alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-20340

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

NICOLAS ANTONIO GUTIERREZ LOPEZ, also known as Nicolas A. Gutierrez,

also known as Nicolas Antonio Gutierrez, also known as Nicolas Antonio

Gutierrez-Lopez,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:10-CR-761-1

Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Nicolas Antonio Gutierrez Lopez (Gutierrez) pleaded guilty of being

present in the United States illegally following deportation after conviction of an

aggravated felony. In this appeal, Gutierrez contends that the district court

erred in increasing his Sentencing Guidelines offense level by 16 levels based on

its determination that Gutierrez’s 2007 Texas conviction of aggravated assault

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

April 25, 2012

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

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.

Case: 11-20340 Document: 00511835356 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/25/2012
No. 11-20340

with a deadly weapon constituted a crime of violence under U.S.S.G.

§ 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii).

Because Gutierrez’s Texas conviction of aggravated assault qualified as a

conviction for the enumerated offense of aggravated assault, the district court

did not err in imposing the 16-level enhancement. See United States v. GuillenAlvarez, 489 F.3d 197, 199-201 (5th Cir. 2007); see also U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2,

comment. (n.1(B)(iii)). The judgment is AFFIRMED.

2

Case: 11-20340 Document: 00511835356 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/25/2012
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY, EX REL. JAMES J. TROY, RELATOR, v. J. VINCENT BARNITT, PROSECUTOR OF THE PLEAS OF PASSAIC COUNTY, AND NATHANIEL KENT, SUCCESSOR IN OFFICE, RESPONDENTS.

Submitted October 14, 1932

Decided March 31, 1933.

Before Justices Pabker, Lloyd and Heher.

Por the relator, *M. Metz Cohn*and *Minium & Weinberger.*

Por the respondents, *William B. Gourley*and *John D. Masierton.*

Per Curiam.

This rule directs respondents to show cause why a peremptory or alternative writ of *mandamus*should not be issued, commanding the prosecutor of the pleas of Passaic county to appoint the relator to the position of county detective.

The relator, an honorably discharged soldier who has a record of disability incurred in the line of duty in the war between the United States and Germany, and its allies, passed a civil service examination for the mentioned position. He was classified as a disabled veteran by the civil service commission, and given first place on the eligible list. Two others, John C. Cluney and James B. Trueman, likewise disabled veterans, were given second and third places, respectively. The latter two were appointed to fill the vacancies in the *276county’s staff of detectives, while the relator was ignored. He asserts the right to preference under the following provision of chapter 349 of the laws of 1929 *(Pamph. L.*1929, *p.*784) : “If more than one soldier, sailor, marine or nurse as aforesaid, pass such examination, and is placed upon the eligible list, then the preference for any such vacancy and position shall be given in accordance with the results of the examination.”

This act provides, however, that to be entitled to such preference the claimant “shall possess the business capacity necessary to discharge the duties of the particular position involved.” The prosecutor of the pleas found that the relator did not possess the requisite business capacity. There was evidence that supports this finding.

This case is controlled by the somewhat similar case of *Edell*v. *McDermott,*11 *N. J. Mis. R.*272. The office of the writ of *mandamus*when directed to a public officer, is to compel him to do something that he is required by law to do, and has failed or refused to do, rather than compel him to do in a different way what he has already done, *Newark*v. *Lewis,*82 *N. J. L.*279 (at *pp.*281, 282); 81 *Atl. Rep.*1072.

If he is vested by law with discretionary power or with the jurisdiction to decide questions of law, or to ascertain matters of fact, the court will not by proceedings by *mandamus*usurp the power to dictate how the discretion shall be exercised, or to decide what conclusions of law or of fact shall be reached. *Davisons. Patterson,*94 *N. J. L.*338 (at *p.*341); 110 *Atl. Rep.*827. *Mandamus*should not issue unless the legal right clearly appears.

The rule to show cause will therefore be discharged, with costs.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-08-00234-CV

G. W. Sneed, Appellant

v.

Jackson National Life Distributors, Inc. d/b/a Jackson National Life Insurance, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF RUNNELS COUNTY, 119TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 14,120, HONORABLE GARLAND B. WOODWARD, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

G. W. Sneed appeals a final judgment that was signed on March 17, 2008. The

clerk’s record was due on May 16, 2008. No clerk’s record has been filed due to appellant’s failure

to pay or make arrangements to pay the clerk’s fee for preparing the clerk’s record.

If the trial court fails to file the clerk’s record due to appellant’s failure to pay or make

arrangements to pay the clerk’s fee for preparing the clerk’s record, the appellate court may dismiss

the appeal for want of prosecution unless the appellant was entitled to proceed without payment of

costs. Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b).

Because appellant has failed to pay or make arrangements to pay the clerk’s fee for

preparing the clerk’s record, this appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.
2

 

Diane M. Henson, Justice

Before Justices Patterson, Waldrop and Henson

Dismissed for Want of Prosecution

Filed: August 14, 2008
IV

107TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 384

Honoring the men and women of the United States Secret Service New

York field office for their extraordinary performance and commitment

to service during and immediately following the terrorist attacks on

the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 10, 2002

Mr. ISTOOK (for himself, Mr. HOYER, Mr. YOUNG of Florida, Mr. OBEY, Mr.

WOLF, Mr. VISCLOSKY, Mrs. MEEK of Florida, Mr. TIAHRT, Mr. PRICE

of North Carolina, Mrs. NORTHUP, Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania, Mr.

ROTHMAN, Mr. SUNUNU, Mr. SHERWOOD, and Mr. SWEENEY) submitted

the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Government Reform

RESOLUTION

Honoring the men and women of the United States Secret

Service New York field office for their extraordinary

performance and commitment to service during and immediately following the terrorist attacks on the World

Trade Center on September 11, 2001.

Whereas the United States Secret Service New York field office located in 7 World Trade Center was destroyed on

September 11, 2001, as a result of terrorist attacks;

Whereas, throughout the day of the attacks and subsequent

days, the men and women of the New York field office
2

•HRES 384 IH

continually and knowingly placed themselves in exceptional danger in their efforts to save life;

Whereas, in selfless dedication to others, Master Special Officer Craig Miller was lost in the collapse of the World

Trade Center;

Whereas, subsequent to the terrorist attacks, the men and

women of the United States Secret Service New York

field office worked tirelessly to re-establish critical field

office operations and assist State and local public safety

officials; and

Whereas the United States Secret Service performs a critical

role in the protection of freedom, and these acts represent a dedication to duty in the highest traditions of

the Department of the Treasury and the United States

of America: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives—

2 (1) honors the continuing service and commit3 ment of the men and women assigned to the United

4 States Secret Service, New York field office;

5 (2) recognizes the critical importance of the

6 United States Secret Service to our national secu7 rity; and

8 (3) supports providing the necessary resources

9 to ensure the full operation of the New York field

10 office and the mission of the Secret Service.

Æ
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. John Rudman, Appellant, *v.*Ernst J. Lederle et al., Composing the Board of Health of the City of New York, Respondents.

*People ex rel. Rudman*v. *Lederle,*149 App. Div. 915, affirmed.

(Argued May 1, 1912;

decided May 21, 1912.)

Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered *595March 26, 1912, which dismissed a writ of certiorari and affirmed the proceedings of the defendants in dismissing the relator from the department of health of the city of 'New York.

*Francis Gilbert, A. S. Gilbert*and *A. Joseph Geist*for appellant.

*Archibald B. Watson, Corporation Counsel (Terence Farley*and *Harry Crone*of counsel), for respondents.

Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Oh. J., Gray, Haight, Vann, Werner, Hiscock and Collin, JJ.
1210-AB32-2-1543.html[7/26/2015 7:20:44 PM]

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: July 16, 2015

Received: July 11, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8jx1-vwza

Comments Due: July 21, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; Notice of

 proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0205

Definition of Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice and Related Proposed

 Prohibited Transaction Exemptions; Hearing and Comment Period Extension

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-2040

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: Anonymous Anonymous

General Comment

I am writing because of my 401k. I believe we the people are smart enough to handle our own money that we

 chose 

to put into our accounts. You opened social security up to people who enter our country and have never paid into

 it. Now you 

you want to tell us the American people how to spend our 401ks. Please leave it alone. 

