alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1777

JEAN P. WARD, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus THOMAS E. WHITE, Secretary of the Army, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (CA-02-86-A) Submitted: September 23, 2002 Decided: November 7, 2002 Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jean P. Ward, Appellant Pro Se. Major Francis Patrick King, Major Mark David Maxwell, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Jean P. Ward appeals the district court’s order granting White’s motion to dismiss Ward’s civil action on res judicata grounds. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Ward v. White, No. CA-02-86-A (E.D. Va. May 31, 2002). 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.

AFFIRMED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-29-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-1999
<CASH>                                           1,867
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   85,412
<ALLOWANCES>                                     7,940
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                83,447
<PP&E>                                          41,280
<DEPRECIATION>                                  12,095
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 143,057
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          139,908
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           236
<OTHER-SE>                                     142,821
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   143,057
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               211,156
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  144,529
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (139)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,167
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (4,237)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       436
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,673)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,673)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.20)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.20)


</TABLE>
§ 27.1180 The cost-sharing formula. ( a ) An AWS licensee that relocates a BRS system with which it interferes is entitled to *pro rata* reimbursement based on the cost-sharing formula specified in § 27.1164, except that the depreciation factor shall be [180−Tm]/180, and the variable *C* shall be applied as set forth in paragraph (b) of this section.
( b ) *C* is the actual cost of relocating the system, and includes, but is not limited to, such items as: Radio terminal equipment (TX and/or RX—antenna, necessary feed lines, MUX/Modems); towers and/or modifications; back-up power equipment; monitoring or control equipment; engineering costs (design/path survey); installation; systems testing; FCC filing costs; site acquisition and civil works; zoning costs; training; disposal of old equipment; test equipment (vendor required); spare equipment; project management; site lease renegotiation; required antenna upgrades for interference control; power plant upgrade (if required); electrical grounding systems; Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) (if required); alternate transport equipment; leased facilities; and end user units served by the base station that is being relocated. In addition to actual costs, *C* may include the cost of an independent third party appraisal conducted pursuant to § 27.1182(a)(3) and incumbent transaction expenses that are directly attributable to the relocation, subject to a cap of two percent of the “hard” costs involved. Hard costs are defined as the actual costs associated with providing a replacement system, such as equipment and engineering expenses. There is no cap on the actual costs of relocation.
( c ) An AWS system shall be considered an interfering system for purposes of this rule if the AWS system is in all or part of the BRS frequency band and operates within line of sight to BRS operations under the applicable test specified in § 27.1184. An AWS relocator that relocates a BRS system with which it does not interfere is entitled to full reimbursement, as specified in § 27.1182(c).
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 99.1

                             OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE
                                       OF
                       RELIABLE FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC.



         The undersigned hereby CERTIFIES on behalf of Reliable Financial
Services, Inc., a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, that:

         (1) I am duly elected and qualified as President of Reliable Financial
Services, Inc. This Certificate is provided to Banco Popular de Puerto Rico
(the "Bank") as per Section 3.10 of that certain Deed of Constitution of Trust
and Pooling and Servicing Agreement (Reliable Auto Receivables Grantor Trust
1996-1) dated February 29, 1996. Capitalized terms used herein shall have the
meaning provided in such Agreement unless the context otherwise requires; and

         (2) a review of the activities of the Servicer during the period
comprised between the Closing Date and the date hereof and of the Servicer's
performance under the Agreement has been made under my supervision; and

         (3) to the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the
Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement
throughout such period.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal of the
Corporation, this 30th day of June, 1996.

                                             RELIABLE FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC.



                                             /s/   Jaime Marti
                                             ---------------------------
                                                   Jaime Marti
                                                    President
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 Defense

###### Office of the Secretary

          - [Transmittal No. 06-30]

# AGENCY:

Department of Defense, Defense Security Cooperation Agency.

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text of a section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification. This is published to fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated 21 July 1996.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. J. Hurd, DSCA/DBO/ADM, (703) 604-6575.

The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Transmittal 06-30 with attached transmittal, policy justification, and Sensitivity of Technology.

Dated: August 1, 2006.

C.R. Choate,

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

      ( print page 44665)          ( print page 44666)          ( print page 44667)    

BILLING CODE 5001-06-M

[FR Doc. 06-6733  Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001-06-C
No. 11-5571.

#### Polite *v.*Arkansas Department of Correction.

C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.
No. 11-9635.

#### Bidwell *v.*United States.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

 v.

OMAR CENTENO-SEPULVEDA,

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 15-50135

D.C. No. 3:14-cr-03561-JAH

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of California

John A. Houston, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted October 25, 2016** 

Before: LEAVY, GRABER, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.

Omar Centeno-Sepulveda appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges the 21-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for

importation of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960. We

FILED

NOV 01 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).
have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we vacate and remand for

resentencing.

Centeno-Sepulveda argues that the district court erred in denying a minor

role reduction to his base offense level under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2(b). After CentenoSepulveda was sentenced, the United States Sentencing Commission issued

Amendment 794 (“the Amendment”), which amended the commentary to the

minor role Guideline. The Amendment is retroactive to cases pending on direct

appeal. See United States v. Quintero-Leyva, 823 F.3d 519, 523 (9th Cir. 2016). 

The Amendment clarified that, in assessing whether a defendant should

receive a minor role adjustment, the court should compare him to the other

participants in the crime, rather than to a hypothetical average participant. See

U.S.S.G. App. C. Amend. 794; Quintero-Leyva, 823 F.3d at 523. In addition, the

Amendment clarified that “[t]he fact that a defendant performs an essential or

indispensable role in the criminal activity is not determinative.” U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2

cmt. n.3(C) (2015). Finally, the Amendment added a non-exhaustive list of factors

that a court “should consider” in determining whether to apply a minor role

reduction. See id. Because we cannot determine from the record whether the

district court followed the guidance of the Amendment’s clarifying language and

considered all of the now-relevant factors, we vacate Centeno-Sepulveda’s

2 15-50135
sentence and remand for resentencing under the Amendment. See Quintero-Leyva,

823 F.3d at 523-24.

VACATED and REMANDED for resentencing. 

3 15-50135
Exhibit 32.1
 Certification Pursuant To 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 By The Chief Executive Officer,
As Adopted Pursuant To Section 906 Of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act Of 2002.
  1.
    
    The Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the annual period ended January
31, 2009 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) and 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (15 U.S.C. 78m); and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 /s/ Gerald L. StorchGerald L. StorchChairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)March 31, 2009
EXHIBIT  99.2
                                  HIV-VAC, INC.
                            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 HIV-VAC, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-QSB/A for the period ending  December 31, 2001, as filed with the  Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Sally Del Principe
the Chief  Financial  Officer of the  Company,  hereby  certify,  pursuant to 18
U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted  pursuant to ss. 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of
2002, that:

(1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) the  information  contained in the Report fairly  presents,  in all material
respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.



                                                     /s/ Sally Del Principe
                                                     -----------------------
                                                     Chief Financial Officer

October 22, 2002





                                       19
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4538 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4538

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a certificate of 
   documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the 
              coastwise trade for the vessel SILENT WINGS.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 26, 1994

Mr. Miller of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred 
           to the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a certificate of 
   documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the 
              coastwise trade for the vessel SILENT WINGS.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That notwithstanding 
section 27 of the Merchant Marine Act, 1920 (46 App. U.S.C. 883), the 
Act of June 19, 1886 (46 App. U.S.C. 289), and section 12106 of title 
46, United States Code, the Secretary of Transportation may issue a 
certificate of documentation with appropriate endorsement for 
employment in the coastwise trade for the vessel SILENT WINGS (United 
States official number 969182).

                                 <all>
```
Code of Ethics


 EXHIBIT 10(a)(1) 
 Code of Ethics for Persons Acting in Capacity of 
 CEO and Financial Executives of 

The Paul Revere Variable Annuity Contract Accumulation Fund 
 In my role as Chairman of the Board of Managers of The Paul Revere Variable Annuity Contract Accumulation Fund (the “Fund”) acting as the Chief Executive Officer, the Chief Financial Officer, or certain of the Chief Financial
Officer’s direct reports, I certify that I will seek to adhere to the following principles and responsibilities, which are in addition to any other applicable requirements set forth in The Paul Revere Variable Annuity Contract Accumulation Fund
Code of Ethics applicable to every director, officer, general partner, Portfolio Manager, or Advisory Person of the Fund, and Adviser or any other Fund policy statements as amended from time to time: 
  

	1.	Acting ethically and with honesty in my work on behalf of the Fund and avoiding conflicts of interest in my personal and professional relationships, and expecting those that work
with and for me to do likewise. 

  

	2.	Disclosing information that is full, fair, accurate, timely and understandable in all SEC filings and public communications. 

  

	3.	Complying with applicable laws, rules, and regulations of the countries, states, local governments, agencies, and stock exchanges that regulate the business of the Fund.


  

	4.	Promptly reporting violations of this Code of Ethics, or any other applicable Fund policy statements, to the Office of Business Practices and Ethics or any other appropriate Fund
officer, auditor, director or regulator. 

  

	5.	Assuming personal accountability for adherence to this Code of Ethics, and understanding that I am subject to disciplinary action, up to and possibly including termination, for
failure to do so. 

 I understand that I may choose to remain anonymous in reporting any violation of this Code of Ethics and that any
questions regarding this Code of Ethics should be directed to the Office of Business Practices and Ethics. I understand that any waivers of this Code of Ethics can only be made by the Fund’s Board of Managers and must be reported by the Fund to
the SEC. 
  

			
		
	By:	 	  
		
	Name:	 	  
		
	Date:
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4544 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4544

  To authorize the appropriations for construction projects under the 
Covenant to Establish a Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands in 
   Political Union with the United States of America, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              June 8, 1994

  Mr. de Lugo (by request) (for himself and Mr. Miller of California) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                           Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To authorize the appropriations for construction projects under the 
Covenant to Establish a Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands in 
   Political Union with the United States of America, and for other 
                               purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That the Act of March 
24, 1976 (Public Law 94-241, 90 Stat. 263), is amended by--
            (1) adding the following new section at the end thereof:
    ``Sec. 6. There are authorized to be appropriated for the 
Government of the Northern Mariana Islands for capital infrastructure 
$18,000,000 to become available on October 1, 1994, and $9,000,000 to 
become available on October 1, 1995, notwithstanding the first 
paragraph of section A of Part II and section B of Part III of the 
Agreement of the Special Representatives on Future Federal Financial 
Assistance for the Northern Mariana Islands, executed on December 17, 
1992: Provided, That such amounts shall become available only to the 
extent that matching funds are provided, on a project-by-project basis, 
by the Government of the Northern Mariana Islands in the amounts of 
$9,000,000 for fiscal year 1995 and $18,000,000 for fiscal year 1996. 
No funds are authorized to be appropriated for the purposes of this Act 
for any fiscal year thereafter. Such Federal assistance shall be 
provided through annual grants according to the remaining terms of such 
Agreement, except that the duration of the Agreement shall be 2 
years.''; and
            (2) repealing section 4(b) upon enactment of appropriations 
        to the Secretary of the Interior for the Government of the 
        Northern Mariana Islands.

                                 <all>
```
#### Robert WILLIAMS v. UNITED STATES of America.

Civ. A. No. 81-1929.

United States District Court, W. D. Louisiana, Monroe Division.

June 18, 1982.

Richard Beard, Alexandria, La., for plaintiff.

John R. Halliburton, Asst. U. S. Atty., Shreveport, La., for defendant.

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

NAUMAN S. SCOTT, Chief Judge.

Plaintiff has filed a Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) suit 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b) against the government for damages arising out of an accident with a postal vehicle on June 20, 1978. The government has filed a Motion to Dismiss or in the Alternative to Reduce Ad Damnum, stating that plaintiff failed to properly file as a prerequisite to suit an administrative claim within two years of the alleged tort as required by 28 U.S.C. § 2401(b).

Within a year of the accident, plaintiff filed a state court suit against the postal employee involved. A United States attorney, when notified of the state action, informed plaintiff’s counsel that an administrative claim must first be filed. Plaintiff filed such a claim on a Standard Form (SF) 95 on June 5, 1980. Only a claim for property damage in the amount of $7,000 was filled in. No amount was filled in for personal injuries or a total amount claimed. On August 5,1980, plaintiff’s counsel wrote to the Postal Service attorney fully setting out plaintiff’s claims and making a settlement offer. Plaintiff’s administrative claim was subsequently denied.

Under 28 U.S.C. § 2675(a) and CFR 14.2(a), plaintiff’s administrative claim, a prerequisite to suit under the FTCA, must contain a sum certain. Plaintiff’s partial claim failed to comply with this requirement. Therefore, the claim was a nullity. DeGerena *v. The United States,*398 F.Supp. 93 (D.P.R.1975); *Hlavac v. United States,*356 F.Supp. 1274 (N.D.Ill.1972); See Adams *v. United States,*615 F.2d 284 (5th Cir. 1980); *Melo v. United States,*505 F.2d 1026*1243(8th Cir. 1974); *Caton v. United States,*495 F.2d 635 (9th Cir. 1974); *Avril v. United States,*461 F.2d 1090 (9th Cir. 1972).

Notice of the state suit did not satisfy the sum certain requirement. *Miller v. United States,*418 F.Supp. 373 (D.Minn. 1976). Plaintiff counsel’s letter might have sufficed in lieu of a fully completed SF 95 form, see *Adams v. United States,*supra, had it been sent within the two year prescriptive period.

We are not free to view plaintiff’s piecemeal contacts with the government as together satisfying the claims procedure. The United States has chosen to waive its sovereign immunity pursuant to the dictates of the FTCA. The procedures are not overly burdensome nor are they unrealistic. A properly filed administrative claim does not stand solely as a rule of procedure or as a general notice requirement but serves to establish the parameters of subject matter jurisdiction for this court.

Plaintiff having failed to file a proper administrative claim within the two years provided by law, we grant the Government’s motion to dismiss and hereby dismiss plaintiff’s complaint at plaintiff’s cost.