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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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

May 27, 2005

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 04-40655

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

WILLIAM J. KRAR,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 6:03-CR-36-1

Before JONES, BARKSDALE, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

William J. Krar appeals his guilty-plea sentence for

possession of a chemical weapon in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 229

and 229A(a)(1). Krar argues that the enhancement of his sentence

pursuant to United States Sentencing Guidelines § 2M6.1(b)(3)

violates Supreme Court precedent, including Blakely v. Washington,

124 S. Ct. 2531 (2004), because the enhancement was an element of

the offense that should have been charged in the indictment. In

Blakely, the Supreme Court held that the Sixth Amendment prohibits
2

state sentences greater than “the maximum sentence a judge may

impose solely on the basis of the facts reflected in the jury

verdict or admitted by the defendant.” Blakely, 124 S. Ct. at

2537. In United States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct. 738, 749-50 (2005),

the Supreme Court held that the system of enhancements established

by the federal sentencing guidelines violates the Sixth Amendment

as construed in Blakely.

This court’s review is for plain error because Krar’s

Blakely/Booker argument is raised for the first time on appeal.

See United States v. Mares, ___ F.3d ___, No. 03-21035, 2005 WL

503715 at **7-8 (5th Cir Mar. 4, 2005), petition for cert. filed,

No. 04-9517 (U.S. Mar. 31, 2005). The enhancement of Krar’s

sentence under U.S.S.G. § 2M6.1(b)(3) was plain error because the

facts underlying the enhancement were found by the sentencing judge

under a mandatory guidelines system. See Mares, 2005 WL 503715 at

*9. Krar has not demonstrated, however, that the plain error

affected his substantial rights. See id. The district court

sentenced Krar to 135 months imprisonment, the top of the

applicable guideline range, while indicating concern about the

quantity and amount of bomb making material Krar possessed.

Krar also argues that his due process rights were

violated because the indictment did not allege the enhancement

under the sentencing guidelines, and, thus, he had no notice of

that charge against him. As Krar had actual notice that the

Government would seek the enhancement, there is no plain error.
3

See United States v. Alvarez-Moreno, 874 F.2d 1402, 1411 (5th Cir.

1989).

AFFIRMED.
No. 60400.

protests 253301-K and 253302-K (New York).

#### Paris Leather Co. *v.*United States,

*433Opinion, by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of hides and skins of the India water buffalo imported to be used in the manufacture of rawhide articles and that the issue is similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Max Rosenberg*v. *United States*(32 Cust. Ct. 295, C. D. 1616), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
IV 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 712 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the Senate should 

immediately change its rules and end the ‘‘modern’’ filibuster. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 22, 2018 

Mr. MESSER (for himself, Mr. CRAMER, Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia, Mr. 

BIGGS, Ms. CHENEY, Mr. GRIFFITH, and Mrs. BLACK) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Rules 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that 

the Senate should immediately change its rules and end 

the ‘‘modern’’ filibuster. 

Whereas the Senate rules first allowed the use of the filibuster in 1806 to ensure that the minority party in the 

Senate was heard and understood before a vote was 

taken on a particular issue; 

Whereas in 1917, the Senate adopted a procedure known as 

the cloture vote to end a filibuster if a supermajority of 

Senators voted to end debate; 

Whereas in 1975, the Senate created the ‘‘modern’’ filibuster 

when it changed its rules to allow other business to be 

conducted while a filibuster was underway, eliminating 

the need for an individual Senator to stand on the Senate 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 712 IH 

floor and make the case to their colleagues and the 

American people why a specific piece of legislation should 

not be debated and voted on; 

Whereas the filibuster has been used more than 1,300 times 

since 1917, with 413 of those times occurring from 

1917–1990 and more than 600 of those times occurring 

since 1990; 

Whereas the modern filibuster is not used to extend debate 

or stall a vote, but rather to block the Senate’s Motion 

to Proceed, preventing legislation from being debated or 

voted on at all; and 

Whereas during the 115th Congress, the House of Representatives has passed twelve appropriations bills to fund Government agencies for fiscal year 2018 but Senate Democrats have blocked each Government funding bill, preventing debate or a vote on a single measure: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep2 resentatives that the Senate should immediately change its 

3 rules to eliminate the modern filibuster that has allowed 

4 Senators to block debate on and passage of legislation, and 

5 has prevented the democratic process from working as the 

6 Founding Fathers intended. 

Æ 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
No. 61217.

protest 296200-K (New York).

