alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### James Edward ELMER, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.

No. 21264.

United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit.

May 5, 1967.

Rehearing Denied June 5, 1967.

Morton Galane, Las Vegas, Nev., for appellant.

Joseph L. Ward, U. S. Atty., Robert S. Linnell, Asst. U S. Atty., Las Vegas, Nev., for appellee.

Before MERRILL and BROWNING, Circuit Judges, and TAYLOR, District Judge.

*673PER CURIAM:

From the testimony of the arresting officer, the district court could conclude, as by necessary implication it did, that when appellant accompanied the police officer to the station and made statements regarding the offense he acted voluntarily and with knowledge of his rights; that the arrest occurred thereafter, and hence was supported by probable cause; and that the search of appellant’s wallet followed immediately upon the arrest and was incident to it. Appellant’s arguments, resting on the premise that the arrest occurred when the officer first contacted appellant and was unlawful because unsupported by probable cause, must therefore fall.

From the whole of the evidence, the district court could also conclude, as it did, that the appellant’s statements to the police officer, and subsequently to the FBI agent, were voluntary, and not the product of a will overborne by alcohol and police pressure as appellant, contended.

The district court may have thought, mistakenly, that a guilty plea could be valid because “voluntary,” even though induced by prior violation of the accused’s constitutional rights. It is clear now, if it was not then, that “A guilty plea primarily motivated by a deprivation of fundamental constitutional right cannot stand.” Briley v. Wilson, 376 F.2d 802 (9th Cir. 1967) (No. 20,454, April 12, 1967). But appellant could not have been prejudiced by the district court’s misapprehension for, as we have said, the district court found, and we agree, that appellant failed to establish that his constitutional rights were violated prior to his plea.

On the whole record the district court could properly find, as it did, that appellant’s guilty plea was “voluntarily made and free from coercion and misrepresentations.”

Affirmed.
#### § 2200.11 [Reserved]
Exhibit 31.1


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Ronald J. Sidman, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of The
First Years 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 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 functions):

      a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control 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 control over
financial reporting.

Date: April 29, 2004


By: /s/ Ronald J. Sidman
    -----------------------------
    Ronald J. Sidman
    Chairman, President, and Chief Executive Officer
### Fw **: Revised EGU GHG NSPS proposal Peter Tsirigotis**  to

: Dominic_J._Mancini, nathan_j._frey Cc : RobertJ W ayland, Kevin Culligan, Mary Johnson, Tsirigotis.Peter

From: Peter Tsirigotis/RTP/USEPA/US To: Dominic_J._Mancini@omb.eop.gov, nathan_j._frey@omb.eop.gov Cc: RobertJ W ayland/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Kevin Culligan/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Mary Johnson/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Tsirigotis.Peter@epamail.epa Hi (again) Dom and Nathan. T he previous redline/strikeout file I sent you was off an interim version of the preamble instead of the correct, 11 - 04 - 11 version. A ttached is the corrected redline version. W e also corrected a typo (a "The" was missing on pg 72) so I have appended the "clean" version with the ty po corrected. Sorry for any confusion. **Clean Version:** EO 12866 EGU GHG NSPS proposal FR notice 02_28_12.docx **Redline Version (02 -**  **28 -**  **12 version versus 11 -**  **04 -**  **11 version):**

EO 12866 EGU GHG NSPS preamble_02_28_12_v_11_04_11 redline.docx
Exhibit B

USCA Case #14-1083 Document #1514095 Filed: 09/25/2014 Page 1 of 3
Emission Event Report

http://www11.tceq.texas.gov/oce/eer/index.cfm?fuseaction=main.getDetails&target=77464[9/11/2014 5:11:45 PM]

Emission Event Reporting Database

Regulated

entity

name

E I DU PONT

DE NEMOURS

LA PORTE

PLANT

Physical

location

GO E ON HWY 225 FROM E LOOP 610 TAKE

EXIT SENS/STRANG & TURN L AT LIGHT

CROSS OVERPASS & CONT ON SENS RD

TURN R ONTO STRANG & CONT TO END OF

STRANG RD

Regulated

entity RN

number

RN100225085 City,

County LA PORTE, HARRIS

Type(s) of

air

emissions

event:

EMISSIONS

EVENT

Event

began: 06/15/2006 8:53PM

This is

based on

the:

FINAL

REPORT

Event

ended: 06/20/2006 11:39PM

Cause

The Lannate unit experienced problems with the dichloromethane

recovery system. The unit shutdown to make repairs to the system

(no emissions were generated). The unit was restarted on 6/15/2006

at 20:53 with the relief device (automatic) in the open position. The

relief device was reset (closed) on 6/20/2006 at 23:39. The problem

was discovered on 6/21/2006 at 15:00 by an area engineer during a

data review. The amount released was then calculated and reported.

The National Response Center was notified of this event at 16:04 on

6/21/2006 (Incident # 801542).

Action

taken

The relief device was reset (closed). The distributive control system is

being modified to prevent start-up of the unit with the relief device

open.

Emissions

estimation

method

Calculated.

Source 1: Lannate Production Unit , FIN number

Source 2: Methylene Chloride Relief Device , FIN number N/A

SITE SEARCH:

SUBJECT INDEX

Air Water Waste

Search TCEQ Data

Agency Organization Map

USCA Case #14-1083 Document #1514095 Filed: 09/25/2014 Page 2 of 3
Emission Event Report

http://www11.tceq.texas.gov/oce/eer/index.cfm?fuseaction=main.getDetails&target=77464[9/11/2014 5:11:45 PM]

Source 3: Relief Valve , EPN number

Contaminant Authorization Limit Amount Released

Dichloromethane 1834 0.0 8700.0 lbs (est.)

No other sources

Return to search form

Air subjects

Region contact information

Air emissions events/maintenance activity forms

30 TAC air quality rules

USCA Case #14-1083 Document #1514095 Filed: 09/25/2014 Page 3 of 3
#### UNITED STATES of America ex rel. Perry PAULDING, Relator, v. Vincent R. MANCUSI, Warden, Attica State Prison, Attica, New York, Respondent.

No. MR 714.

United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.

Nov. 3, 1966.

Perry Paulding, in pro. per.

Louis J. Lefkowitz, Atty. Gen. for State of New York, New York City, opposed the motion on behalf of respondent, Vincent Mancusi, Attica, N. Y.

Before LUMBARD, Chief Judge, and MOORE and KAUFMAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

We deny the motions and dismiss the petition, without prejudice to petitioner’s right to renew his petition in the district court should appropriate proceedings for the relief herein sought be denied in the New York State courts. United States ex rel. Martin v. McMann, 348 F.2d 896 (2 Cir. 1965); United States ex rel. Bagley v. LaVallee, 332 F.2d 890, 892 (2 Cir. 1964). In light of People ex rel. Keitt v. McMann, 18 N.Y.2d 257, 273 N.Y.S.2d 897, 220 N.E.2d 653 (1966), the broadened scope of habeas corpus in New York makes it appropriate for the petitioner to seek whatever remedy he may have in such a proceeding in the first instance.
#### § 1910.501 [Reserved]
| /s/  David      L.      Cheek                                       David      L. CheekPresident      and Chief Executive OfficerMarch      14, 2008  | /s/  Bert E. Downing,      Jr.                                                             Bert      E. Downing, Jr.Vice      President, Chief Financial Officer,Corporate      Controller and TreasurerMarch      14, 2008 |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     |
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**Certification of the Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

I, Dan W. Snyder, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of Kenilworth Systems Corporation on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Kenilworth Systems Corporation.

 
| By:    | /s/   Dan W. Snyder       |   |
|--------|---------------------------|--------|
| Name:  | Dan   W. Snyder           |   |
| Title: | Chief   Executive Officer |   |
| Date:  | March 30,   2011     |   |

 

