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



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 I, Warren D. Edwards, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
of Affiliated Computer Services, Inc. (the Company), certify, pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to
my knowledge:  (1)
    
    the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the
third quarter of fiscal year 2004 ended March 31, 2004, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and(2)
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company. Dated: May 17, 2004
    
    /s/ Warren D. EdwardsWarren D. Edwards,
Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer of
Affiliated Computer Services, Inc.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

June 26, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
133501 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 133501 COA: 275452 Grand Traverse CC: 05-009916-FC KENNETH DALE GILDERSLEEVE, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the February 9, 2007 order of the Court of Appeals is consider ed, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

t0618 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

June 26, 2007

Clerk
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

FORT PIERCE DIVISION

CASE NO. 22-14048-CR-CANNON

CASE NO. 22-14054-CR-CANNON

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

ELIJAH DANIEL SHAW,

DUSTIN SINGLETON, 

Defendant.

 /

ORDER GRANTING GOVERNMENT’S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO 

RESCHEDULE SENTENCING HEARINGS

THIS MATTER comes before the Court upon the Government’s Unopposed Motion to 

Reschedule Sentencing Hearings, filed in both cases listed above [ECF No. 177 (Case No. 22-

14054-CR); ECF No. 267 (Case No. 22-14048-CR)]. Being fully advised, it is, 

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motions are GRANTED. The Sentencing 

Hearings are hereby reset as follows: 

1. Defendant Dustin Singleton’s sentencing hearings in both cases (22-14048-CR and 22-

14054-CR) are reset for 9:30 a.m. on Tuesday, August 29, 2023.

2. Defendant Elijah Shaw’s (22-14048-CR) sentencing is reset for 1:30 p.m. on Tuesday, 

August 29, 2023.

3. No additional changes to these dates will be permitted.

Case 2:22-cr-14054-AMC Document 178 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/27/2023 Page 1 of 2
CASE NO. 22-14048-CR-CANNON / CASE NO. 22-14054-CR-CANNON

2

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Pierce, Florida, this 27th day of July 2023.

 

AILEEN M. CANNON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

cc: counsel of record

Case 2:22-cr-14054-AMC Document 178 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/27/2023 Page 2 of 2
II

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4794

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

OCTOBER 24 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 22), 2000

Received

AN ACT

To require the Secretary of the Interior to complete a resource study of the 600 mile route through Connecticut,

Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New

York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Virginia, used

by George Washington and General Rochambeau during

the American Revolutionary War.
2

HR 4794 RDS

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 ‘‘Washington-Rocham5 beau Revolutionary Route National Heritage Act of

6 2000’’.

7 SEC. 2. STUDY OF THE WASHINGTON-ROCHAMBEAU REVO8 LUTIONARY ROUTE.

9 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 2 years after the

10 date on which funds are made available to carry out this

11 section, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on

12 Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and the

13 Committee on Resources of the House of Representatives,

14 a resource study of the 600 mile route through Con15 necticut, Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jer16 sey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Virginia,

17 used by George Washington and General Jean Baptiste

18 Donatien de Vimeur, comte de Rochambeau during the

19 American Revolutionary War.

20 (b) CONSULTATION.—In conducting the study re21 quired by subsection (a), the Secretary shall consult with

22 State and local historic associations and societies, State

23 historic preservation agencies, and other appropriate orga24 nizations.

25 (c) CONTENTS.—The study shall—
3

HR 4794 RDS

1 (1) identify the full range of resources and his2 toric themes associated with the route referred to in

3 subsection (a), including its relationship to the

4 American Revolutionary War;

5 (2) identify alternatives for National Park Serv6 ice involvement with preservation and interpretation

7 of the route referred to in subsection (a); and

8 (3) include cost estimates for any necessary ac9 quisition, development, interpretation, operation, and

10 maintenance associated with the alternatives identi11 fied pursuant to paragraph (2).

Passed the House of Representatives October 23,

2000.

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL,

Clerk.

By MARTHA C. MORRISON,

Deputy Clerk.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-50902

MICHAEL PINEDO,

Plaintiff−Appellant,

versus

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, Connally Unit,

Defendant−Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

No. 5:18-CV-577

Before SMITH, COSTA, and HO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Michael Pinedo, Texas prisoner #2055727, seeks to proceed in forma 

pauperis (“IFP”) on appeal of the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights 

complaint as frivolous, for failure to state a claim, because the defendants were 

entitled to qualified immunity and immunity under the Eleventh Amendment, 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 

5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

September 27, 2019

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk
No. 18-50902

2

and in the alternative, for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. By 

moving to proceed IFP, Pinedo is challenging the district court’s certification 

that his appeal was not taken in good faith. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 

202 (5th Cir. 1997). Our inquiry into Pinedo’s good faith “is limited to whether 

the appeal involves legal points arguable on their merits (and therefore not 

frivolous).” Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

Pinedo fails to address any of the district court’s conclusions and, otherwise, makes only conclusional statements in support of his argument that the 

district court erred in dismissing his complaint. Pro se briefs are afforded 

liberal construction. See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 225 (5th Cir. 1993). 

Nevertheless, when an appellant fails to identify any error in the district 

court’s analysis, it is the same as if he had not appealed. Brinkmann v. Dallas 

Cty. Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987).

Because Pinedo has failed to challenge any factual or legal aspect of the 

district court’s disposition of the claims raised in his complaint or the certification that his appeal is not taken in good faith, he has abandoned the critical 

issue of his appeal. See id. Thus, the appeal lacks arguable merit. See Howard, 707 F.2d at 220. 

Accordingly, the IFP motion is DENIED. Additionally, because this 

appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2; Baugh, 117 F.3d 

at 202 n.24. The district court’s dismissal of Pinedo’s complaint and our dismissal of this appeal count as strikes under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba 

v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 387-88 (5th Cir. 1996). Pinedo is CAUTIONED 

that if he accumulates three strikes, he will not be allowed to proceed IFP in 

any civil action or appeal filed while he is detained or incarcerated in any 

facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury.
#### § 164.51 Deviations from rules: Emergency.

Except for the requirements of § 164.53(b), in an emergency, any person may deviate from any rule in this part to the extent necessary to avoid endangering persons, property, or the environment.

[CGD 74-77, 42 FR 5956, Jan. 31, 1977]
#### Purandat Chalu et al., Respondents, v Tov-Le Realty Corp. et al., Appellants.

Submitted May 13, 1996;

decided July 9, 1996

Motion, insofar as it seeks leave to appeal from that portion of the Appellate Division order that dismissed the appeal from Supreme Court’s order denying defendants’ motion to vacate and affirmed Supreme Court’s amended order adhering to the order denying defendants’ motion to vacate, dismissed upon the ground that those portions of the order do not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution; motion for leave to appeal otherwise denied. Cross motion for the imposition of sanctions denied.
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.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. ER00-2556-000]

Take notice that on May 22, 2000, Kansas City Power & Light Company (KCPL), tendered for filing Service Agreements dated May 9, 2000, between KCPL and Conectiv Energy Supply, Inc. (Powerex).

KCPL proposes an effective date of May 10, 2000, and requests a waiver of the Commission's notice requirement to allow the requested effective date. This Agreements provide for the rates and charges for Non-Firm and Short-term Firm Transmission Service.

In its filing, KCPL states that the rates included in the above-mentioned Service Agreement are KCPL's rates and charges in the compliance filing to FERC Order 888-A in Docket No. OA97-636-000.

Any person desiring to be heard or to protest such filing should file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). All such motions and protests should be filed on or before June 12, 2000. Protests will be considered by the Commission to determine the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection. This filing may also be viewed on the Internet at http://www.ferc.fed.us/​online/​rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-14135  Filed 6-5-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### Taylor *v.*Commonwealth.

*(Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia,*

*June 4, 1894.)*

[19 S. E. Rep. 739.]

Criminal Law — Murder—Mental Incapacity of Accused.

A conviction of murder in the first degree will not be set aside on the ground of lack of understanding of accused, although several witnesses spoke of him as hardly up to the average in mental capacity, and one of the witnesses for the defense, who had employed him for four years just previous to the murder, testified that he exercised very good judgment in caring for his own interest, and other witnesses gave similar evidence.

Error to circuit court, Pulaski county; Sami. W. Williams, Judge.

One Taylor was found guilty of murder in the first degree, and sentenced to be hanged. To a judgment entered on said verdict, he brings error.

Affirmed.

*Isaac H. Larew,*for plaintiff in error.

*R. Taylor Scott, Atty. Gen.,*for the Commonwealth.

Lewis, P.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is a writ of error to a judgment of the circuit court of Pulaski county affirming a judgment of the county court of that county sentencing the plaintiff in error to be hanged for the murder of his wife, Nancy Taylor, on the 18th July, *8181893. We have given to the record the careful consideration which the character of the case demands, but are unable to find the slightest ground for reversing the judgment of which the prisoner complains. The crime was deliberately committed, without the least extenuating circumstance. The principal ground of defense was the lack of understanding on the part of the prisoner ; but this, so far from being established, is negatived by his own evidence, although several of the witnesses speak of him as hardly up to the average in point of mental capacity. Not one witness who was examined in the case gives it as his opinion that he was not in a condition of understanding to discern right from wrong, while the contrary abundantly appears. Thus, one of the witnesses for the defense, a farmer in the neighborhood, in whose employ the prisoner was at the time of the murder, and had been for four years, testified that he was capable of attending to his own business, and that he exercised very good judgment in caring for his own interest. There is other evidence in the case to the same effect, and the question as to his mental capacity or power to discern right from wrong was clearly, in unexceptionable terms, submitted to the jury. We do not see how the jury could have done otherwise than find as they did, and there was no error in overruling the motion for a new trial. There were several exceptions taken during the trial to rulings of the court, but they are so trivial and clearly without merit as not to require special consideration. The judgment must therefore be affirmed.
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit 

___________________________

No. 21-2092

___________________________ 

United States of America

 Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

David Wayne Lemley

 Defendant - Appellant

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Southern District of Iowa - Central 

____________ 

Submitted: November 15, 2021

Filed: December 7, 2021

[Unpublished]

____________ 

Before COLLOTON, BENTON, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

David Wayne Lemley appeals the below Guidelines sentence the district 

court1 imposed after he pled guilty to a conspiracy drug offense. Having jurisdiction 

under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court affirms.

1

The Honorable Rebecca Goodgame Ebinger, United States District Judge for 

the Southern District of Iowa.
-2- 

Counsel has moved for leave to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders 

v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the assessment of a 2-level 

enhancement for maintaining a premises, and asserting that the sentence was 

substantively unreasonable. In a pro se brief, Lemley also challenges the premises 

enhancement, and contends that counsel has not been helpful throughout the case.

The district court did not err in applying the premises enhancement because 

its factual findings were not clearly erroneous, as Lemley conducted substantial drug 

trafficking activities from his storage units, and drugs and drug distribution materials 

were stored there. See United States v. Miller, 698 F.3d 699, 705, 707 (8th Cir. 

2012) (standard of review); United States v. McArthur, 11 F.4th 655, 661 (8th Cir. 

2021) (enhancement applies to defendant who uses a premises for the purpose of 

substantial drug-trafficking activities, even if the premises also served other, 

legitimate functions). The sentence was not substantively unreasonable because the 

record shows that the court considered the appropriate statutory factors in 

determining Lemley’s sentence. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461-

62, 464 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (in reviewing sentences, appellate court first 

ensures no significant procedural error occurred, then considers substantive 

reasonableness of sentence under abuse-of-discretion standard); United States v. 

Stults, 575 F.3d 834, 849 (8th Cir. 2009) (where court makes individualized 

assessment based on facts presented, addressing defendant’s proffered information 

in consideration of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, sentence is not unreasonable). 

To the extent Lemley is attempting to raise an ineffective assistance claim that 

requires development of matters outside the record, this court declines to address the 

claim on direct appeal. See United States v. Ramirez-Hernandez, 449 F.3d 824, 826-

27 (8th Cir. 2006). This court has independently reviewed the record under Penson 

v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and finds no nonfrivolous issues for appeal.

The judgment is affirmed. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.

