alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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

December 10, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 03-50641

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MARGARITA LUJAN-CALZADA,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. EP-02-CR-1906-2-DB

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

Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Nancy G. Revelette, the attorney appointed to represent

Margarita Lujan-Calzada, has moved for leave to withdraw and has

filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S.

738 (1967). Lujan-Calzada has filed no response to Revelette’s

motion. Our independent review of the record and Revelette’s

brief shows that there are no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. 

Accordingly, Revelette’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED,

Revelette is excused from further responsibilities herein, and

this appeal is DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
#### Georgia Industrial Company *v.*Provident Savings Life Assurance Society.

Argued February 5,

Decided July 28, 1906.

Lumpkin, J.

Under the facts of this ease and in view of the entire situation and circumstances disclosed by the pleadings and evidence, after a careful examination this court can not say that the presiding judge abused his discretion in appointing a receiver. _

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur, except Fish, O. J., absent.*

*55Injunction and receiver. Before Judge Cann. Chatham superior court. October 11, 1905.

*Walter McElreath*and *W. Cecil Neill,*for plaintiffs in error.

*J. N. Gilbert, W. H. Burwell, W. L. Clay, A. N. Blackshear, Green, Tilson & McKinney, Osborne & Lawrence, Lawton & Cunningham, N. W. Johnson, Nall & Wimberly, Erwin & Callaway, John B. L, Smith,*and *C. N. Nall, Jr.,*contra.
### IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 19 - 0334

_________________ ST ATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. CECIL LEE RUSSELL,

Defendant and Appellant. O R D E R

_________________ Pursuant to the Internal Operating Rules of this Court, this cause is classified for submission on briefs to a five - justice panel of this Court. The Clerk is directed to provide a copy hereof to Cecil L. Russell, to all counsel of r ecord , and to the Honorable Ro bert B. Allison , Distr ict Judge . For the Court,

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

August 12 2020

08/12/2020
Case Number: DA 19-0334
§ 2522.475 To what extent must I use the Corporation's selection criteria and priorities when selecting formula programs or operating sites? Cross Reference
Link to an amendment published at 89 FR 46034 , May 28, 2024.
Cross Reference
Link to a correction published at 89 FR 66615 , Aug. 16, 2024.
You must ensure that the selection criteria you use include the following criteria: ( a ) The quality of the national service program proposed to be carried out directly by the applicant or supported by a grant from the applicant.
( b ) The innovative aspects of the national service program, and the feasibility of replicating the program.
( c ) The sustainability of the national service program.
( d ) The quality of the leadership of the national service program, the past performance of the program, and the extent to which the program builds on existing programs.
( e ) The extent to which participants of the national service program are recruited from among residents of the communities in which projects are to be conducted, and the extent to which participants and community residents are involved in the design, leadership, and operation of the program.
( f ) The extent to which projects would be conducted in one of the areas listed in § 2522.450(c)(1) through (5) of this subpart.
( g ) In the case of applicants other than States, the extent to which the application is consistent with the application of the State in which the projects would be conducted.
( h ) Such other criteria as the Corporation considers to be appropriate, following appropriate notice.
[70 FR 39600, July 8, 2005]
#### § 1703.208 Meetings for extraordinary agency business.

Where agency business so requires, Commission members may decide by majority, recorded vote to schedule a meeting for a date earlier than eight days after the decision. Such a decision would obviate the general requirement for a public announcement at least one week before the scheduled meeting. At the earliest practicable time, however, the Commission will announce publicly the time, place, and subject matter of the meeting, whether the meeting is to be open or closed, and the name and telephone number of an agency official who will respond to requests for information about the meeting.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-11592

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

HUGO IVAN CASTANEDA, also known as Takua,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:14-CR-367-41

Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Hugo Ivan Castaneda has moved 

for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. 

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th 

Cir. 2011). Castaneda has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s 

brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with 

counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for 

 

* 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

August 18, 2017

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 16-11592 Document: 00514121531 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/18/2017
No. 16-11592

2

appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is 

GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the 

APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 16-11592 Document: 00514121531 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/18/2017
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 06-105.1 

________________________________________________________________________ 

TRADE 

 Agreement between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and PERU 

Effected by Exchange of Letters 

January 5, 2006 

 with 

Annexes 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
PERU 

Trade 

Agreement effected by exchange of letters 

 January 5, 2006; 

 Entered into force January 5, 2006. 

 With annexes.
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 04-708 

________________________________________________________________________ 

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT 

Article 98 

 Agreement between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and ERITREA 

Signed at Washington July 8, 2004 

 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
ERITREA 

International Criminal Court: Article 98 

 Agreement signed at Washington July 8, 2004; 

 Entered into force July 8, 2004.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 19 - 0607 IN THE MATTER OF B.A.F., AN ALLEGED MENTALLY ILL PERSON . **G RANT**  Pursuant to authority granted under Mont. R. App. P. 26(1), the Appellant is given an extension of time until June 10, 202 1 , to prepare, file, and serve the Appellant’s reply brief. No further extensions will be granted.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

May 5 2021

05/05/2021
Case Number: DA 19-0607
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20463 

MEMORANDUM 

TO: Patricia C. Orrock 

FROM: 

Chief Compliance Officer 

Thomas E. Hintermister 

Assistant Staff Director 

Audit Division 

AdavNotiA1f 

Associate General Counsel 

Policy Division 

Lorenzo Holloway L k ~ ','YJ g. 5 

Assistant General Counsel 

Compliance Advice 

Margaret J. Forman ·'TY) ,1_ :)--

Attorney CJ 

ocr 2 o 2D1 

SUBJECT: Proposed Draft Final Audit Report on the Kansas Democratic Party (LRA 1022) 

I. INTRODUCTION 

The Office of the General Counsel has reviewed the proposed Draft Final Audit Report 

("proposed DFAR") on the Kansas Democratic Party. The proposed DFAR contains four 

findings: Misstatement of Financial Activity (Finding 1 ), Recordkeeping for Employees 

(Finding 2), Reporting of Debts and Obligations (Finding 3), and Levin Funds Activity (Finding 

4). We concur with the findings. If you have any questions, please contact Margaret J. Forman, 

the attorney assigned to this audit.
§ 33.3 General rule. ( a ) Whenever a delinquent debt is owed to the Department by an employee, the Secretary may, subject to paragraphs (b) through (d) of this section, involuntarily offset the amount of the debt from the employee's disposable pay.
( b ) Unless provided by another statute pertaining to a particular type of debt (e.g., 42 U.S.C. 292r, Health professionals education, 42 U.S.C. 297b, Nurse education), the Department may not initiate salary offset to collect a debt more than 10 years after the Government's right to collect the debt first accrued, unless facts material to the Government's right to collect the debt were not known and could not reasonably have been known by the official or officials of the Government who were charged with the responsibility to discover and collect such debts.
( c ) Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, prior to initiating collection through salary offset under this part, the Secretary must first provide the employee with the following: ( 1 ) Written notice of intent to offset as described in § 33.4; and
( 2 ) An opportunity to petition for a hearing, and, if a hearing is provided, to receive a written decision from the hearing official within 60 days on the following issues: ( i ) The determination of the Department concerning the existence or amount of the debt; and
( ii ) The repayment schedule, unless it was established by written agreement between the employee and Department.
( d ) The provisions of paragraph (c) of this section do not apply to: ( 1 ) Any adjustment to pay arising out of an employee's election of coverage or a change in coverage under a federal benefits program requiring periodic deduction from pay, if the amount to be recovered was accumulated over four pay periods or less;
( 2 ) A routine intra-agency adjustment of pay that is made to correct an overpayment of pay attributable to clerical or administrative errors or delays in processing pay documents, if the overpayment occurred within the four pay periods preceding the adjustment and, at the time of such adjustment, or as soon thereafter as practical, the individual is provided written notice of the nature and the amount of the adjustment and point of contact for contesting such adjustment; or
( 3 ) Any adjustment to collect a debt amounting to $50 or less, if, at the time of such adjustment, or as soon thereafter as practical, the individual is provided written notice of the nature and the amount of the adjustment and a point of contact for contesting such adjustment.
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 07-614 

________________________________________________________________________ 

EMPLOYMENT 

 Agreement between 

the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and GUATEMALA 

Signed at Guatemala City April 25, 2007 

 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
GUATEMALA 

Employment 

Agreement signed at Guatemala City April 25, 2007; 

 Entered into force June 14, 2007.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q**

**OF GOLDLEAF FINANCIAL SOLUTIONS INC.**

**FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31, 2009**

 

The undersigned herebycertifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 906 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of2002, that, to the undersigned’s best knowledge and belief, the QuarterlyReport on Form 10-Q for Goldleaf Financial Solutions, Inc. (“Issuer”)for the period ending March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”):

 

(a)                                  fully complieswith the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(b)                                 the informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Issuer.

 

The foregoing certificationis being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by referenceinto any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof,regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.

 

This Certification isexecuted as of May 14, 2009.

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of2002 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company andfurnished to the Securities Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 
|   | /s/ G. LYNN BOGGS                      |
|--------|----------------------------------------|
|   | G. Lynn Boggs*Chief Executive Officer* |

 

----
IIA 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. J. RES. 24 

Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United 

States Code, of the rule submitted by the United States Fish and 

Wildlife Service relating to ‘‘Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and 

Plants; Endangered Species Status for Northern Long-Eared Bat’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 30, 2023 

Mr. MULLIN (for himself, Mrs. CAPITO, Mr. MARSHALL, Mr. BUDD, Ms. LUMMIS, Mr. BOOZMAN, Mr. LANKFORD, Mr. CRAMER, Mr. SULLIVAN, Mr. 

WICKER, and Mr. HOEVEN) introduced the following joint resolution; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and 

Public Works 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of 

title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by 

the United States Fish and Wildlife Service relating to 

‘‘Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Species Status for Northern Long-Eared Bat’’. 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 That Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the 

4 United States Fish and Wildlife Service relating to ‘‘En5 dangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endan6 gered Species Status for Northern Long-Eared Bat’’ (87 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•SJ 24 IS 

1 Fed. Reg. 73488 (November 30, 2022)), and such rule 

2 shall have no force or effect. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
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.                  

###### Election Assistance Commission

# AGENCY:

United States Election Assistance Commission.

# ACTION:

Notice of public meeting (amended).

# DATE AND TIME:

Thursday, December 7, 2006, 10 a.m.-3:30 p.m.

# PLACE:

U.S. Election Assistance Commission, 1225 New York Ave, NW., Suite 150, Washington, DC 20005. (Metro Stop: Metro Center).

# AGENDA:

The Commission will receive presentations on public comments received for the DRAFT Procedural Manual for Voting System Testing and Certification Program and the proposed final document will be considered for approval. The Commission will receive presentations from election officials, community interest groups, academicians and technology experts regarding the 2006 election. The Commission will elect officers for 2007 and consider other administrative matters. In addition, the Commission will consider the adoption of a voter fraud and intimidation report and the adoption of an administrative policy and procedures manual.

This meeting will be open to the public.

# PERSON TO CONTACT FOR INFORMATION:

Bryan Whitener, Telephone: (202) 566-3100.

Donetta L. Davidson,

Commissioner, U.S. Election Assistance Commission.

[FR Doc. 06-9547 Filed 12-1-06; 1:22 pm]

BILLING CODE 6820-KF-M
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman,

 Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Kurtis T. Wilder

Elizabeth T. Clement,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 

December 19, 2018

Order 

Clerk

December 19, 2018

158061 & (38)

FORD MOTOR COMPANY,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

SC: 158061

v COA: 338784

Ct of Claims: 16-000042-MT

DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY,

Defendant-Appellee.

______________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the stipulation signed by counsel for the parties 

agreeing to the dismissal of this application for leave to appeal is considered, and the

application for leave to appeal is DISMISSED with prejudice and without costs. The 

motion to file a response to the amicus brief is DENIED as moot.
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 Defense Industries
International, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March
31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, Joseph Postbinder, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
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/ Joseph Postbinder
---------------------
Joseph Postbinder
Chief Executive Officer
May 23, 2005
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

 

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

 

In connection with the Annual Report for Rainchief Energy Inc. (the“Company”) on

Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2012 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange

Commission on the date hereof (the “Report), the undersigned,Brad J. Moynes, President of the Company do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section906 of the Sarbanes- Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of our knowledge:

 

 

(1)	The Report fully complies with the requirements of section13(a) of the Securities

Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)	The information contained in the Report fairly presents, inall material respects, the

Financial condition and results of operationsof the Company.

 

 

By:

 

 

/s/ Brad J. Moynes

Brad J. Moynes

President

June 25, 2013
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-6565
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus CORNELL BLACKWELL, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert D. Potter, Senior District Judge. (CR-92-62-P, CA-96-68-3-P) Submitted: November 26, 1996 Decided: December 17, 1996 Before HALL, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Cornell Blackw ell, Appellant Pro Se. James Michael Sullivan, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:Appellant appeals the district court's order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1994), amended by Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214. 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. United States v. Blackwell , Nos. CR-92-62-P; CA-96-68-3-P (W.D.N.C. Mar. 7, 1996). We dispense withoral 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
§ 2555.545 Pre-employment inquiries. ( a ) *Marital status.* A recipient shall not make pre-employment inquiry as to the marital status of an applicant for employment, including whether such applicant is “Miss” or “Mrs.”
( b ) *Sex.* A recipient may make pre-employment inquiry as to the sex of an applicant for employment, but only if such inquiry is made equally of such applicants of both sexes and if the results of such inquiry are not used in connection with discrimination prohibited by these Title IX regulations.