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

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-41037

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

EZEQUIEL GONZALEZ,

Defendant - Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:07-CR-84-1

Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Following his guilty plea, Ezequiel Gonzalez was convicted for conspiracy

to possess, with intent to distribute, more than 100 kilograms of marijuana, in

violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B) and 846. He was sentenced, inter

alia, to 97 months’ imprisonment, the low end of the advisory Guidelines

sentencing range. 

Gonzalez contends his trial counsel was ineffective because he failed to

timely debrief a Government agent prior to sentencing.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

June 5, 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: 11-41037 Document: 00511876453 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/05/2012
No. 11-41037

“[T]he general rule in this circuit is that a claim of ineffective assistance

of counsel cannot be resolved on direct appeal when the claim has not been

raised before the district court since no opportunity existed to develop the record

on the merits of the allegations”. United States v. Gulley, 526 F.3d 809, 821 (5th

Cir. 2008) (internal quotation marks omitted). As the Supreme Court has

stated, a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion is the preferred method for raising a claim of

ineffective assistance of counsel. Massaro v. United States, 538 U.S. 500, 504-05

(2003). “There may be cases in which trial counsel’s ineffectiveness is so

apparent from the record that appellate counsel will consider it advisable to

raise the issue on direct appeal.” Id. at 508. Accordingly, our court generally

resolves an ineffective-assistance claim on direct appeal only where the record

is sufficient to consider the claim’s merits. Gulley, 526 F.3d at 821.

The record is not sufficient to allow us to consider whether counsel’s

failure to pursue additional debriefing or to seek a continuance of the sentencing

proceedings constituted ineffective assistance. Because we conclude that “we

cannot fairly evaluate the claim from the record”, we decline to consider

Gonzalez’ ineffective-assistance claim on appeal, without prejudice, of course, to

his right to raise this claim in a timely § 2255 proceeding. Id.

AFFIRMED.

2

Case: 11-41037 Document: 00511876453 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/05/2012
# C_2018134EN.01000301.xml

| 16.4.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 134/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.4.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 134/3

---

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 20 February 2018 — Kingdom of Belgium v European Commission

(Case C-16/16 P) (1)

1

((Appeal - Consumer protection - Online gambling services - Protection of consumers and players and prevention of minors from gambling online - Commission Recommendation 2014/478/EU - EU act which is not legally binding - Article 263 TFEU))

(2018/C 134/03)

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Kingdom of Belgium (represented by: L. Van den Broeck, M. Jacobs and J. Van Holm, acting as Agents, assisted by P. Vlaemminck, B. Van Vooren, R. Verbeke and J. Auwerx, advocaten)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: F. Wilman and H. Tserepa-Lacombe, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 145, 25.4.2016.

1

---
# C_2016038EN.01007401.xml

| 1.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 38/74 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.2.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 38/74

---

Action brought on 4 December 2015 — Drugsrus v EMA

(Case T-717/15)

(2016/C 038/100)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Drugsrus Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: M. Howe and S. Ford, Barristers, and R. Sanghvi, Solicitor)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Medicines Agency

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the decision contained in the EMA’s email dated 8 October 2015, that Drugsrus is not permitted to rebrand as Eklira Genuair, a product imported as Bretaris Genuair; and |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision contained in the EMA’s email dated 8 October 2015, that Drugsrus is not permitted to rebrand as Eklira Genuair, a product imported as Bretaris Genuair; and

| — | order EMA to pay the applicant’s costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EMA to pay the applicant’s costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on a single plea in law.

The applicant contends that the EMA has erred in law in concluding that it is impermissible to rebrand centrally authorised medicinal products. It submits that under the rules of the TFUE on the free movement of goods, a parallel importer is permitted to repackage and/or rebrand a product for parallel distribution provided that such repackaging or rebranding is objectively necessary in order that the imported product can gain effective access to the market of the importing Member State.

---
# C_2017095EN.01001101.xml

| 27.3.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 95/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 95/11

---

Judgment of the General Court of 15 February 2017 — M. I. Industries v EUIPO — Natural Instinct (Natural Instinct Dog and Cat food as nature intended)

(Case T-30/16) (1)

1

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark Natural Instinct Dog and Cat food as nature intended - Earlier EU word marks INSTINCT and NATURE’S VARIETY - Genuine use of the earlier mark - Nature of the use - Article 42(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Rule 22(3) and (4) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95))

