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

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-60912

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff–Appellee,

versus

J.D. BELL,

Defendant–Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Mississippi

No. 1:11-CR-124-1

Before SMITH, PRADO, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

J.D. Bell pleaded guilty, pursuant to a conditional guilty plea, to failure

to register as a convicted sex offender in violation of the Sex Offender RegistraUnited States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

June 24, 2013

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: 12-60912 Document: 00512284355 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/24/2013
No. 12-60912

tion and Notification Act (“SORNA”), 18 U.S.C. § 2250(a), reserving his right to

appeal the challenges to SORNA made in his motion to dismiss the indictment.

The district court sentenced Bell to twenty-four months in prison and ten years’

supervised release.

Bell argues that the district court erred when it denied his motion to dismiss the indictment. He contends that the Attorney General’s 2007 interim rule,

which made SORNA retroactively applicable to pre-SORNA offenders, such as

himself, was not validly promulgated because of certain Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) violations, and, thus, SORNA was not applicable to him. In

support, Bell asserts that Reynolds v. United States, 132 S. Ct. 975 (2012), overruled United States v. Johnson, 632 F.3d 912 (5th Cir. 2011). In the alternative,

Bell argues that, in light of Reynolds, this court should reconsider Johnson. 

Bell’s complaints as to the APA and his reliance on Reynolds are unavailing. Bell’s SORNA violations occurred in 2011, after the 2008 effective date of

the Attorney General’s final regulations applying SORNA to pre-SORNA offenders. 73 Fed. Reg. 38,030, 38,063. Those final regulations were not under scrutiny in Reynolds or Johnson, and, on appeal, Bell does not challenge the validity

of those regulations. Furthermore, the Attorney General’s final regulations

“were published with proper notice and comment rulemaking.” United States v.

Davis, 471 F. App’x 363, 364 (5th Cir.) (per curiam), cert. denied, 133 S. Ct. 493

(2012). As for Bell’s request that we revisit Johnson, this panel may not reconsider the court’s precedent absent an overriding Supreme Court decision, a

change in statutory law, or en banc consideration. See United States v. ZunigaSalinas, 952 F.2d 876, 877 (5th Cir. 1992) (en banc). 

Accordingly, the judgment is AFFIRMED.

2

 Case: 12-60912 Document: 00512284355 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/24/2013
EXHIBIT 32 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350  In connection with the accompanying quarterly report on Form 10-K of Strike Axe, Inc. for the period ending March 31, 2010, I, Daniel K. Leonard, President, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Principal Accounting Officer and Chairman of the Board of Directors of Strike Axe, Inc. hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:  1.Such annual report of Form 10-K for the period ending March 31, 2010, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.The information contained in such annual report of Form 10-K for the year ending March 31, 2010, fairly represents in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Strike Axe, Inc.  Date: November 2, 2010Strike Axe, Inc.By: /s/   Daniel K. LeonardDaniel K. Leonard
President, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer,
Principal Accounting Officer and Chairman of the Board of Directors
BEFORE the SECOND Division,

May 3, 1967

No. P67/139.

#### J. Gerber & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 66/3315

#### (New York).

Foed, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protest consists of rayon labels similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Bruce Duncan Co., Inc., a/c Standard Commodities Import*& *Export Corp*v. *United States*(51 Cust. Ct. 27, C.D. 2409), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
<PAGE>

                                                               Exhibit 10.4

                            5Net5 Corp.
                      133 Mercer St., Suite 6
                      New York, New York 10012


           Amendment to Paragraph 2, Section A, subsection vi.
       COMPUTER SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT dated Feb. 1, 2000


Horizon Pharmacies, Inc.
531 W. Main St. Suite 100
Denison, TX 75020


Attention: Rick McCord
           President and CEO

Re:   COMPUTER SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT

Dear Mr. McCord:

      This will amend Paragraph 2, Section A, subsection vi. of our agreement
dated Feb. 1, 2000. This will now replace the language of the existing clause
of that agreement:



           A consulting fee of $10,000 per month for one (1) year, payable no
           later than the 10th calendar day of each month; provided, however,
           that the first month's fee shall be payable to Consultant on
           Feb. 1st, 2000. If the publicly traded common stock of the Company
           closes at a market price greater than, or equal to, $5.00 per share
           for 10 trading days on a trailing average basis, this consulting fee
           shall become $20,000 per month for the remainder of the period of
           this agreement. In addition, the Company shall pay the Consultant
           retroactively an additional $10,000 for each month of this agreement
           prior to the month when payment of the $20,000 consulting fee is
           begun under the above provision.


                                      Very truly yours,
                                      5NET5 CORP.


                                      By: /s/ Kethe Cicconi
                                         ----------------------------
                                         Name: Kethe Cicconi
                                         Title: President

AGREED AND ACCEPTED
HORIZON PHARMACIES, INC.


By: /s/ Ricky D. McCord
   ---------------------
   Name: Ricky D. McCord
   Title: President
Date of Execution: 2/2/00
EX-10.9


 Exhibit 10.9 

AMENDMENT TO THE 

BROADCOM CORPORATION 

2012 STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN 

April 4, 2018 
 This
Amendment (this “Amendment”) to the Broadcom Corporation 2012 Stock Incentive Plan, as amended (as amended, the “Plan”) is effective as of the date first set forth above, such amendment being approved by the Board
of Directors of Broadcom Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), pursuant to Article Five, Section IV.A of the Plan. The Plan is hereby amended as follows: 

 

	1.	All references to the “Corporation,” “Broadcom Limited” or “Broadcom Limited (Registration No. 201505572G), a limited company incorporated under the Republic of Singapore” in the Plan shall
refer to the Company. The following will replace Section F of the Appendix to the Plan in its entirety: 

 “F.
Corporation shall mean Broadcom Inc., a Delaware corporation.” 
  

	2.	All references to “ordinary shares” or other similar terms in the Plan shall refer to shares of the common stock of the Corporation. 


 

	3.	The following will replace Section E of the Appendix to the Plan in its entirety: 

 “E.
Shares shall mean shares of the Corporation’s common stock, par value $0.001 per share.” 
  

	4.	Except as provided in this Amendment, the Plan shall remain in full force and effect. 

 * * * *
*
Exhibit 32.2

                            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 Startech Environmental Corporation
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended July 31, 2005 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Peter J. Scanlon, Chief Financial 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 results of operations
          of the Company.





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request





/s/ Peter J. Scanlon
--------------------
Peter J. Scanlon
Chief Financial Officer
September 19, 2005
(Reap. Dec. 10820)

#### Berben Corp. *v.*United States

Entry No. 752780, etc.

(Decided September 2, 1964)

*Barnes, Richardson & OoXburn*for the plaintiff.

*John W. Douglas,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

LawkeNce, Judge:

The appeals for a reappraisement enumerated in schedule A, attached to and made a part of the decision herein, present the question of the proper dutiable value of certain shotguns and parts thereof, imported from Italy.

The parties hereto have entered into a stipulation of fact wherein it has been agreed as follows:

> That the appeals for reappraisement listed on Schedule A, hereto attached and made a part hereof, are limited to the merchandise described on the invoices as shotguns with or without other words of description, and parts thereof and fittings therefor, exported by the firm of Pietro Beretta, Italy.

> That the merchandise in question was entered after February 28, 1958, and that said merchandise does not appear on the Secretary’s Final List, T.D. 54521.

> That at the time of exportation to the United States of the merchandise in question, the price at which such or similar merchandise was freely sold in the principal markets of the country of exportation in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade for exportation to the United States including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other expenses incidental to placing the merchandise in condition, packed ready for shipment to the United 'States, was the entered value.

Upon the agreed facts of record, the court finds and holds that export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956 (19 U.S.C. § 1401a (b)), is the proper basis of value for the shotguns and parts thereof and fittings therefor in issue and that said value is represented by the entered value.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
EXHIBIT 32.2

                            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 on Form 10-Q of WNC Housing Tax
Credit Fund III, L.P. (the  "Partnership") for the period ended June 30, 2007 as
filed with the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof  (the
"Report"),  and  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.,  section  1350,  as adopted  pursuant to
section  906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  I,  Thomas  J.  Riha,  Senior
Vice-President  and Chief Financial Officer of WNC & Associates,  Inc.,  general
partner of the Partnership, hereby certify 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 Partnership.




/s/Thomas J. Riha.
------------------
Thomas J. Riha
Senior Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc.

November 14, 2007
Before the First Division,

February 28, 1958

No. 61599.

#### Alex Murphy & Co. *v.*United States,

protests 283589-K and 283590-K (Philadelphia).

Opinion by

Oliver, O. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of parts of machine tools the same in all material respects as those the subject of Abstract 61048, 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

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Page - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

RICKEY A. BEAVER,

Plaintiff,

v.

RICK PALMERTON,

Defendant.

Case No. C06-5215RJB

REPORT AND

RECOMMENDATION TO

DISMISS COMPLAINT

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

NOTED FOR:

June 23rd 2006

This case has been referred to Magistrate Judge J. Kelley Arnold pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

636(b)(1)(B). This matter comes before the court upon plaintiff's request/motion to voluntarily dismiss his

complaint, (Dkt. # 7). The court entered an order to show cause why the action should not be dismissed

and in response plaintiff filed a document requesting the court grant his motion to dismiss. (Dkt. # 7). 

After reviewing plaintiff's motion, and the remaining record, the Court recommends the action be

DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

DISCUSSION

Under Rule 41, a plaintiff has the right to voluntarily dismiss his case when no answer or motion for

summary judgment has been filed by an adverse party. Rule 41(a)(1) specifically provides that dismissal as a

matter of right can be foreclosed only by the filing of an answer or a motion for summary judgment. Roddy v.

Dendy, 141 F.R.D. 261, 262 (S.D. Mississippi, 1992). When ruling on a motion to dismiss without prejudice,

Case 3:06-cv-05215-RJB Document 8 Filed 06/01/06 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

27

28

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Page - 2

the district court must determine whether the defendant will suffer some plain legal prejudice as a result of the

dismissal. Hyde & Drath v. Baker, 24 F.3d 1162, 1169 (9th Cir.1994); Hamilton v. Firestone Tire & Rubber

Co., 679 F.2d 143, 145 (9th Cir.1982).

Here, the complaint has not been served. Thus, plaintiff has a right to dismiss the action. 

CONCLUSION

Accordingly, plaintiff's request to voluntarily dismiss his complaint (Dkt. # 7) should be GRANTED. 

A proposed order accompanies this report and recommendation.

Dated this 31st day of May, 2006.

/S/ J. Kelley Arnold

J. Kelley Arnold

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:06-cv-05215-RJB Document 8 Filed 06/01/06 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-03-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-02-2000
<CASH>                                          10,676
<SECURITIES>                                    14,387
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,556
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      9,079
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                47,925
<PP&E>                                          13,127
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  66,411
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           10,351
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            14
<OTHER-SE>                                      73,650
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    66,411
<SALES>                                         11,741
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                11,741
<CGS>                                            5,593
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   19,547
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 173
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (7,471)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,615
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,856)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,856)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.42)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.42)


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.2





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 annual report of Organic Alliance, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Barry Brookstein, Chief Financial Officer of the Company hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:





(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.





/s/ Barry BrooksteinName:
Barry BrooksteinTitle:
Chief Financial OfficerDate: June 18, 2012





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Organic Alliance, Inc. and will be retained by Organic Alliance, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Opinion issued February 12 , 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals
For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01
- 11
- 01049
- CR NO. 01
- 11
- 01069
- CR

——————————— IN RE JORGE MATA , Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus



### MEMORANDUM OPINION By petition for writ of mandamus, relator, Jorge Mata , seeks mandamus relief compelling the trial court to rule on his motion s for judgment nunc pro tunc

. 1 The trial court signed an order denying both on January 9, 2013.

1 The underlying cases are Cas e No s. 125379001010 and 129868401010 in the 183rd Distric t Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Vanessa Vasquez , presiding.2 Accordingly, t he petition for writ of mandamus is dismissed as moot

. PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justice s Keyes, Sharp, and Huddle

. Do not publish. T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 47.2(b).
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




The undersigned, Ross Lavnikevich, the President and Chief Executive Officer of iGenii, Inc. (the “Company”), certifies, under the standards set forth and solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his knowledge, the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in that Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




Dated: April 18, 2012


By:
/s/ Ross LavnikevichName: Ross LavnikevichTitle: President and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)
Case No. 8,868.

