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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 95-31020

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

SIMEON RAFAEL; EPIFANIO GONZAGA,

Defendants-Appellants.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Louisiana

USDC No. CR-94-104-B-M1

- - - - - - - - - -

September 11, 1996

Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Simeon Rafael and Epifanio Gonzaga challenge the sufficiency

of the evidence to support their convictions for importation of

cocaine, possession of cocaine on board a vessel arriving in the

United States, and possession with intent to distribute cocaine. 

We have throughly reviewed the record and the arguments raised in

the briefs and find no reversible error. See United States v.
2

Velgar-Vivero, 8 F.3d 236, 241 (5th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 114

S. Ct. 1865, 2715 (1994). 

 The appellants also challenge the admission of testimony

concerning a statement by Gonzaga and of the witness’s opinion

concerning what Gonzaga meant. Even if the admission of Bambao’s

testimony was error, it was harmless in light of the other

evidence against Rafael and Gonzaga. See United States v.

Gadison, 8 F.3d 186, 192 (5th Cir. 1993).

 Rafael and Gonzaga’s convictions are AFFIRMED.
1.
    
    I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required
to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Principal
Life Income Fundings Trust 2008-053 (the Exchange Act periodic reports);2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as whole, do
not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact
necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such
statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information
required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is
included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;4.
    
    Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement(s) required in this
report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act
periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing
agreement(s) in all material respects; and5.
    
    All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for
asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of
compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included
in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules
13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise
disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such
reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.
   /s/ Dwight N. Soethout

Dwight N. SoethoutVice President  Principal Life Insurance Company
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

MICHAEL BALL, et al.,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

PUGET SOUND MASONRY &

RESTORATION Inc., et al.,

 Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

 C05-1783JCC

 MINUTE ORDER

The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Clerk of Court, Bruce Rifkin:

Pursuant to the Amended General Order entered by the Chief Judge on November

3, 2004, this action has been reassigned to the Honorable John C. Coughenour, United

States District Court Judge. All future documents filed in this case must bear the cause

number C05-1783JCC and bear the Judge’s name in the upper right hand corner of the

document. 

Dated this 12th day of December , 2005.

Bruce Rifkin, Clerk of Court

By s/ JUDITH A. NOTHERN 

Judith A. Nothern, Deputy Clerk

Case 2:05-cv-01783-JCC Document 7 Filed 12/12/05 Page 1 of 1
Before the First Division,

September 25, 1967

No. P67/313.

#### Seaway Importing Co. *v.*United States, protests 65/18518, 65/20324, and 65/20328 (New York).

Beckworth, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of rainwear similar in all material respects to that the subject of *United States*v. *Weather-Rite Sportswear Co., Inc.*(52 CCPA 7, C.A.D. 848), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Before the First Division,

December 9, 1963

No. 68159.

#### Palmar Import Co., Inc., and Frank P. Dow Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 59/3147(B), *etc.*(Bos Angeles).

Opinion by

Oliver, C.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of plastic paperweights similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 67488, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
Before the First Division,

July 15, 1953

No. 57422.

#### H. A. Gogarty, Inc., and Peter Stager *v.*United States,

protest 180369-K (New York).

*219Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of metal buckles similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Weyenberg Shoe Mfg. Co.*v. *United States*(38 C. C. P. A. 122, C. A. D. 448), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
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 Annual Report on Form 10-K/A (Amendment No.2) for the year ended December 31, 2011 (the “Report”) of China Electronics Holdings, Inc. (the "Company"), the undersigned, in the capacities and on the date indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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, as amended; and
 
 2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 Date: November 5, 2012
/s/ Hailong LiuHailong LiuChief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer (principal executive and financial officer)
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

ORDER - 1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

GHASSAN HADDAD,

 Defendant.

No. CR05-0071P

 ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S 

 MOTION FOR BILL OF 

PARTICULARS, MOTION FOR 

INSPECTION OF PERSONNEL 

FILES OF LAW ENFORCEMENT 

OFFICERS, AND MOTION FOR 

NOTICE OF INTENT TO USE 404(b) 

 EVIDENCE

This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Ghassan Haddad’s Motion for Bill of

Particulars (Dkt. No. 74), Motion for Inspection of Personnel Files of Law Enforcement Officers

(Dkt. No. 75), and Motion for Notice of Intent to Use 404(b) Evidence (Dkt. No. 76). Having

considered Mr. Haddad’s motions, the Government’s Response and Mr. Haddad’s Reply and all other

pertinent documents and papers in this case, the Court GRANTS the motion for a bill of particulars

and FINDS AS MOOT the Motions for inspection of law enforcement personnel files and for notice

of intent to use 404(b) evidence. 

In Mr. Haddad’s motion for a bill of particulars, Mr. Haddad requests that the government be

ordered to state the following with respect to count 3:

Case 2:05-cr-00071-MJP Document 84 Filed 02/08/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

ORDER - 2 

1. The make, model and serial number of any firearm which is the subject of count 3 dealing

in firearms without a license;

2. The date and location of the sale of any such firearms which are the subject of count 3; and

3. The purchaser of the firearms which are the subject of count 3. 

The Court finds that the requested information is key to Mr. Haddad’s ability to mount a defense

against the charge contained in count 3 and orders the Government to disclose this information to the

Defendant within ten (10) days of the date of this Order.

Regarding Mr. Haddad’s motions for inspection of law enforcement personnel files and for

notice of intent to use 404(b) evidence at least 21 days before trial, the Court finds that these motions

are now moot because the Government, in its Response (Dkt. No. 81) has agreed to provide Mr.

Haddad with the information that he seeks. Should the Government not follow through with this

promise, the Court trusts that counsel for Defendant will alert the Court.

The Clerk is directed to send copies of this order to all counsel of record.

Dated: February 8th , 2006

A

Marsha J. Pechman

United States District Judge

Case 2:05-cr-00071-MJP Document 84 Filed 02/08/06 Page 2 of 2
From: goober01@juno.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 10:03:10 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Glenn Maas

Syracuse, NY 13210
LDC Operators with >25,000 tonne CO2e Emissions Population Ser