#### Schultz Surgical Instrument Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the issues are the same in all material respects as those the subject of *John P. Herber & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(30 Cust. Ct. 193, C. D. 1519), the protest was dismissed, and the matter was remanded to a single judge sitting in reappraisement for determination of the value of the merchandise in the manner provided by law (28 U. S. C. § 2636 (d)).
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

SECTION 302 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, James D. Haggard, Chief Financial and Executive Officer, certify that:



1.

I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of AutoFund Servicing, Inc.;



1.

Based on my knowledge, this annual report does 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 annual report;



2.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;



3.

I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:



a.

designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;



b.

evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and



c.

presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;



4.

The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):



a.

all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and



b.

any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls;



5.

The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this annual report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.



Date: April 14, 2003



By:

/s/ James D. Haggard



James D. Haggard

Chief Financial and Executive Officerr
Exhibit 32

                       CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.
                 SECTION 1350 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


The  undersigned  officer  of  Ocean  Fresh  Seafood  Marketplace,  Inc.  hereby
certifies, to the best of his knowledge that:

1.       The accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the Company, for the
         annual period ended December 31, 2003, fully complies with the
         requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, 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:  August 23, 2004
                                          By: /s/ Robert G. Coutu
                                                  -------------------------
                                                  Robert G. Coutu, President
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

 

MIRIAN SCHVOM, et al.,

 Plaintiffs,

 v.

MCNEIL-PPC, INC. 

 Defendant.

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

INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF

ELECTRICAL WORKERS, LOCAL NO.

2270,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

MCNEIL-PPC, INC. 

 Defendant.

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

ANDREW BEHREND, 

 Plainitff,

 v.

MCNEIL-PPC, INC. 

 Defendant.

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

ROBERT K. ALDERMAN,

 Plainitff,

 v.

MCNEIL-PPC, INC. 

 Defendant.

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

CYNTHIA B. GOEPEL,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

MCNEIL-PPC, INC. 

 Defendant.

 

 CIVIL ACTION NO. 02-4093

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

 CIVIL ACTION NO. 02-4105

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

 CIVIL ACTION NO. 02-4149

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

 CIVIL ACTION NO. 02-4180

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

 CIVIL ACTION NO. 02-4197

O R D E R

AND NOW, this 6th day of March, 2003, it is hereby ORDERED that counsel shall

report to the court by a single jointly signed submission stating their respective positions regarding the

Case 2:02-cv-04093-MK Document 10 Filed 03/06/2003 Page 1 of 2
2

status of the above captioned matter by April 6, 2003. Counsel are requested to discuss settlement with

each other and their respective clients before reporting to the court.

BY THE COURT:

_________________________________

MARVIN KATZ, S.J.

Case 2:02-cv-04093-MK Document 10 Filed 03/06/2003 Page 2 of 2
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, April 19, 2017. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, April 19, 2017 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A17D0361. DEW PLUMBING, INC et al. v. R. PETER FISHMAN et al..
Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby DENIED.
LC NUMBERS: 13GR068579
### User validation required to continue..

----
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1121 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  1st Session

                               H. R. 1121

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

To designate the Federal building and United States courthouse located 
 at 18 Greenville Street in Newnan, Georgia, as the ``Lewis R. Morgan 
            Federal Building and United States Courthouse''.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1121

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To designate the Federal building and United States courthouse located 
 at 18 Greenville Street in Newnan, Georgia, as the ``Lewis R. Morgan 
            Federal Building and United States Courthouse''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The Federal building and United States courthouse located at 18 
Greenville Street in Newnan, Georgia, shall be known and designated as 
the ``Lewis R. Morgan Federal Building and United States Courthouse''.

SEC. 2. 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 section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference 
to the ``Lewis R. Morgan Federal Building and United States 
Courthouse''.

            Passed the House of Representatives May 4, 1999.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 659 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
   1st Session
H. RES. 659

Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to establish a point 
 of order against legislation that cuts Social Security, Medicare, or 
                           Medicaid benefits.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           December 12, 2017

Mr. Nolan submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 
                           Committee on Rules

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to establish a point 
 of order against legislation that cuts Social Security, Medicare, or 
                           Medicaid benefits.

    Resolved, That rule XXI of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives is amended by adding at the end the following new 
clause:
    ``13.(a) Point of Order.--It shall not be in order to consider any 
bill, joint resolution, amendment, amendment between the Houses, or 
conference report that would--
    ``(1) result in a reduction of guaranteed benefits scheduled under 
title II of the Social Security Act;
    ``(2) increase either the early or full retirement age for the 
benefits described in paragraph (1);
    ``(3) privatize Social Security;
    ``(4) result in a reduction of guaranteed benefits for individuals 
entitled to, or enrolled for, benefits under the Medicare program under 
title XVIII of such Act; or
    ``(5) result in a reduction of benefits or eligibility for 
individuals enrolled in, or eligible to receive medical assistance 
through, a State Medicaid plan or waiver under title XIX of such Act.
    ``(b) Waiver.--Paragraph (a) may be waived or suspended only by an 
affirmative vote of two-thirds of the Members, duly chosen and 
sworn.''.
                                 <all>
```
**[PROTECTIVE
      LIFE AND ANNUITY INSURANCE COMPANY LETTERHEAD]**














**EXHIBIT
      32(b)**





**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 Protective Life
      and
      Annuity Insurance Company (the “Company”) for the period ending June 30,
      2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I,
      Allen W. Ritchie, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the
      Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to
§ 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my
      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 result of operations of the Company.










/s/
      Allen W.
      Ritchie


Allen
      W.
      Ritchie


Executive
      Vice President and


Chief
      Financial Officer


August 15,
      2005








This
      certification accompanies the Report pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
      of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act
      of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of §18 of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
Exhibit 99.1

                               THE GSI GROUP, INC.
                             1004 E. Illinois Street
                           Assumption, Illinois  62510



May  10,  2004

Securities  and  Exchange  Commission
450  Fifth  Street,  N.W.
Washington,  D.C.  20549

Re:     Certification  pursuant  to  18  U.S.C.   1350,
     as  enacted  by  Section  906  of  the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of  2002
     ---------------------------------------------------------------------

Ladies  and  Gentlemen:
     In  connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
April  2,  2004  of The GSI Group, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Company"),
filed  with  the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the
"Report"),  the  undersigned  hereby  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.   1350, as
enacted  by  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,  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/  Craig  Sloan
Craig  Sloan
Chief  Executive  Officer



     /s/  Russell  C.  Mello
Russell  C.  Mello
Chief  Financial  Officer,
Secretary  and  Treasurer
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  The undersigned hereby certifies, in his capacity as Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Salem Communications Corporation (the Company), for purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that based on his knowledge: · the Quarterly report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2010 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  · the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. Dated: May 7, 2010By: /s/ EVAN D. MASYREvan D. MasyrSenior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.2**CERTIFICATION**     PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENT SET FORTH IN RULE 13A-14(b) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, ASAMENDED, AND SECTION 1350 OF CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE (18 U.S.C. SECTION1350), MICHAEL D. PERRY, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF VITRIA TECHNOLOGY,INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION (THE “COMPANY”) HEREBY CERTIFIES THAT, TO THE BEST OF HIS KNOWLEDGE,AS FOLLOWS:     The Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A for the period ended March 31, 2006, to which thisCertification is attached as Exhibit 32.2 (the “PERIODIC REPORT”), fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that theinformation contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.     INWITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has set his hand hereto as of this 15th day of May, 2006.     /s/ Michael D. Perry     Michael D. PerrySenior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer     A signed original of this written statement required by Rule 13a-14(b) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United StatesCode (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), has been provided to Vitria Technology, Inc. and will be retained byVitria Technology, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff uponrequest. This certification accompanies the Form 10-Q/A to which it relates, is not deemed filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filingof Vitria Technology, Inc. under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-Q/A), irrespective ofany general incorporation language contained in such filing.
No. 68633.

protest 64/1699 (Tampa).

#### Labels Unlimited, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of rayon labels similiar 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.