Thank You,
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 166 (Tuesday, August 29, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 59513]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-18578]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers


Intent To Grant an Exclusive License for a U.S. Army Owned 
Invention to necoTECH, LLC

AGENCY: Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of the Army announces that, unless there is an 
objection, after 15 days it intends to grant an exclusive license to 
necoTECH, LLC., a corporation having a place of business in Culpepper, 
VA on United States Patent No. 10,954,161 entitled ``Performance Grade 
Asphalt Repair Composition,'' filed September 14, 2016, and United 
States Patent Pub No. 2021/0380480 filed March 22, 2021.

DATES: Written objections must be filed by September 13, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Send written objections to U.S. Army Engineer Research and 
Development Center, ATTN: CEERD-ZBT-C (Mr. Eric L. Fox), 3909 Halls 
Ferry Road, Vicksburg, MS 39180-61996, or by email to: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#ace9dec5cf82e082eac3d4ecd9dfcdcfc982cddec1d582c1c5c0"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="692c1b000a4725472f0611291c1a080a0c47081b041047040005">[email protected]</span></a>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: U.S. Army Engineer Research and 
Development Center, ATTN: CEERD-ZBT-C (Mr. Eric L. Fox), 3909 Halls 
Ferry Road, Vicksburg, MS 39180-61996, Voice: 601-634-4113, Email: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#81c4f3e8e2afcdafc7eef9c1f4f2e0e2e4afe0f3ecf8afece8ed"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="2663544f45086a0860495e6653554745430847544b5f084b4f4a">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Any license granted shall comply with 35 
U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR part 404.

Eric L. Fox,
Senior Technology Transfer Officer, U.S. Army Engineer Research and 
Development Center.
[FR Doc. 2023-18578 Filed 8-28-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3720-58-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                         INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

The Board of Directors
CT Communications, Inc.:

     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements
(Nos. 33-59641, 33-59643, 33-59645, 333-15537, 333-30125, 333-38895, 333-77323,
333-65818, and 333-65846) of CT Communications, Inc. of our report dated
February 22, 2002, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of CT
Communications, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2001 and 2000, and the
related consolidated statements of income, comprehensive income, stockholders'
equity and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended
December 31, 2001, and related schedule, which report is included in the
December 31, 2001 annual report on Form 10-K of CT Communications, Inc.

                                          KPMG LLP

Charlotte, North Carolina
March 28, 2002
South Park Ave. 

Herrin, IL 62948 

618-942-7376 Spinal Rehabilitation Fax 942-5321 

"Get WeD, stay WeD, Continue To Feel Good." 

August 11,2010 

Office of Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight 


Department of Health and Human Services 


Attention: OCIIO-9991-IFC 


P.O. Box 8016 


Baltimcre, MD 21244-1850 


Re: Interim Final Rule for Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage Relating to 

Status as a Grandfathered Health Plan Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 

Below are my comments regarding the Interim Final Rule for Group Health Plans and Health 

Insurance Coverage Relating to Status as a Grandfathered Health Plan Under the Patient 

Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). 

I believe that every effort should be made to increase the number of individuals covered by 

PP ACA, especially as "o{ January 1, 2014 when most ofthe reform components (Insurance 

Exchanges, Subsidies, Tax Credits, etc.") come into play. .' 

The average consumer has a broad definition 6f"benefits." Consumers view their health plan 

beyond the covered benefits, cost sharing, and the contribution levels associated with the plan, 

It is my opinion that the Rule may still result in some confusion to the marketplace in its 

~pplication. For example, if an employer raised the copayment level beyond the maximum in one 

ai'e"a"(i.e. 6'utpatient services) but retained the copayment level for primary care doctor visits, 

does' that mean a loss ofgrandfather status?· Clarity,\vill be <;:riticill both for the employer and the 

emP.10 yee. ,. " . - -" "" ...• 

Even by the most optimistic estimates, a substantial portion ofthe employee population will 

remain outside the PPACA as of January 20]4 based on the current rules. While I understand the 

difficulty involved in making change, creating another large sub-population of excluded 

individuals will only add to costs,increase confusion, .and mitigate the potential impact ofthe 

legislation. ' ". "., . " , '.' .•.. , ,­

"I' • 

.'" .

.' 

. ttl 't' , '. " , ~,.~' ~ , '.. . . ." ~ ~. "t: ," ,"... ,.;.,.. 

f~!: A'~.,.,:; ~;J t .. tJ; ! "~-, : , ...."":"" .....,::. ,: , .. d<- • \ 

."'''' ~ .. . .. Director "

Member: Logan Alumni Association 

lUinois Chiropractic Society " 

':.~ ~-............... -------~-~ 
------

The Rule needs to be clear, reasonable, and with no ambiguities involved in determining whether 

a group health plan is "in or out." The decisions the federal government makes today will 

determine the outcomes for tomorrow. We may need to make some difficult decisions to create 

a sustainable health care system that will support a growing economy in the future. That means 

getting as many citizens across the country participating at the beginning to make it work and 

delivering on its promises to retain their support. 

- _T-han.l( you ior~the~opport!lDi.tYJiLcO~1ent on thi s regulation. --,-..- ,.- -~_ ""-.. __ ~:r _ 

----....... ..... ... .----..---­

Charles W. Rubright, D.C. 

---_._--------- - --_._----- .-.......... --.-.--­
Page 1 of2 r;\EG- - ),y LI/ :1--/ 0 

:1/'''' 1, , >'" ~"") 

LEGALPROC 


PUBLICATION~SINo DIVISION 
 ~REGULAnoN As of: August 25, 2010 

PUBLIC Received: August 10, 2010 BRANCH S Status: Posted 

Posted: August 25, 2010 

Tracking No. 80b2dOc4 SUBMISSION Comments Due: August 16, 2010 

Submission Type: Web 

Docket: IRS-2010-0010 

Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage Rules Relating to Status as a Grandfathered 

Health Plan Under the Patient Protection and Afforable Care Act 

Comment On: IRS-2010-001O-0001 

Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage: Interim Final Rules for Relating to Status as 

a Grandfathered Health Plan under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 

Document: IRS-2010-001O-0357 

Comment on FR Doc # 2010-14488 

-----------------------------------------------------------------,---­

Submitter Information 

Name: Pamela Lampson 

Address: 

509 Greenway Dr 

Corpus Christi, TX, 78412-3145 

Email: lampson509@gmail.com 

Phone: 361-994-1817 

Fax: 361-994-1817 

Government Agency Type: Federal 

Government Agency: AHRQ 

General Comment 

August 10, 2010 

Office of Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight 

Department of Health and Human Services 

Attention: OCIIO-9991-IFC 

P.O. Box 8016 

Baltimore, MD 21244-1850 

Re: Interim Final Rule for Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage Relating to Status 

as a Grandfathered Health Plan Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 

I wish to take this opportunity to formally comment on the interim final rule regarding healt1 

plans and "grandfather" status (Document ID IRS-2010-0010-000l). 

I believe the consumer protections included as part of the new health care law are vitally 

important and should be extended to as many people as possible. Accordingly, every effort 

should be made to increase the number of individuals covered by the Patient Protection and 

https:/ /fdms.erulemaking.netlfdms-web-agency/componentlsubmitter InfoCoverPage?Call=... 8/2512010 
Page 20f2 

Affordable Care Act (PPACA) via the above regulations. The triggers or conditions that woulc 

extend these protections to consumers under currently existing "grandfathered" plans should not 

be weakened or reduced in any way. I specifically support the position and detailed commerts 

offered by the American Chiropractic Association with respect to the implementation of these 

regulations. 

Pamela C. Lampson 

https:llfdms.erulemaking.netlfdms-web-agency1componentlsubmitterInfoCover Page?Call=... 8/25/2010
From: leefeldman@verizon.net [mailto:leefeldman@verizon.net] 

Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 12:12 PM 

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA; e-ori@regulations.gov 

Subject: 2010 investment advice proposed rule

Dear Department of Labor: 

There is no superficial detail which identifies the good guys from the bad. The DOL should not make any 

rules which imply otherwise. 

The only way to guarantee that 401(k) plan participants are getting good advice is to give them the 

authority to rollover their vested plan assets at least once a year to any IRA account. The only rule about 

investment advice that the Department of Labor should be making is to strongly emphasize that the 

employees should “shop around” for that advice. Competition is the only possible chance for the employee 

to know that he is getting good advice. 

Every advisor is biased by how he gets paid, by what he knows, and by what he does not know. The only 

way to offset that bias is to allow competition for that advice. 

If one “approved” advisor tells you to do something, you do not know whether that is good or bad advice. 

If two or more advisors compete for your business, the best advice will prevail! 

Thank You, 

Lee Feldman 

412 561 0321 

leefeldman@verizon.net
IV

107TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 466

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that reciting the Pledge

of Allegiance in schools is constitutional, that the Congress deplores

the decision of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and that the House

of Representatives encourages every American to start their day by

reciting the Pledge.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 26, 2002

Mr. ISRAEL (for himself and Mr. SHOWS) submitted the following resolution;

which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that

reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in schools is constitutional, that the Congress deplores the decision of the

9th Circuit Court of Appeals and that the House of

Representatives encourages every American to start their

day by reciting the Pledge.

Whereas the original Pledge of Allegiance was written by

Francis Bellamy in 1892;

Whereas the Congress of the United States officially endorsed

the Pledge of Allegiance in 1942;

Whereas in 1954 Congress officially added the words ‘‘Under

God’’ to the Pledge;
2

•HRES 466 IH

Whereas the Supreme Court ruled in 1943 that schoolchildren could not be forced to recite the pledge;

Whereas the House of Representatives begins each of its days

by reciting the Pledge of Allegiance;

Whereas millions of Americans have been reciting the current

Pledge without significant controversy for 48 years;

Whereas the 9th United States Circuit Court of Appeals

ruled the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional on June

26, 2002;

Whereas the United States is currently engaged in military

combat in the War on Terrorism;

Whereas the decision of the 9th United States Circuit Court

of Appeals could provide aid and comfort to enemies of

the United States of America; and

Whereas our nation is one nation, under God, indivisible,

with liberty and justice for all: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives, That it is

2 the sense of the House of Representatives that—

3 (1) reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in schools

4 and other public places is constitutional;

5 (2) the decision of the 9th United States Cir6 cuit Court of Appeals is wrong, erroneous, deplor7 able, and should be overturned by the United States

8 Supreme Court; and

9 (3) Americans of every age should be encour10 aged to begin their day by reciting the following

11 Pledge: I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United

12 States of America and to the Republic for which it
3

•HRES 466 IH

1 stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with lib2 erty and justice for all.

Æ
# U.S. Central Command announces 3 recent strikes in Yemen

/ Published Jan. 25, 2017
January 25, 2017Release Number20170125-01FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE**TAMPA, Fla. —** The U.S. military conducted strikes on al-Qa'ida in the Arabian Peninsula operatives in central Yemen on Jan. 20, 21 and 22.On Jan. 20, one strike killed an AQAP operative in the al-Baydah Governorate.On Jan. 21, one strike killed three AQAP operatives in the al-Baydah Governorate.On Jan. 22, one strike killed an AQAP operative in the al-Baydah Governorate."Strikes against al-Qa'ida operatives in Yemen put consistent pressure on the terrorist network and prevent them from plotting and executing attacks against the U.S. and our allies," said Army Maj. Josh T. Jacques, a U.S. Central Command spokesman. "AQAP remains a significant threat to the region, the United States, and beyond."The CENTCOM mission is to direct and enable military operations and activities with allies and partners to increase regional security and stability in support of enduring U.S. interests."U.S. Central Command remains committed to defeating AQAP and denying it safe havens in Yemen," Jacques said.