______________________________
III 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 560 

Proclaiming the week of May 18 through May 24, 2008, as ‘‘National Public 

Works Week’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 12, 2008 

Mrs. BOXER (for herself and Mr. INHOFE) submitted the following resolution; 

which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Proclaiming the week of May 18 through May 24, 2008, 

as ‘‘National Public Works Week’’. 

Whereas public works infrastructure, facilities, and services 

are of vital importance to the health, safety, and wellbeing of the people of the United States; 

Whereas those facilities and services could not be provided 

without the dedicated efforts of public works professionals, including engineers and administrators, who represent State and local governments throughout the 

United States; 

Whereas those individuals design, build, operate, and maintain the transportation systems, water infrastructure, 

sewage and refuse disposal systems, public buildings, and 

other structures and facilities that are vital to the citizens and communities of the United States; and 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

•SRES 560 ATS 

Whereas it is in the interest of the public for citizens and 

civic leaders to understand the role that public infrastructure plays in— 

(1) protecting the environment; 

(2) improving public health and safety; 

(3) contributing to economic vitality; and 

(4) enhancing the quality of life of every community 

of the United States: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) proclaims the week of May 18 through May 

3 24, 2008, as ‘‘National Public Works Week’’; 

4 (2) recognizes and celebrates the important 

5 contributions that public works professionals make 

6 every day to improve— 

7 (A) the public infrastructure of the United 

8 States; and 

9 (B) the communities that those profes10 sionals serve; and 

11 (3) urges citizens and communities throughout 

12 the United States to join with representatives of the 

13 Federal Government and the American Public 

14 Works Association in activities and ceremonies that 

15 are designed— 

16 (A) to pay tribute to the public works pro17 fessionals of the Nation; and 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
3 

•SRES 560 ATS 

1 (B) to recognize the substantial contribu2 tions that public works professionals make to 

3 the Nation. 

Æ 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 696 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 696

     Designating September 2008 as ``National Youth Court Month''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

           September 30 (legislative day, September 17), 2008

  Mr. Stevens (for himself and Ms. Murkowski) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
     Designating September 2008 as ``National Youth Court Month''.

Whereas a strong country begins with strong communities in which all citizens 
        play an active role and invest in the success and future of the youth of 
        the United States;
Whereas the seventh National Youth Court Month celebrates the outstanding 
        achievement of youth courts throughout the country;
Whereas 1,255 youth court programs in 49 States and the District of Columbia 
        provide restorative justice for juvenile offenders, resulting in 
        effective crime prevention, early intervention, and education for all 
        youth participants, as well as enhanced public safety throughout the 
        United States;
Whereas, by holding juvenile offenders accountable, reconciling victims, 
        communities, juvenile offenders, and their families, and reducing 
        caseloads for the juvenile justice system, youth courts address offenses 
        that might otherwise go unaddressed until the offending behavior 
        escalates and redirect the efforts of juvenile offenders toward becoming 
        contributing members of their communities;
Whereas Federal, State, and local governments, corporations, foundations, 
        service organizations, educational institutions, juvenile justice 
        agencies, and individual adults support youth courts because youth court 
        programs actively promote and contribute to building successful, 
        productive lives and futures for the youth of the United States;
Whereas a fundamental correlation exists between youth service and lifelong 
        adult commitment to, and involvement in, one's community;
Whereas volunteer service and related service learning opportunities enable 
        young people to build character and develop and enhance life-skills, 
        such as responsibility, decision-making, time management, teamwork, 
        public speaking, and leadership, which prospective employers will value; 
        and
Whereas participating in youth court programs encourages youth court members to 
        become valuable members of their communities: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate designates September 2008 as ``National 
Youth Court Month''.
                                 <all>
```
##### 



Exhibit 32.1
 
  1.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 EDWARD B. CLOUES, II

Edward B. Cloues, II
    
    RONALD R. REMICK

Ronald R. RemickChairman and Chief Executive Officer
    
    Senior Vice President, Chief
Financial Officer and TreasurerDate: May 6, 2008
    
    Date: May 6, 2008
Impurity and CAS Registry Number (a) Maximum percent

(b) Confidential CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI TS-G050GW 

### Attachment 3 Page 1/1