1 4

2 

3 14 5 367 28 

9 

10 111213141516171819

Those highlighted meet the criteria: >25,000 tonne CO2e/yr AND <50,000 customers served
```

[114th Congress Public Law 48]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

[[Page 129 STAT. 488]]

Public Law 114-48
114th Congress

                                 An Act

 
 To designate the Federal building and United States courthouse located 
 at 83 Meeting Street in Charleston, South Carolina, as the ``J. Waties 
    Waring Judicial Center''. <<NOTE: Aug. 7, 2015 -  [H.R. 2131]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. J. WATIES WARING FEDERAL BUILDING AND UNITED STATES 
                              COURTHOUSE.

    (a) Designation.--The Federal building and United States courthouse 
located at 83 Meeting Street in Charleston, South Carolina, shall be 
known and designated as the ``J. Waties Waring Judicial Center''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the Federal building and 
United States courthouse referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed 
to be a reference to the ``J. Waties Waring Judicial Center''.

    Approved August 7, 2015.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 2131:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 114-137 (Comm. on Transportation and Infrastructure).
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 161 (2015):
            June 15, considered and passed House.
            Aug. 5, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
Order filed January 8, 2016 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-15-01070-CR

____________

EX PARTE YROOJ SHAMIM, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Criminal Court at Law No. 3

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1822364-B

ORDER

This is an appeal from a judgment signed December 3, 2015. The district 

clerk has informed this court that the appeal was mistakenly assigned to this court 

instead of the Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas. 

It is ORDERED that the appeal docketed under this court’s appellate cause 

number 14-15-01070-CR is transferred to the Court of Appeals for the First 

District of Texas. The Clerk of this Court is directed to transfer all papers filed in 

the case, and certify all Orders made, to the Court of Appeals for the First District 

of Texas.
PER CURIAM
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the WESTERN DISTRICT of WASHINGTON

MARIA VIKTOROVNA DARSKAYA,

 

 Plaintiff, 

 

 vs. 

MICHAEL CHERTOFF, Secretary of the

Department of Homeland Security, et al.,

 Defendant.

 C06-308 JLR

 MINUTE ORDER

 REASSIGNING CASE

Pursuant to the Amended General Order entered by the Chief Judge on

November 3, 2004, this action has been reassigned to the Honorable James L. Robart, United

States District Judge. 

All future documents filed in this case must bear the cause number C06-308 JLR and bear

the Judge’s name in the upper right hand corner of the document.

Dated this 21st day of April, 2006

BRUCE RIFKIN

Clerk of Court

by: /s/ PETER H. VOELKER

 Peter H. Voelker, Deputy Clerk

Case 2:06-cv-00308-JLR Document 8 Filed 04/21/06 Page 1 of 1
No. 56785.

#### Judson Sheldon Division National Carloading Corp. *v.*United States,

protest 183254-K (New York).

Opinion by

Cole, J.

An examination of the official record disclosing no reason for disturbing the action of the collector, which was presumptively correct, the protest was overruled.
September 19, 1960

No. 64581.

Suit 5015.

#### United States *v.*Dodge & Olcott, Inc.

O.D. 2102 affirmed May 24, 1960. C.A.D. 737.
No. 61092.

Suit 4901.

#### Richter Bros., Inc. *v.*United States.

Abstract 59993 reversed April 10, 1957. C. A. D. 649.
SEALE AND BEERS, CPAs


PCAOB & CPAB REGISTERED AUDITORS


www.sealebeers.com

















CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM











We consent to the use, in the statement on Form 10-K of Legend Mining, Inc., of our report dated July 12, 2011 on our audit of the financial statements of Legend Mining, Inc. as of March 31, 2011 and 2010, and the related statements of operations, stockholders’ equity (deficit) and cash flows for the years then ended and for the period from inception on July 1, 2007 through March 31, 2011, and the reference to us under the caption “Experts.”


























/s/ Seale and Beers, CPAs





Seale and Beers, CPAs


Las Vegas, Nevada


July 14, 2011




























































Seale and Beers, CPAs PCAOB & CPAB Registered Auditors


50 S. Jones Blvd Suite 202 Las Vegas, NV 89107 Phone: (888)727-8251 Fax: (888)782-2351
No. 58681.

protest 151706-K (New York).

#### Anglo-American Commodities *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain items of the merchandise consist of figures similar in all material respects to those passed upon in *Wm. S. Pitcairn Corp.*v. *United States*(39 C. C. P. A. 15, C. A. D. 458), the claim of the plain!iff was sustained.
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 61 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

  1st Session
S. CON. RES. 61

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That (a) a revised edition of the publication entitled ``Our Flag'', 
revised under the direction of the Joint Committee on Printing, shall 
be reprinted as a Senate document.
    (b) There shall be printed--
            (1)(A) 250,000 copies of the publication for the use of the 
        House of Representatives, distributed in equal numbers to each 
        Member;
            (B) 51,500 copies of the publication for the use of the 
        Senate, distributed in equal numbers to each Member;
            (C) 2,000 copies of the publication for the use of the 
        Joint Committee on Printing; and
            (D) 1,400 copies of the publication for distribution to the 
        depository libraries; or
            (2) if the total printing and production costs of copies in 
        paragraph (1) exceed $150,000, such number of copies of the 
        publication as does not exceed total printing and production 
        costs of $150,000, with distribution to be allocated in the 
        same proportion as in paragraph (1).

            Passed the Senate November 5, 1997.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
105th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                            S. CON. RES. 61

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 Authorizing printing of a revised edition of the publication entitled 
                             ``Our Flag''.
```
Case No. 6,627.

#### The HIRAM.

[2 Gall. 60.] 1

Circuit Court, D. Massachusetts.

May Term, 1814.2

Prize Causes — Apportionment of Costs.

Of the rule for apportionment of costs among the several claimants in prize causes.

[NOTE. The decree of condemnation in this case was affirmed by the supreme court in an opinion by Mr. Ohief Justice Marshall, who said that sailing under an enemy's license is cause of confiscation. In such cases the knowledge of the agent will affect the principal, although he be ignorant of the fact. 1 Wheat. (14 U. S.) 440.] ■

Some inquiries were made at the bar respecting the apportionment of costs in these cases, which were prize causes, among the several claimants of the ship and cargo.

2

 [Affirmed in 1 Wheat. (14 U. S.) 440.]

STORY, Circuit Justice.

In taxing the costs in prize causes, where there are several claims, some of which are disposed of by a final decree of condemnation, while others stand suspended upon appeal, the practice has been to tax the costs and expenses, which have accrued specially upon each claim so finally disposed of, as a separate charge against the same, and to add thereto an average proportion of the general costs and expenses, which have accrued in reference to all the claims in the cause. In this manner all parties are made to bear a reasonable proportion of all charges, according to the final event of their particular claims.
REPLY TO 

ATTENTION OF 

~\- OST- I ~'ll..- J1lel 

DEPARTMENT oF THE ARMY : :· f

1

AFlHv1ENT OF 

INSTALLATION MANAGEMENT COMMAN. 0.) .. ··., \.IC~P.[)J'T,~·~~ .. )j\i HEADQUARTERS, UNITED STATES ARMY GARRISON, FORT'(JS0hf11!1~~ ;,. ~ ,, ... , 

32o MANSCEN LooP, suiTE 120 ... ,,; ,c 1 .,. rcr'i:'1 Ur·J,) 

FORT LEONARD WOOD, MO 65473-8929 

2~!! z 2: 24 

Directorate of Logistics, Transportation Office 28 September 20 12 

Dear Mr Muldoon, 

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposals for an airline service for the 

Ft Leonard Wood community from Forney Field. After an intense study of all ofthe proposals 

received, a decision has been made based on the best overall value to the customers who are our 

men and women in uniform and their families. 

Although there was comparable information for the companies that submitted proposals, 

based on our review of the proposals and hearing proposals submitted by Air Choice One and 

Cape Air, Ft Leonard Wood recommends the proposal submitted by Air Choice One for an initial 

2 year period, with the option to extend to 4 years. Air Choice One's proposal offers interline eticketing by travel agencies and internet portals. They also have code share baggage agreements 

with more than 65 partner airlines worldwide. 

Air Choice One has larger, more comfortable and newer aircraft, along with offering 

lower basic prices. Their prices offered will be almost half of what Cape Air currently charges, 

thereby saving the government and civilian travelers up to 50% of their current cost for traveling 

to and from StLouis. Cape Airs' limitation in their capability to only move 8 personnel is 

discouraging with the fact that they ensured us changes in the future if we showed them our 

interest and gave them our support. We have seen no new features or promises for changes for 

no sooner than 2 more years. 

The local community continues to support the company of Cape Air because of their 

past-proven capabilities. Ft Leonard Wood feels that Air Choice One has proven themselves in 

other communities. They have also gone out and acquired the capabilities that were limiting 

them from meeting our requests during the last EAS bid and offer to provide our community a 

less expensive means of travel to and from St Louis, thereby saving our customers and the 

government valuable money at a time of financial budget impacts. 

On behalf of the Ft Leonard Wood Installation, I want to thank you for your continued 

support and the opportunity to provide input concerning the implementation of the new contract 

for airline service for our local community. Please feel free to contact me at (573) 596-0614, 

should you require any further information. 

Darlene F. Battle 

Chief, Transportation Division
No. 68500.

protests 61/2971, 61/ 15467, and 61/23546 (New York).

#### Siemens New York, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of electrical X-ray apparatus or instruments, which are not X-ray tubes or parts thereof, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 ORDER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

J.D. CHARLES MCMANUS,

Plaintiff,

v.

JOSEPH LEHMAN,

Defendant.

Case No. C05-5563RBL

ORDER TO PROVIDE SERVICE

DOCUMENTS

Plaintiff has been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Plaintiff has not provided

service documents. The Clerk is directed to send plaintiff one service form.

Plaintiff will fill out the form and return it with a copy of the complaint so the court can

attempt service by mail. The form must be returned on or before November 18th, 2005 or the court

will recommend dismissal for failure to prosecute.

The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Order and the service forms to plaintiff and note

this matter for November 18th, 2005.

DATED this 7th day of October, 2005.

/S/ J. Kelley Arnold

J. Kelley Arnold

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:05-cv-05563-RBL Document 5 Filed 10/07/05 Page 1 of 1