1

----
Section 333 /Petition for Exemption Title 14 CFR 11.63

William P. Croom Billcroom32@gmail.com FAA Registration for UAV **FA34X7ATW7** 211 Big Tree Road South Daytona, Florida 32119 540
- 220
-8885 UAV: DJI Phantom 3 Advanced Professional Quadcopter UAV Experience 2 Years Current holder of Priva te Pilot Certificate Have Flight Operations Manual from DJI that include updates and safety operational, preflight recommendations. The DJI Professional Advance cont ains imbedded recording system detailing all flights and details of those flights. **Purpose** : Recreational and for hire Aerial photography for local economic development: Licensed Realtor/documentation and promotion of Real Estate Construction and project ma nagement of new construction, inspection of projects. **Pilot in command :**  As pilot in command I employ the same regulations that govern my action during fixed wing flight according to FAA requirements. Safe flight operations apply in both applications.

I u nderstand and agree that as the operator of an unmanned aircraft system, I will be solely responsible for understanding and abiding by all relevant rules and regulations. I also understand that I am ultimately responsible for the safety of every flight.
636 A.2d 480

#### ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION OF MARYLAND v. Neil Warren STEINHORN.

Misc. (Subtitle BV) No. 28,

Sept. Term, 1990.

Court of Appeals of Maryland.

Feb. 1, 1994.

ORDER

Upon consideration of the Consent to Disbarment from the practice of law filed by Neil Warren Steinhorn, in accordance with Maryland Rule BV 12d2, and the written recommendation of Bar Counsel, it is this 1st day of February, 1994

ORDERED, by the Court of Appeals of Maryland, that Neil Warren Steinhorn be, and he is hereby, disbarred by consent from the further practice of law in the State of Maryland; and it is further

ORDERED, that the Clerk of this Court shall strike the name of Neil Warren Steinhorn from the register of attorneys, and pursuant to Maryland Rule BV13, shall certify that fact to the Trustees of the Clients’ Security Trust Fund and the clerks of all judicial tribunals in the State.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

 v.

OSCAR JAVIER NOLASCO-TELLEZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 15-50511

D.C. No. 3:15-cr-01835-DMS

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of California

Dana M. Sabraw, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 14, 2016** 

Before: WALLACE, LEAVY, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

Oscar Javier Nolasco-Tellez appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges the 36-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for

being a removed alien found in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C § 1326. 

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

FILED

DEC 20 2016

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Nolasco-Tellez contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing

to consider U.S.S.G. § 4A1.3. We review for plain error, see United States v.

Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 & n.3 (9th Cir. 2010), and find none. 

The district court did not depart upward on the basis that Nolasco-Tellez’s criminal

history category was inadequate. Accordingly, section 4A1.3 was not a “pertinent

policy statement” that the district court was required to consider under 18 U.S.C.

§ 3553(a)(5). 

Nolasco-Tellez next contends that the district court erred under Federal Rule

of Criminal Procedure 32(h) by imposing an above-Guidelines sentence without

providing prior notice. Contrary to Nolasco-Tellez’s contention, the record reflects

that the district court imposed an upward variance based on the 18 U.S.C.

§ 3553(a) factors. Accordingly, the district court was not required to provide

notice under Rule 32(h). See United States v. Moschella, 727 F.3d 888, 893 (9th

Cir. 2013) (“A district court is not required under Rule 32(h) to give advance

notice before imposing a sentence outside of the advisory guideline range if the

sentence is the result of a variance.”).

Finally, Nolasco-Tellez contends that his sentence is substantively

unreasonable. The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing

Nolasco-Tellez’s sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). 

2 15-50511
The above-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the section

3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including

Nolasco-Tellez’s criminal and immigration history as well as his failure to be

deterred by prior sentences. See United States v. Burgos-Ortega, 777 F.3d 1047,

1056–57 (9th Cir. 2015). 

AFFIRMED. 

3 15-50511
#### UNION TRUST CO v LESSOVITZ

Ohio Supreme Court

No 22098 (Appeal Case)

No 22099 (Error case)

Decided May 21, 1930

*337Marshall, CJ., Kinkade, Robinson, Matthias, Day and Allen, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 10.35(a)


 


SPECIAL OPERATING LICENSE


 


Serial Number: YU PING JT[2012]001








 


	Enterprise Name:	Pingdingshan Xulong Renewable Resource Co., Ltd.
	 	 
	Entity Type:	Limited liability company (invested or controlled by natural person)
	 	 
	Address:	Eastern side of Xihuan Road, Xinhua Area, Pingdingshan (premises of Pingdingshan Hengji
                                    Concrete Co., Ltd.)
	 	 
	Principal Person in Charge:	ZHU Yulong
	 	 
	Business Scope:	Construction wastes cleaning, transportation, handling and recycling within municipal planning
                        zone
	 	 
	Effective Date:	Until October 30, 2032
	 	 
	Issuing Authority:	Pingdingshan Construction Wastes Management Office






 


[Seal of Pingdingshan Construction 


Wastes Management Office]


 


October 15, 2012
EXHIBITS









EXHIBIT 99



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  Elgrande.com, Inc.  (the "Company")

On  Form  10-QSB  for  the period  ended  August 31,  2002 as  filed  with  the

Securities  and Exchange  Commission on  the  date  hereof  (the "Report"),  I,

Michael F. Holloran, Chief Executive Officer and Principal 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  to the  best  of my

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.



/s/ Michael F. Holloran

Michael F. Holloran

Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer



October 15, 2002
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 99 (Monday, May 22, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32123-32124]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-12734]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree Pursuant to Sections 106 and 
107 of CERCLA

    Notice is hereby given that on May 5, 2000, the United states 
lodged a proposed Consent Decree with the United States District Court 
for the Southern district of Texas in United States and State of Texas 
v. Alpha Metals, Inc., et al., Civ. A. No. G-00250, in connection with 
related case Amoco Chemical Co., et al. v. United States, et al., Civ. 
A. No. G-96-272 (consolidated with Civ. A. No. G-96-247), pursuant to 
sections 106 and 107 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9606 and 9607. The proposed 
Consent Decree resolves civil claims of the United States and the State 
of Texas against settling generator defendants and settling former 
owner/operator defendants, and contribution claims against settling 
federal agencies, regarding the Tex Tin Superfund Site--a former tin 
and copper smelter and metals reclamation facility established during 
WWII--located in Texas City, Texas. Under the proposed Consent Decree, 
settling defendants agree to perform the cleanup of the Tex Tin Site, 
financed in substantial part by settling federal agencies, at an 
estimated cost of approximately $27 million. In addition, the settling 
parties agree, among other things, to finance a proposed remedy 
addressing continued erosion in the Swan Lake Marsh are near Galveston 
Bay, pay natural resource damages relating to losses and injuries in 
the Swan Lake Marsh area, and reimburse Amoco Chemical Company for past 
response costs for work it performed at the Site.
    The Department of Justice will receive comments relating to the 
proposed Consent Decree for 30 days following publication of this 
Notice. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney General, 
Environment and Natural Resources Division, United States Department of 
Justice, P.O. Box 7611, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, DC 20044-
7611, and should refer to United States and State of Texas v. Alpha 
Metals, Inc., et al., DOJ No. 90-11-3-1669. The proposed Consent Decree 
may be examined at the Office of the United States Attorney for the 
Southern District of Texas, Houston, Texas, and the Region VI Office of 
the United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, 
Dallas, Texas 75202. A copy of the proposed Consent Decree may be 
obtained by mail from the Department of Justice Consent Decree Library, 
P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044. In requesting a

[[Page 32124]]

copy, please enclose a check for reproduction costs (at 25 cents per 
page) in the amount of $94.50 for the Decree, payable to the Consent 
Decree Library.

Joel M. Gross,
Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and Natural 
Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 00-12734 Filed 5-19-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-15-M