(2017/C 095/19)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: M. I. Industries, Inc. (Lincoln, Nebraska, United States) (represented by: initially by T. Elias, Barrister, and B. Cookson, Solicitor, and subsequently by M. Montañá Mora, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Zaera Cuadrado, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervening before the General Court: Natural Instinct Ltd (Camberley, United Kingdom) (represented by: C. Spintig, S. Pietzcker, lawyers, and B. Brandreth, Barrister)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervening before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 November 2015 (Case R 2944/2014-5), relating to opposition proceedings between M. I. Industries and Natural Instinct.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 26 November 2015 (Case R 2944/2014-5) in so far as it concludes that there is no genuine use of the earlier word mark INSTINCT; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 26 November 2015 (Case R 2944/2014-5) in so far as it concludes that there is no genuine use of the earlier word mark INSTINCT;

| 2. | Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3. | Orders EUIPO to bear, in addition to its own costs, half of the costs incurred by M. I. Industries Inc.; |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders EUIPO to bear, in addition to its own costs, half of the costs incurred by M. I. Industries Inc.;

| 4. | Orders M. I. Industries to bear half of its own costs; |
| --- | --- |

4.

Orders M. I. Industries to bear half of its own costs;

| 5. | Orders Natural Instinct Ltd to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

5.

Orders Natural Instinct Ltd to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 106, 21.3.2016.

1

---
Exhibit 10.17
 SEVENTH AMENDMENT
TO LOAN AGREEMENT
 Amendment Borrower Bank
  Loan Agreement
     Conditions Precedent




---



##### 



Amendments
 The Loans Section 1.1
 Loan Fees Section 1.7
 Loan Fees and
 Total Capital Base Section 4.15
 Amendments to Financial Covenants Sections 4.16(e) and (f)
   Representations; No Default Unmatured Event of Default
  2




---



##### 



Reaffirmation of Pledge Agreement Loan Documents
 Affirmation, Further References
 Merger and Integration, Superseding Effect
 Severability
 Successors
  3




---



##### 



Costs and Expenses
 Headings
 Counterparts
 Governing Law
 No Waiver
   4




---



##### 



BORROWER:
    WESTERN RESERVE BANCORP, INC.,
an Ohio corporationBy:
    /s/ Edward J. McKeonPrinted Name: Edward J. McKeonIts: President and Chief Executive OfficerBy:
    /s/ Cynthia A. MahlPrinted Name: Cynthia A. MahlIts: Senior Vice President and Chief       Financial
Officer BANK:
    TCF NATIONAL BANK,
a national banking associationBy:
    /s/ Adam C. SouthardPrinted Name: Adam C. SouthardIts: Relationship ManagerBy:
    /s/ Guy RauPrinted Name: Guy RauIts: Senior Vice President  5




---



##### 



EXHIBIT A  AMENDED AND RESTATED
PROMISSORY NOTE
 $2,000,000
    
    July 18, 2008
 Borrower Bank Loan Loans
  provided
 Default Rate
 LIBOR Rate Base Rate
    6




---



##### 



Loan Agreement
      7




---



##### 



WESTERN RESERVE BANCORP, INC.By:
    /s/ Edward J. McKeonTitle:  President and Chief Executive OfficerandBy:
    /s/ Cynthia A. MahlTitle:  Senior Vice President and           Chief Financial Officer  8




---



##### 



EXHIBIT B  AMENDED AND RESTATED
PROMISSORY NOTE
 $3,000,000
    
    July 18, 2008
 Borrower Bank Loan Loans
  provided
 Default Rate
 LIBOR Rate Base Rate
    9




---



##### 



Loan Agreement
      10




---



##### 



WESTERN RESERVE BANCORP, INC.By:
    /s/ Edward J. McKeonTitle:  President and Chief Executive OfficerandBy:
    /s/ Cynthia A. MahlTitle:  Senior Vice President and          Chief Financial Officer  11
# C_2018436EN.01003602.xml

| 3.12.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 436/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.12.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 436/36

---

Judgment of the General Court of 23 October 2018 — McCoy v Committee of the Regions

(Case T-567/16) (1)

((Civil Service - Officials - Social security - Occupational disease - Occupational origin of the disease - Fifth paragraph of Article 78 of the Staff Regulations - Invalidity Committee - Obligation to state reasons - Manifest error of assessment - Liability - Non-material damage))

(2018/C 436/50)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Robert McCoy (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: L. Levi, lawyer)

Defendant: Committee of the Regions (represented by: J. C. Cañoto Argüelles and S. Bachotet, acting as Agents, and by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

Application based on Article 270 TFEU and seeking, first, annulment of the decision of the Committee of the Regions of 2 December 2014 confirming the conclusions of the Invalidity Committee of 7 May 2014 by which it rejected the applicant’s request to recognise the occupational origin of the disease from which he is suffering and, secondly, to compensate for the non-material damage of EUR 25 000 which the applicant allegedly suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the Bureau of the Committee of the Regions of 2 December 2014 refusing to recognise the occupational origin of the disease resulting in Mr Robert McCoy's invalidity within the meaning of the fifth paragraph of Article 78 of the Staff Regulations. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the Bureau of the Committee of the Regions of 2 December 2014 refusing to recognise the occupational origin of the disease resulting in Mr Robert McCoy's invalidity within the meaning of the fifth paragraph of Article 78 of the Staff Regulations.

| 2. | Orders the Committee of the Regions to pay Mr McCoy the sum of EUR 5 000. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Committee of the Regions to pay Mr McCoy the sum of EUR 5 000.

| 3. | Orders the Committee of the Regions is to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Committee of the Regions is to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 7 of 11.1.2016 (case initially registered before the European Union Civil Service Tribunal under Case No F-139/15 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1.9.2016).

---
### Re: HPV 2 CAS 68479-98-1 Test Results from Albemarle and studies that Albemarle believes will satisfy requirements for E 2 endpoint David Brooks to: Paul Campanella 05/08/2012 09:24 AM Cc: John Schaeffer, Mark Townsend, Meena Sonawane Hi Paul and John, Attached is our contractor's report. The genotoxicity data (chromosomal aberration studies) submitted on March 1, 2012 by Albemarle and Lonza are adequate to satisfy the E2 test rule requirement. We have reviewed this report and it is acceptable.

May 2012 Update of 68479-98-1Final DA Review.docx Dave David Brooks Risk Assessment Division (7403M) High Production Volume Chemical Branch EPA East Room 6308N (202) 564-8603
Paul Campanella 03/28/2012 03:24:59 PM David, Attached is a submission from Albemarle....
From: Paul Campanella/DC/USEPA/US To: David Brooks/DC/USEPA/US Cc: John Schaeffer/DC/USEPA/US@EPA Date: 03/28/2012 03:24 PM Subject: HPV 2 CAS 68479-98-1 Test Results from Albemarle and studies that Albemarle believes will satisfy requirements for E2 endpoint
David, Attached is a submission from Albemarle. Daniel Lin is reviewing the A1 test for acceptability. Please give me an opinion on the information they submitted to meet the E2 endpoint. Also, do you have any updates for delivery dates on 

### HPV CAS 127-68-4 Tiarco -- study plans ? Paul J. Campanella, Ph.D. Chemical Information and Testing Branch Chemical Control Division U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, D.C. 202-564-8091
No. 65395.

#### American Machine & Fdry. (Hercules Division) et al. *v.*United States,

protests 60/12340, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues herein are similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *Schmidt Pritchard & Co. et al.*(47 C.C.P.A. 152, C.A.D. 750), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
# March 2015

# April 2015

# May 2015

# June 2015

# July 2015

# August 2015

# September 2015
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

JANICE and KENNETH DRY :

: CIVIL ACTION NO. 02-CV-4225

Plaintiffs, :

:

v. :

:

BAYER CORPORATION;

BAYER AG;

GLAXOSMITHKLINE, PLC;

GLAXOSMITHKLINE;

SMITHKLINE BEECHAM

:

:

:

:

:

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

:

Defendants. :

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

To the Clerk of the Court:

Kindly enter the appearances of Hope S. Freiwald, Aline Fairweather, Erin

Brennan and Kirstin J. Miller as attorneys for defendant SmithKline Beecham Corporation d/b/a

GlaxoSmithKline.

Respectfully Submitted,

_____________________________ _____________________________

Hope S. Freiwald Aline Fairweather

_____________________________ _____________________________

Erin Brennan Kirstin J. Miller

DECHERT PRICE & RHOADS

4000 Bell Atlantic Tower

1717 Arch Street

Philadelphia, PA 19103-2793

(215) 994-4000

Case 2:02-cv-04225-SD Document 8 Filed 09/20/2002 Page 1 of 1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

In the Matter of : No. 121 DB 2020 (No. 76 RST 2020)

:

AMY BETH JONES : Attorney Registration No. 80204

:

PETITION FOR REINSTATEMENT :

 FROM RETIRED STATUS : (Allegheny County)

O R D E R

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 7

th day of October, 2020, the Report and Recommendation of 

Disciplinary Board Member dated September 30, 2020, is approved and it is ORDERED 

that Amy Beth Jones, who has been on Retired Status, has never been suspended or 

disbarred, and has demonstrated that she has the moral qualifications, competency and 

learning in law required for admission to practice in the Commonwealth, shall be and is, 

hereby reinstated to active status as a member of the Bar of this Commonwealth. The 

expenses incurred by the Board in the investigation and processing of this matter shall 

be paid by the Petitioner.
* 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. 96-10762 Conference Calendar

JOHN MCCOY, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus ANN RICHARDS ET AL., Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:95-CV-179

- - - - - - - - - - October 24, 1996 Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * John McCoy, Texas state prisoner #399292, appeals the district court’s dismissal, with prejudice, of his civil rights suit pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). Although McCoy argues that he was denied access to legal materials and legal assistance to prepare his direct appeal, he has not alleged that he was denied access to the courts. Indeed, he asserts that his appointed counsel prepared and timely filed a brief withoutNo. 96-10762 - 2 - McCoy's legal input. McCoy’s access-to-the-courts assertion is without merit. See Lewis v. Casey , 116 S. Ct. 2174, 2180 (1996). Through appointed counsel, McCoy was provided the means for ensuring a reasonably adequate opportunity to present his defense. The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing McCoy’s claim as frivolous because it has no arguable basis in law. See Denton v. Hernandez , 504 U.S. 25, 31-34 (1992). McCoy’s appeal is without arguable merit and thus frivolous. See Howard v. King , 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Because the appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. We caution McCoy that any additional frivolous appeals filed by him will invite the imposition of sanctions. To avoid sanctions, McCoy is further cautioned to review any pending appeals to ensure that they do not raise arguments that are frivolous. McCoy’s motion to amend the record with his brief is DENIED. APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTIONS WARNING ISSUED; MOTION DENIED.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1367 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1367

   To require the Secretary of Energy to conduct a study and issue a 
   report that quantifies the energy savings benefits of operational 
    efficiency programs and services for commercial, institutional, 
                 industrial, and governmental entities.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 15, 2017

 Ms. Warren (for herself and Mr. Crapo) introduced the following bill; 
   which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                           Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To require the Secretary of Energy to conduct a study and issue a 
   report that quantifies the energy savings benefits of operational 
    efficiency programs and services for commercial, institutional, 
                 industrial, and governmental entities.

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

SECTION 1. STUDY AND REPORT ON ENERGY SAVINGS BENEFITS OF OPERATIONAL 
              EFFICIENCY PROGRAMS AND SERVICES.

    (a) Definition of Operational Efficiency Programs and Services.--In 
this section, the term ``operational efficiency programs and services'' 
means programs and services that use information and communications 
technologies (including computer hardware, energy efficiency software, 
and power management tools) to operate buildings and equipment in the 
optimum manner at the optimum times.
    (b) Study and Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Energy shall conduct a study 
and issue a report that quantifies the energy savings benefits of 
operational efficiency programs and services for commercial, 
institutional, industrial, and governmental entities, including Federal 
agencies.
    (c) Measurement and Verification of Energy Savings.--The report 
required under this section shall recommend methodologies or protocols 
for utilities, utility regulators, and Federal agencies to evaluate, 
measure, and verify energy savings from operational efficiency programs 
and services.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 99.2


                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 GSV, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002, as amended (the "Report"), I, Harvey
Doliner, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, 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; and

2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the Company's financial position and results of operations.





/s/ Harvey Doliner
--------------------
Chief Financial Officer
August 15, 2002
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### National Credit Union Administration

# TIME AND DATE: 

10:00 a.m., Thursday, November 16, 2023.

# PLACE: 

Board Room, 7th Floor, Room 7B 1775 Duke Street (All visitors must use Diagonal Road Entrance), Alexandria, VA 22314-3428.

# STATUS: 

Open.

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

1. Board Briefing, Share Insurance Fund Quarterly Report.

2. NCUA Rules and Regulations, Charitable Donation Accounts.

# RECESS:

 12:00 p.m.

# TIME AND DATE: 

2:00 p.m., Thursday, November 16, 2023.

# PLACE: 

NCUA Event Center, Lobby, 1775 Duke Street (All visitors must use Diagonal Road Entrance), Alexandria, VA 22314-3428.

# STATUS: 

Open.

# MATTER TO BE CONSIDERED:

1. Board Briefing, NCUA's 2024-2025 Budget.

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

Melane Conyers-Ausbrooks, Secretary of the Board, Telephone: 703-518-6304.

Melane Conyers-Ausbrooks,

Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 2023-25286 Filed 11-13-23; 11:15 am]

BILLING CODE 7535-01-P