alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR
. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR
. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED August 8, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk 

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-40195 Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee
v. SERGIO GARCIA-MARTINEZ Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:06-CR-897-1 Before DENNIS, CLEMENT, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Sergio Garcia-Martinez raisesarguments that areforeclosed by Almendarez-Torresv. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. The appellant's motion for summary disposition is GRANTED, and thejudgment ofthe district court is AFFIRMED.
§ 22.912 Service area boundary extensions. This section contains rules governing service area boundary (SAB) extensions. SAB extensions are areas (calculated using the methodology of § 22.911) that extend outside of the licensee's Cellular Geographic Service Area (CGSA) boundary into Unserved Area or into the CGSA of a neighboring co-channel licensee. Service within SAB extensions is not protected from interference or capture under § 22.911(d) unless and until the area within the SAB extension becomes part of the CGSA in compliance with all applicable rules. ( a ) *Extensions into Unserved Area.* Subject to paragraph (c) of this section, the licensee of a Cellular system may, at any time, extend its SAB into Unserved Area and provide service on a secondary basis only, provided that the extension area comprises less than 130 contiguous square kilometers (50 contiguous square miles). If more than one licensee of a Cellular system extends into all or a portion of the same Unserved Area under this section, all such licensees may provide service in such Unserved Area on a shared secondary (unprotected) basis only.
( b ) *Contract extensions.* The licensee of any Cellular system may, at any time, enter into a contract with an applicant for, or a licensee of, a Cellular system on the same channel block to allow one or more SAB extensions into its CGSA (not into Unserved Area).
( c ) *Gulf of Mexico Service Area.* Land-based Cellular system licensees may not extend their SABs into the Gulf of Mexico Exclusive Zone (GMEZ) absent written contractual consent of the co-channel GMEZ licensee. GMEZ licensees may not extend their SABs into the CGSA of a licensee on the same channel block in an adjacent CMA or the Gulf of Mexico Coastal Zone absent written contractual consent of the co-channel licensee.
[79 FR 72151, Dec. 5, 2014]
### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN NO. 03- 09 -00 529 -CV In re N. M . ORI GINAL PRO CEEDING FRO M TRAVIS COUNTY M E M O R

A N D U M O P I N I O N Relator N . M . h as filed a petition for writ of manda mus, complaining of

the trial court’ s temporar

y order related to child custody . See Tex. R. App. P . 52.8. Havingrevie wed the re c or d, we de ny

the pe tit ion

fo r wri t of

mand amus .

__________________________________________ David Pury ear , J ustice Be fore J ustices Pury ear , Pemberton and Waldrop Filed: September

18, 2009
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

# EIVED
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

## JAN 212015 HEARING DOCKET ) Inthe Matter ofArctic Air Alaska, Inc. ) FDMS No. FAA2014-0316 ) FAACaseNo.2012WP910268



## ____________________________) Judge Richard C. Goodwin

WITHDRAWAL OF COMPLAINT The Federal Aviation Administration hereby withdraws the complaint filed inthis matter on May 22, 2014 as the parties have reached a settlement in this matter.
Respectfully submitted, Peter J. Lynch Assistant ChiefCounsel forEnfo

. Autumn Killingham Federal Aviation Administration Office ofthe ChiefCounsel, AGC-300 800 Independence Ave., S.W. Washington, D.C. 20591 (202) 267-7728 (202) 267-5106 (fax)CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that the foregoing Withdrawal ofComplaint, inthe Arctic Air Alaska, Inc., FDMS No. 2014-0316, has been mailed this date byregular and Certified Mail to:
James I. Hamilton President/CEO Arctic AirAlaska, Inc. 3540 University Ave. South Fairbanks, AK 99709
I further certify that the foregoing document has been sent via facsimile and mailed this date by Certified Mail to: The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin Administrative LawJudge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (E-11-310) Washington, DC 20590
The original and a copy was also personally delivered to: Hearing Docket (Original and I copy) Federal Aviation Administration 600 Independence Avenue, S.W. Room 2W1000-AGC-430 Washington, DC 20591

## B~e~ January 21,2015
EXHIBIT 23.01

               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

         We consent to the  incorporation  by  reference  in this Annual  Report
(Form 10-K) of The Indus  Group,  Inc.  of our report  dated  January 24,  1997,
included in the 1996 Annual Report to the Shareholders of The Indus Group, Inc.

         Our audits also included the financial  statement schedule of The Indus
Group,  Inc. listed in Item 14(a).  This schedule is the  responsibility  of the
Company's  management.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion based on our
audits. In our opinion, the financial statement schedule referred to above, when
considered  in  relation  to the basic  financial  statements  taken as a whole,
present fairly in all material respects the information set forth therein.

         We also consent to the  incorporation  by reference in the Registration
Statement  (Form S-8 No.  333-04654)  pertaining  to the 1995 Stock  Plan,  1995
Director  Option Plan and Employee  Stock Plan of The Indus  Group,  Inc. of our
report  dated  January 24,  1997,  with  respect to the  consolidated  financial
statements  of The Indus Group,  Inc.  incorporated  by reference in this Annual
Report (Form 10K) for the year ended December 31, 1996.

                                                           /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Palo Alto, California
March 24, 1997




                                   21
§ 52.9 General requirements. ( a ) To ensure that telecommunications numbers are made available on an equitable basis, the administration of telecommunications numbers shall, in addition to the specific requirements set forth in this subpart: ( 1 ) Facilitate entry into the telecommunications marketplace by making telecommunications numbering resources available on an efficient, timely basis to telecommunications carriers;
( 2 ) Not unduly favor or disfavor any particular telecommunications industry segment or group of telecommunications consumers; and
( 3 ) Not unduly favor one telecommunications technology over another.
( b ) If the Commission delegates any telecommunications numbering administration functions to any State or other entity pursuant to 47 U.S.C. 251(e)(1), such State or entity shall perform these functions in a manner consistent with this part.
#### Alejandra HERNANDEZ-OCAMPO, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 02-71096.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 15, 2004.*

Decided March 24, 2004.

Antonio Reyna Salazar, Esq., Salazar Law Offices, Seattle, WA, for Petitioner.

Regional Counsel, Western Region Immigration & Naturalization Service, Lagu-na Niguel, CA, Ronald E. LeFévre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, WWS — District Counsel, Immigration and Naturalization Service, Office of the District Counsel, Seattle, WA, Audrey B. Hemesath, DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before B. FLETCHER, LEAVY, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

*987Alejandra Hernandez-Oeampo, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) summary affirmance of an immigration judge’s denial of her application for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny the petition for review.

Hernandez-Ocampo’s sole contention on appeal is that the BIA’s streamlining regulations violate her procedural due process rights. This contention is foreclosed by *Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft,*350 F.3d 845, 851 (9th Cir.2003).

The clerk is directed to stay the mandate pending the resolution of *Desta v. Ashcroft,*No. 03-70477 and further order of this Court.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
§ 22.983 Field strength limit. ( a ) Subject to paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, a licensee's predicted or measured median field strength limit must not exceed 40 dBμV/m at any given point along the Cellular Geographic Service Area (CGSA) boundary of a neighboring licensee on the same channel block, unless the affected licensee of the neighboring CGSA on the same channel block agrees to a different field strength. This also applies to CGSAs partitioned pursuant to § 22.948.
( b ) *Gulf of Mexico Service Area.* Notwithstanding the field strength limit provision set forth in paragraph (a) of this section, licensees in or adjacent to the Gulf of Mexico Exclusive Zone are subject to § 22.912(c) regarding service area boundary extensions. *See* § 22.912(c).
( c ) Cellular licensees shall be subject to all applicable provisions and requirements of treaties and other international agreements between the United States government and the governments of Canada and Mexico, notwithstanding paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section.
[79 FR 72153, Dec. 5, 2014]
No. 11-9006.

#### Manus *v.*Florida.

Dist. Ct. App. Fla., 2d Dist. Certiorari denied.
No. 11-5248.

#### Flenoid *v.*United States.

C. A. 8th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4595 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4595

    To designate the building located at 4021 Laclede in St. Louis, 
 Missouri, for the period of time during which it houses operations of 
the United States Postal Service, as the ``Marian Oldham Post Office''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 17, 1994

   Mr. Clay introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
               Committee on Post Office and Civil Service

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To designate the building located at 4021 Laclede in St. Louis, 
 Missouri, for the period of time during which it houses operations of 
the United States Postal Service, as the ``Marian Oldham Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The building located at 4021 Laclede in St. Louis, Missouri, shall, 
for the period of time during which it houses operations of the United 
States Postal Service, be known and designated as the ``Marian Oldham 
Post Office''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the building referred to in section 1 
shall, with respect to the period referred to in section 1, be deemed 
to be a reference to the Marian Oldham Post Office.

                                 <all>
```
No. 11-5444.

#### Ellis *v.*Illinois.

App. Ct. Ill., 1st Dist. Cer-tiorari denied.
No. 11-5299.

#### O’Connor *v.*Borgner et al.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4654 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4654

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide for coverage 
under part B of the medicare program of drugs approved by the Food and 
  Drug Administration for the treatment of individuals with multiple 
                               sclerosis.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 27, 1994

Mr. Greenwood introduced the following bill; which was referred jointly 
      to the Committees on Ways and Means and Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide for coverage 
under part B of the medicare program of drugs approved by the Food and 
  Drug Administration for the treatment of individuals with multiple 
                               sclerosis.

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

SECTION 1. MEDICARE COVERAGE OF DRUGS FOR TREATMENT OF INDIVIDUALS WITH 
              MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS.

    (a) In General.--Section 1861(s)(2) of the Social Security Act (42 
U.S.C. 1395x(s)(2)), as amended by section 13553(a) of the Omnibus 
Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, is amended--
                    (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph 
                (P);
                    (2) by adding ``and'' at the end of subparagraph 
                (Q); and
                    (3) by adding at the end the following new 
                subparagraph:
            ``(R) a drug for the treatment of individuals with multiple 
        sclerosis (if the use of the drug for such purpose is approved 
        by the Food and Drug Administration);''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply to drugs furnished on or after January 1, 1995.

                                 <all>
```
§ 25.211 Analog video transmissions in the FSS. ( a ) [Reserved]
( b ) All conventional C-band analog video transmissions must contain an energy dispersal signal at all times with a minimum peak-to-peak bandwidth set at whatever value is necessary to meet the power flux density limits specified in § 25.208(a) and successfully coordinated internationally and accepted by adjacent U.S. satellite operators based on the use of state of the art space and earth station facilities. All transmissions in frequency bands described in § 25.208(b) and (c) must also contain an energy dispersal signal at all times with a minimum peak-to-peak bandwidth set at whatever value is necessary to meet the power flux density limits specified in § 25.208(b) and (c) and successfully coordinated internationally and accepted by adjacent U.S. satellite operators based on the use of state of the art space and earth station facilities.
( c ) All initial analog video transmissions shall be preceded by a video test transmission at an uplink e.i.r.p. at least 10 dB below the normal operating level. The earth station operator shall not increase power until receiving notification from the satellite network control center that the frequency and polarization alignment are satisfactory pursuant to the procedures specified in § 25.272. The stationary earth station operator that has successfully transmitted an initial video test signal to a satellite pursuant to this paragraph is not required to make subsequent video test transmissions if subsequent transmissions are conducted using exactly the same parameters as the initial transmission.
( d ) An earth station may be routinely licensed for transmission of full-transponder analog video services in the 5925-6425 MHz band or 14.0-14.5 GHz band provided: ( 1 ) The application includes certification, pursuant to § 25.132(a)(1), of conformance with the antenna performance standards in § 25.209(a) and (b);
( 2 ) For transmission in the 5925-6425 MHz band, the input power into the antenna will not exceed 26.5 dBW; or
( 3 ) For transmission in the 14.0-14.5 GHz band, the input power into the antenna will not exceed 27 dBW.
( e ) Applications for authority for analog video uplink transmission in the 5925-6425 MHz or 14.0-14.5 GHz bands that are not eligible for routine processing under paragraph (d) of this section are subject to the requirements of § 25.220.
[58 FR 13421, Mar. 11, 1993, as amended at 61 FR 9952, Mar. 12, 1996; 62 FR 5931, Feb. 10, 1997; 70 FR 32256, June 2, 2005; 78 FR 8428, Feb. 6, 2013; 79 FR 8323, Feb. 12, 2014; 81 FR 55338, Aug. 18, 2016]
No. 10-10794.

#### Taylor *v.*Hoke, Warden.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
§ 27.906 Designated entities. ( a ) *Eligibility for small business provisions.* ( 1 ) A very small business is an entity that, together with its controlling interests and affiliates, has average annual gross revenues not exceeding $15 million for the preceding three years.
( 2 ) A small business is an entity that, together with its controlling interests and affiliates, has average annual gross revenues not exceeding $40 million for the preceding three years.
( b ) *Bidding credits.* A winning bidder that qualifies as a very small business, as defined in this section, or a consortium of very small businesses may use the bidding credit specified in § 1.2110(f)(2)(ii) of this chapter. A winning bidder that qualifies as a small business, as defined in this section, or a consortium of small businesses may use the bidding credit specified in § 1.2110(f)(2)(iii) of this chapter.
[67 FR 41856, June 20, 2002, as amended at 68 FR 43000, July 21, 2003]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                               5
<MULTIPLIER>                            1000
<CURRENCY>                              U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                          JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                            SEP-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                   1
<CASH>                                           27
<SECURITIES>                                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     0
<ALLOWANCES>                                      0
<INVENTORY>                                   1,320
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              1,710
<PP&E>                                       43,806
<DEPRECIATION>                               10,882
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               34,855
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           571
<BONDS>                                           0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             0
<PREFERRED>                                       0
<COMMON>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                    3,561
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 34,855
<SALES>                                           0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              7,870
<CGS>                                             0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 3,366
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            1,584
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 104
<INCOME-TAX>                                      0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             104
<DISCONTINUED>                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0
<CHANGES>                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                                    104
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1

# 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 Wyeth (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2005, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 6, 2005 (the Report), I, Robert
Essner, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §
1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 results of operations of the Company.

|                   |  |                                                                                                                                    
|------------------ |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                   |  |                                                                                                                                    
|Dated: May 6, 2005 |  |                                                                                                                                    
|                   |  |                                                                                                                                    
|                   |  | By  /s/
        Robert Essner

              
    Robert Essner
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
#### § 22.501 Scope.

The rules in this subpart govern the licensing and operation of public mobile paging and radiotelephone stations. The licensing and operation of these stations are also subject to rules elsewhere in this part that apply generally to the Public Mobile Services. However, in case of conflict, the rules in this subpart govern.
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADDED BY

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of First Community Bank Corporation of America (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the Report), I, John A. Stewart, Jr., Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 1350, as added by § 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. | To my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for
the period covered by the report.
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                      |  |     |  |                                                                        
|--------------------- |  | --- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: August 13, 2004 |  | By: |  | /s/ John A. Stewart, Jr.                                               
|                      |  |     |  | John A. Stewart, Jr., Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer