158
"Employers'  Accounting for Defined  Benefit  Pensions and Other  Postretirement
Benefit  Plans"  discussed  in Notes 1 and 4 and (ii) the  adoption of Financial
Accounting  Standards Board  Interpretation  No. 47, "Accounting for Conditional
Asset  Retirement  Obligations"  discussed  in  Notes 1 and 7) and  management's
report on the  effectiveness  of  internal  control  over  financial  reporting,
appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of KeySpan Corporation for the year
ended December 31, 2006.



/s/DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
New York, New York
February 22, 2007
EXHIBIT 49 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:4014-45 Filed:10/04/18 Entered:10/04/18 16:51:23 Desc:

Exhibit 49 Page 1 of 3
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:4014-45 Filed:10/04/18 Entered:10/04/18 16:51:23 Desc:

Exhibit 49 Page 2 of 3
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:4014-45 Filed:10/04/18 Entered:10/04/18 16:51:23 Desc:

Exhibit 49 Page 3 of 3
#### Matteawan Manufacturing Company, Appellant and Respondent, *v.*Chemical Bank and Trust Company, Respondent and Appellant, and The Midnight Mission, Appellant and Respondent.

(Argued April 30, 1936;

decided July 8, 1936.)

*412
      *Orison S. Marden*and *Charles J. Fay*for plaintiff; appellant and respondent.

*Justus Scheffield, Philip A. Carroll*and *Jack D. Gunther*for Chemical Bank and Trust Company, defendant, respondent and appellant.

*Walbridge S. Taft, Malcolm S. Langford*and *Whitman Knapp*for The Midnight Mission, defendant, appellant and respondent.

Judgment modified to the extent that plaintiff’s complaint against The Midnight Mission is dismissed, with costs in all courts to The Midnight Mission against the plaintiff, and the judgment otherwise affirmed, with costs to the plaintiff against Chemical Bank and Trust Company, and with costs to Chemical Bank and Trust Company against The Midnight Mission. No opinion.

Concur: Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien, Hubbs, Crouch, Loughran and Finch, JJ.
EXHIBIT 19 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3126-19 Filed:05/23/18 Entered:05/23/18 11:45:37 Desc:

Exhibit Letter from Cotton to FOMB Page 1 of 3
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3126-19 Filed:05/23/18 Entered:05/23/18 11:45:37 Desc:

Exhibit Letter from Cotton to FOMB Page 2 of 3
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3126-19 Filed:05/23/18 Entered:05/23/18 11:45:37 Desc:

Exhibit Letter from Cotton to FOMB Page 3 of 3
#### Sheilah Bailer et al., Respondents, v Norma PerezVeridiano et al., Respondents, and Guttman Breast Diagnostic Institute, Inc., Appellant.

[698 NYS2d 288]

—In an action, *inter alia,*to recover damages for medical malpractice, the defendant Guttman Breast Diagnostic Institute, Inc., appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Levine, J.), dated June 24, 1998, which, upon a jury verdict finding it 100% at fault for the plaintiffs’ injuries, and finding that the plaintiffs suffered total damages in the amount of $1,325,000, and upon an order of the same court, dated April 3,1998, granting the motion of the defendant Guttman Breast Diagnostic Institute, Inc., to the extent of reducing the verdict by $500,000 previously paid pursuant to a settlement agreement between the plaintiffs and the defendant Selig Strax, is in favor of the plaintiffs and against it in the principal sum of $825,000.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with one bill of costs payable to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

In this medical malpractice action, the plaintiffs sued, among others, the appellant Guttman Breast Diagnostic Institute, Inc., for the actions of several of its employees, including the defendant Dr. Selig Strax. The appellant brought a cross claim for indemnification or contribution against Dr. Strax. At the conclusion of the trial, after Dr. Strax had settled with the *250plaintiffs for $500,000, the appellant requested that an interrogatory be given to the jury apportioning fault between it. Dr. Strax, and a third codefendant unrelated to the appellant and Dr. Strax. The court denied the application, on the ground that Dr. Strax was, as a matter of law, an employee of the appellant.

After a verdict was rendered in the plaintiffs’ favor against the appellant, the appellant did not seek judgment against Dr. Strax for indemnification. Rather, in a motion brought against the plaintiffs only, it moved to set aside the verdict in the plaintiffs’ favor. The appellant contended that it was entitled to a setoff against the verdict pursuant to General Obligations Law § 15-108 (a) for the amount of Dr. Strax’s “equitable share” of the damages, which the appellant claimed was greater than the $500,000 actually paid by Dr. Strax. However, the setoff pursuant to General Obligations Law § 15-108 (a) is applicable to contribution between joint tortfeasors pursuant to CPLR article 14, not indemnification of those vicariously liable for the acts of others (see, *Riviello v*Waldron, 47 NY2d 297, 305-306). The appellant is, in effect, seeking contribution from Dr. Strax. Such relief is unavailable, since Dr. Strax was its own employee (see, *Riviello v Waldron, supra).*

The appellant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Joy, J. P., Goldstein, McGinity and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3653-3 Filed:07/20/18 Entered:07/20/18 11:45:16 Desc:

Exhibit C Page 1 of 2
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3653-3 Filed:07/20/18 Entered:07/20/18 11:45:16 Desc:

Exhibit C Page 2 of 2
§ 291.41 Financial and statistical reporting—general. ( a ) Carriers providing cargo operations in interstate air transportation that also conduct other operations under section 41102 shall comply with the provisions of part 241 of this title.
( b ) Carriers providing cargo operations in interstate air transportation under section 41103 certificates shall comply with § 291.42.
( c ) Carriers providing cargo operations in interstate air transportation under section 41103, and also providing other services under part 298 of this title, shall report their cargo operations in interstate air transportation operations in accordance with § 291.42, and shall report all other traffic in accordance with the provisions of subpart F of part 298.
[ER-1080, 43 FR 53635, Nov. 16, 1978, as amended at 60 FR 43526, Aug. 22, 1995]
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 87 (Thursday, May 4, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 25945]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-11110]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-36,874]


Fahnos Apparel, Inc. El Paso, TX; Amended Certification Regarding 
Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance

    In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 
2273) the Department of Labor issued a Certification of Eligibility to 
Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance on November 19, 1999 applicable 
to workers of Fashions Apparel Corporation, El Paso, Texas. The notice 
was published in the Federal Register on December 28, 1999 (64 FR 
72691).
    At the request of the State agency, the Department reviewed the 
certification for workers of the subject firm. New findings show that 
the Department incorrectly identified the subject firm name in its 
entirety. The Department is amending the certification determination to 
correctly identify the subject firm title name to read ``Fahnos 
Apparel, Inc.''.
    The amended notice applicable to TA-W-36,874 is hereby issued as 
follows:

    All workers of Fahnos Apparel, Inc., El Paso, Texas who became 
totally or partially separated from employment on or after September 
10, 1998 through November 19, 2001 are eligible to apply for 
adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974.


    Signed at Washington, D.C. this 20th day of April 2000.
Edward A. Tomchick,
Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 00-11110 Filed 5-3-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4325 

To amend the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 to clarify the 

authority of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection with respect 

to persons regulated by a State insurance regulator, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 27, 2020 

Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina (for himself and Mr. MANCHIN) introduced the 

following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 

Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 

to clarify the authority of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection with respect to persons regulated by 

a State insurance regulator, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Business of Insurance 

5 Regulatory Reform Act of 2020’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4325 IS

1 SEC. 2. CLARIFICATION TO THE AUTHORITY OF THE BU2 REAU WITH RESPECT TO PERSONS REGU3 LATED BY A STATE INSURANCE REGULATOR. 

4 Section 1027(f) of the Consumer Financial Protec5 tion Act of 2010 (12 U.S.C. 5517(f)) is amended— 

6 (1) in paragraph (2)— 

7 (A) in the paragraph heading, by striking 

8 ‘‘DESCRIPTION OF ACTIVITIES’’ and inserting 

9 ‘‘EXCEPTIONS’’; 

10 (B) by striking ‘‘Paragraph (1)’’ and in11 serting the following: 

12 ‘‘(A) AUTHORITY.—Paragraph (1)’’; and 

13 (C) by inserting after subparagraph (A), 

14 as so designated, the following: 

15 ‘‘(B) LIMITATION.—With respect to a per16 son regulated by a State insurance regulator— 

17 ‘‘(i) if that person is offering or pro18 viding a consumer financial product or 

19 service, the Bureau may not enforce this 

20 title with respect to that person to the ex21 tent that the person is engaged in the busi22 ness of insurance; or 

23 ‘‘(ii) if that person is subject to any 

24 enumerated consumer law or any law for 

25 which authorities are transferred under 

26 subtitle F or H, the authority of the BuVerDate Sep 11 2014 23:05 Aug 09, 2020 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S4325.IS S4325

kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 4325 IS

1 reau to enforce that law with respect to 

2 that person shall be narrowly construed to 

3 the extent that the person is engaged in 

4 the business of insurance.’’; and 

5 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

6 ‘‘(4) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—The enforce7 ment of this title shall be broadly construed in favor 

8 of the authority of a State insurance regulator with 

9 respect to a person regulated by the State insurance 

10 regulator.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

In re:

COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO,

Debtor.

CASE NO. 3:17-cv-01578 (LTS)

TITLE III

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE

TO THE CLERK OF COURT AND 

ALL PARTIES OF RECORD:

Pursuant to Rule 83(D)(a) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure for the United States 

District Court for the District of Puerto Rico and Bankruptcy R. 9010 (b), I am admitted or 

otherwise authorized to practice in this Court, appear in this case as counsel for National Public 

Finance Guarantee Corporation (“National”), and hereby request to be served with all motions, 

pleadings, papers and processes in this matter and to be added to any Master List to be 

maintained by the Clerk of Court.

WHEREFORE, the undersigned respectfully requests the Clerk of Court and all parties 

of record to take notice of the foregoing.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.

In San Juan, Puerto Rico, this 9

th of May, 2017.

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this same date a true and exact copy of this notice was 

filed with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system, which will notify a copy to counsel of 

record.

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:30 Filed:05/09/17 Entered:05/11/17 14:45:21 Desc: Main

Document Page 1 of 2
2

ADSUAR MUÑIZ GOYCO

SEDA & PÉREZ-OCHOA, P.S.C.

P.O. Box 70294

San Juan, PR 00936-8294

Tel: 787.756.9000

Fax: 787.756.9010

Email: epo@amgprlaw.com

By: /s/ Eric Pérez-Ochoa

Eric Pérez-Ochoa

USDC-PR No. 206314

Counsel for 

National Public Finance Guarantee Corporation

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:30 Filed:05/09/17 Entered:05/11/17 14:45:21 Desc: Main

Document Page 2 of 2
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > Banking Act of 1933

              																	United States. Congress. House. Committee on Banking and Currency, 1865-1974					 and 	Seventy-Third Congress, 1933-1935. 						*Banking Act of 1933 : Report (To Accompany H.R. 5661)*,										May 19, 1933,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/994,			accessed on September 18, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. MAR C E L O R I VE R A I B AR R A, a .k .a . M a n u e l D e lg a d o - H u g o , D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t. N o. 11- 50077 D. C . No . 2 : 1 0 - c r - 0 0 9 4 1 - AH M ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e C e n tr a l D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia A . H ow a r d M a t z , D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d F e brua ry21, 2012 ** B efo re: F E RN A N D E Z , M cK E O W N , an dB Y B E E , C i rcu i tJu d g es. M ar ce l o R i veraIbarraappeal s f rom the 60 -m on th sent ence i m po se d fol l ow i ng hi s gui l ty- pl eaconv i ct i on for bei ng an i l l egal al i en foun d i n the U ni t ed S t a t e d f ol l ow i ng de port a t i on, i n vi ol a t i on of 8 U . S . C . § 1326. W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on



# FI LED FEB 23 2 012 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS11- 50077 2 u n d e r2 8 U . S. C. § 1 2 9 1 , a n dw e a f f i rm. I b a rr ac o n te n d s th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u rt p r o c e d u r a llye rr e db yf a ilin g to appr e c i a t e i t s di s c r e t i on t o va ryf r om the a dvi s oryS e nt e nc i ng G ui de l i ne s r a nge on p o lic yg r o u n d s a n db yf a ilin g to e x p la in w h yit r e je c te dh is p o lic ya r g u m e n ts c onc e rni ng U . S . S . G . § 2L 1. 2( b) ( 1) ( A ) . T he r e c or d be l i e s the s e c ont e nt i ons . T he c o u rt c o n s id e r e dI b a rr a ’s a r g u m e n ts a n de x p la in e dth e s e n te n c e s u f f ic ie n tlyto p e rm it m e a n in g f

u l ap p e lla te r e v ie w . Se e U n ite d S ta tes v . Ca r ty , 502 F . 3d 984, 992 (9th C i r. 20 08 ) ( en banc). I b a rr af u rth e rc o n te n d s th a t h is s e n te n c e is s u b s ta n tiv e lyu n r e a s o n ab le in lig h t o f th e a s s e rte dd e f

ic ie n c ie s in s e c tio n 2 L 1 .2 ( b ) a n do th e rs e n te n c in g f a c to r s . W e c ons i de rpol i c ya r gum e nt s l i ke I ba rr a ’ s w i thi n the c ont e xtof c ons i de r a t i on of th e r e a s o n ab le n e s s o f

th e f in a l s e n te n c e . Se e U

ni te d States v . B ars umy an , 517 F . 3d 11 54 , 11 58 -59 (9th C i r. 20 08 ). T he re cord re fl ec t s thatIbarra ’ s s ent ence , t en m o n th s b e lo w th e a d v is o ryS e n te n c in g G u id e lin e s r a n g e , is s u b s ta n tiv e ly re as on abl e i n l i gh tof the t ot al i ty of the ci rc um st ance s and the 18 U . S . C . § 3 55 3(a) s e n te n c in g f

a c to r s . See G al l

v. U ni ted States , 55 2 U . S . 38 , 51 (200 7). AF F I RME D.