#### McKNIGHT v. RAMSAY.

[1 Cranch, C. C. 40.]1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

Oct. Term, 1801.

Courts — Jurisdictional Amount — Offset — Arrest of Judgment.

In an action of debt for an amount large enough to support the jurisdiction of this court, it is no cause for arrest of judgment that the sum due is reduced by offsets to a sum for which the court would not have had original jurisdiction.

[Cited in Hellrigle v. Dulaney, Case No. 6,-343.]

Debt. Verdict for the debt in the declaration mentioned to be discharged on payment of £3. 11s. — the plaintiff’s demand being reduced to that sum by offsets.

Motion by Mr. Taylor, for defendant,

for nonsuit; the sum being less than twenty dollars, and so not within the jurisdiction of this court.

Mr. Swann, for plaintiff,

cited Gross v. Fisher, 3 Wils. 49.

Nonsuit refused.
IV 

House Calendar No. 119 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 79 

[Report No. 110–343] 

Recognizing the establishment of Hunters for the Hungry programs across 

the United States and the contributions of those programs efforts to 

decrease hunger and help feed those in need. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 19, 2007 

Mr. GINGREY (for himself, Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland, Mr. HAYES, Mrs. 

MILLER of Michigan, Mr. BROWN of South Carolina, Mr. MCCOTTER, 

Mr. CARTER, Mr. PUTNAM, Mr. COBLE, Mr. CARNEY, Mr. TERRY, Mr. 

CALVERT, Mr. MILLER of Florida, Mr. PEARCE, and Mr. ENGLISH of 

Pennsylvania) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 

the Committee on Agriculture 

SEPTEMBER 24, 2007 

Additional sponsors: Mr. HUNTER, Mr. PATRICK MURPHY of Pennsylvania, 

Mrs. GILLIBRAND, Mr. WALBERG, Mr. KUHL of New York, Mr. ORTIZ, 

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska, Mr. WILSON of South Carolina, Mr. BARRETT of 

South Carolina, Mr. FORTUN ̃O, Mr. SESSIONS, Mr. FEENEY, Mr. BISHOP

of Utah, Mr. AKIN, Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin, Mrs. MUSGRAVE, Mr. KLINE

of Minnesota, Mr. WAMP, Mr. HOLDEN, Mr. GOODLATTE, Mr. KIND, Mr. 

HILL, Mr. MCHENRY, Mr. KILDEE, Mr. ALTMIRE, and Mr. ROSS

SEPTEMBER 24, 2007 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing the establishment of Hunters for the Hungry 

programs across the United States and the contributions 


bajohnson on PRODPC61 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 79 RH 

of those programs efforts to decrease hunger and help 

feed those in need. 

Whereas Hunters for the Hungry programs are cooperative 

efforts among hunters, sportsmen’s associations, meat 

processors, State meat inspectors, and hunger relief organizations to help feed those in need; 

Whereas during the past three years Hunters for the Hungry 

programs have brought hundreds of thousands of pounds 

of venison to homeless shelters, soup kitchens, and food 

banks; and 

Whereas each year donations have multiplied as Hunters for 

the Hungry programs continue to feed those in need: 

Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) recognizes the cooperative efforts of hunt3 ers, sportsmen’s associations, meat processors, State 

4 meat inspectors, and hunger relief organizations to 

5 establish Hunters for the Hungry programs across 

6 the United States; and 

7 (2) recognizes the contributions of Hunters for 

8 the Hungry programs to efforts to decrease hunger 

9 and help feed those in need. 


bajohnson on PRODPC61 with BILLS

bajohnson on PRODPC61 with BILLS
House Calendar No. 119 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 79 

[Report No. 110

–343] 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing the establishment of Hunters for the 

crease hunger and help feed those in need. the contributions of those programs efforts to deHungry programs across the United States and 

SEPTEMBER 24, 2007 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed 


bajohnson on PRODPC61 with BILLS
No. 69311.

#### W. T. Grant Co. *v.*United States,

protest 62/19512 (New York).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of cycle horns similar in all material respects to those the subject of G. *Joannou Cycle Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(46 Cust. Ct. 172, C.D. 2253), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained..