alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 21-10767

Summary Calendar

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Jose Medina-Fuerte, 

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:20-CR-158-1

Before Southwick, Oldham, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jose MedinaFuerte has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance 

with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 

F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Medina-Fuerte has not filed a response. We have 

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited 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 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 3, 2022

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 21-10767 Document: 00516223041 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/03/2022
No. 21-10767

2

reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected 

therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no 

nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for 

leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further 

responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. 

R. 42.2.

Case: 21-10767 Document: 00516223041 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/03/2022
Before the First Division,

October 3, 1945

No. 50548.

#### Protests 989246-G, etc., of Frankel Importing Co. (New York).

*285Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

It was stipulated that certain items of the merchandise consist of colorless transparent glass beads similar in all material respects to those the'subject of Abstract 39360, and that other items consist of beads the same as those involved in *Eitinger Bead Co.*v. *United States*(13 Cust. Ct. 50, C. D. 867). In accordance therewith the merchandise was held properly dutiable at 35 percent under paragraph 1503, or at 20 percent under the same paragraph as modified by T. D. 49458.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-1961

JOHN PAUL TURNER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

RANDY FISHER, Sheriff of Augusta County, Virginia; BERNARD MURPHY, City Manager, Staunton,

Virginia,

Defendants - Appellees.

No. 99-1964

JOHN PAUL TURNER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

U.S. DRUG ENFORCEMENT AGENCY,

Defendant - Appellee.
2

No. 99-1965

JOHN PAUL TURNER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA; COUNTY OF AUGUSTA; AUGUSTA COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District

Judge. (MISC-98-50-R, MISC-99-4, MISC-99-50-7)

Submitted: October 21, 1999 Decided: October 29, 1999

Before WIDENER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John Paul Turner, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
3

PER CURIAM:

John Paul Turner appeals the district court’s orders denying

his motions for reconsideration. We have reviewed the records and

the district court’s opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeals on the reasoning of the district

court. See Turner v. Fisher, No. MISC-98-50-R (W.D. Va. June 10,

1999); Turner v. DEA, No. MISC-99-4 (W.D. Va. June 10, 1999);

Turner v. United States, No. MISC-99-50-7 (W.D. Va. June 21, 1999).

We deny the motions to proceed in forma pauperis and for appointment of counsel and dispense with oral argument because the facts

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
---

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Frederick Vandenberg, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
  1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
  that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Destiny Media Technologies, Inc. for
  the year ended August 31, 2009 fully complies with the requirements of Section
  13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that
  the information contained in the Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents,
  in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
  of Destiny Media Technologies, Inc. (the Company)



| | By:    | /s/ Fred
      Vandenberg
| | ------ | -------------------------
| |        |                          
| | Name:  | Frederick Vandenberg     
| |        |                          
| | Title: | Chief Financial Officer  
| |        |                          
| | Date:  | November 30, 2009        



This written statement is being furnished to the Securities
  and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to the Companys Annual Report on
  Form 10-K. A signed original of this statement 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.

This certification accompanies this Annual Report on Form
  10-K pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not,
  except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for
  purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 10934, as amended (the
  Exchange Act). Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated
  by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or
  the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates
  it by reference.



---
Before the Third Division,

April 3, 1952

No. 56533.

protests 153121-K, etc. (New York).

#### Belgard & Frank, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

It was stipulated that the Federal Reserve bank certified dual rates of exchange for the currency involved in the liquidation of the entries for the dates of exportation of the merchandise covered by the entries and that the circumstances relating to the liquidation of the said entries are similar in all material respects to those in Abstract 54732. In view of this stipulation and following the cited decision it was held that the currency of the invoices covered by certain enumerated entries should have been converted in the manner directed by the judgment of this court in said Abstract 54732, in accordance with Bureau of Customs Circular Letter No. 2675, dated October 19, 1949.
No. 59095.

protest 229711-K (New York).

#### William L. Bane & Co. *v.*United States,

Johnson, Judge:

The merchandise involved in this case consists of a papier-máché tray imported from England, together with other articles, on or about November 10, 1952. It was entered as free of duty under paragraph 1811 of the Tariff Act of 1930 as an antique, but was assessed with duty at 12J4 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 1403 of said tariff act, as modified by the Annecy Protocol of Terms of Accession to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, T. D. 52373, and the President’s proclamation of May 13, 1950, T. D. 52476, as a manufacture of papier máché, not specially provided for. It was also assessed with additional duty of 25 per centum ad valorem under section 489 of said tariff act, as an article described in paragraph 1811, imported for sale, and rejected as unauthentic in respect to the antiquity claimed as a basis for free entry. Protest is made against the assessment of such additional duty on the ground that the article was imported for the personal use of an employee of the importer.

*383The pertinent portion of said section 489 provides:

> * * * If any article described in paragraph 1811 and imported for sale is rejected as unauthentic in respect to the antiquity claimed as a basis for free entry, there shall be imposed, collected, and paid on such article, unless exported under customs supervision, a duty of 25 per centum of the value of such article in addition to any other duty imposed by law upon such article.

> At the trial, there were offered and received in evidence, without objection, the entry, the invoice, and the collector’s letter of transmittal. Counsel for the plaintiff also made a statement of the facts of the case, apparently intended as an oral stipulation, to which no objection was'made by the Government.

The collector’s memorandum, which is in evidence, states:

> Note papier mache tray was entered by importer as *forsale*[sic]. Note appraiser described same as not produced prior to 1830 and hence it was subject o [sic] 25% duty under section 489 of the Act of 1930. Had the affidavits from Vernay and Conklin, been before the Collector within the 90 day period provided for by section 514 of the Act of 1930, the Collector would have waived the 25% penalty under section 489 of the Act of 1930. B Fogelman

On the basis of this statement and the claim made in the protest, we conclude that the tray in question was not imported for sale. Consequently, it is not subject to an additional duty under section 489, *supra,*which is expressly limited to articles rejected under paragraph 1811 and imported for sale. *Mrs. Kimball G. Colby*v. *United States,*62 Treas. Dec. 571, T. D. 46010; *Wm. A. McMahan*v. *United States,*33 Cust. Ct. 354, Abstract 58371.

The protest is sustained and judgment will be rendered for the plaintiff.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8468 

To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to terminate the eligibility 

of certain individuals for student loan forgiveness, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 21, 2024 

Mr. YAKYM introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to terminate 

the eligibility of certain individuals for student loan forgiveness, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘No Debt Forgiveness 

5 for Self-Centered Pupils at Overpriced Institutions Lack6 ing Effectively Disciplined Students Act’’ or the ‘‘No Debt 

7 Forgiveness for SPOILED Students Act’’. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 8468 IH

1 SEC. 2. TERMINATION OF LOAN FORGIVENESS ELIGIBILITY 

2 FOR CERTAIN EXPULSIONS OR FIRINGS. 

3 Part G of title IV of the Higher Education Act of 

4 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1088 et seq.) is amended by adding at 

5 the end the following: 

6 ‘‘SEC. 494. TERMINATION OF LOAN FORGIVENESS ELIGI7 BILITY FOR CERTAIN EXPULSIONS OR 

8 FIRINGS. 

9 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Beginning on the date of the en10 actment of this section, a covered individual who is ex11 pelled or fired, as applicable, from an institution of higher 

12 education for a reason described in subsection (b)— 

13 ‘‘(1) shall not be eligible, with respect to any 

14 loan received under this title, for any loan forgive15 ness, cancellation, or discharge programs under this 

16 Act or any other provision of law; and 

17 ‘‘(2) shall repay such a loan under a standard 

18 repayment plan under section 455(d)(1)(A), based 

19 on a 10-year repayment period. 

20 ‘‘(b) REASONS DESCRIBED.—The reasons for expul21 sion or firing are as follows: 

22 ‘‘(1) Hate crime. 

23 ‘‘(2) Disorderly conduct. 

24 ‘‘(3) Trespassing. 

25 ‘‘(4) Creating a public disturbance. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 8468 IH

1 ‘‘(5) Violating titles IV or VI of the Civil Rights 

2 Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000a et seq.). 

3 ‘‘(c) COVERED INDIVIDUAL DEFINED.—For purposes 

4 of this section, the term ‘covered individual’ means, with 

5 respect to an institution of higher education— 

6 ‘‘(1) an enrolled student; and 

7 ‘‘(2) a faculty member.’’. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 32.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

     Pursuant  to  Section  906 of the  Public  Company  Accounting  Reform  and
Investor  Protection  Act of 2003 (18 U.S.C.ss.  1350,  as adopted),  I, Claudio
Giamascio,  Chief Executive  Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
hereby certifiy that, to the best of his or her knowledge:

     1. The Company's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December
31 2003,  and to which this  Certification  is  attached  as  Exhibit  32.1 (the
"PERIODIC  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 Periodic Report fairly presents, in all
material  respects,  the  financial  condition  of the Company at the end of the
period  covered by the Periodic  Report and results of operations of the Company
for the period covered by the Periodic Report.

         Dated: March 28, 2004


         S/Claudio Gianascio
         ------------------------
         Claudio Gianascio
         CEO & CFO

THIS  CERTIFICATION   ACCOMPANIES  THIS  REPORT  PURSUANT  TO  SS.  906  OF  THE
SARBANES-OXLEY  ACT OF 2003 AND SHALL NOT BE DEEMED  "FILED" BY THE  COMPANY FOR
PURPOSES OF SECTION 18 OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED.
No. 45049.

#### Protests 36193-K, etc., of Dan Brechner & Co. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the opera glasses are the same as those the subject of *Woolworth*v. *United States*(2 Cust. Ct. 1, C. D. 74) the claim at 35 percent under paragraph 228 (b) by virtue of T. D. 48316 was sustained.
<PAGE>


                                                                   Exhibit 10.51


_________________________________CREDIT DU NORD_________________________________

AGENCE DE MASSY ENTREPRISES
2 TER, AVENUE DE FRANCE                      [date stamp]  RECEIVED NOV. 4, 1999
BP 84
91303 MASSY CEDEX
Tel: 01 69 93 85 00
Fax: 01 69 93 85 10
                                                     ROWECOM FRANCE
                                                     VILLEBON SUR YVETTE
                                                     RUE DE LA PRAIRIE
                                                     91 871 PALAISEAU CEDEX

                              ATTN: MR. LUC PRUDHON

                              Massy, 10/29/1999

         Dear Sirs:

         We are pleased to send to you the agreement of our Committee on the
following lines of credit:

                  *   Overdraft                 10 MF        EONIA + 0.50%
                  *   Seasonal credit:
                               - 70 MF              from 12/1/1999 to 2/29/2000
                               - 30 MF              from 3/1/2000 to 5/31/2000
                               - nothing            beginning 6/1/2000

                               utilization by notes from 1 to 3 months minimum
                               1 MF
                               Conditions: Euribor 1 to 3 months + 0.40%


                  GUARANTEES:

                  - letter of intent from the ROWECOM INC. parent company
                  - Dailly transfer as guarantee.


                  It is our sincere hope that we have met your expectations in
view of strengthening our commercial relationship.

                  Sincerely,

                                                     [signature]
                                                     Pascale Le Feunteun
                                                     Business Clientele Advisor






[handwritten] Doc. 16 = Ex. 10.40
Exhibit 31.1 

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 

18 U.S.C. SECTION1350 

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO 

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 

 

I, JohnR. Tuttle, President and Chief Executive Officer of DayStar Technologies, Inc., certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of DayStar Technologies, Inc. for the period ended September 30, 2005; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact 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, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly presentin all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 

 

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, 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 report is being prepared;

 

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

 

(c) Disclosed in this report any change inthe registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and 

 

5. The registrant’s othercertifying 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 functions): 

 

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses inthe design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

 

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date: November 14, 2005
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 09-1143

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee, 

 v. 

BARBARA HUGHES, 

 Claimant – Appellant, 

 and 

DAVID KELLY, JR., a/k/a Panama, 

 Defendant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District 

Judge. (2:07-cr-00014-RAJ-TEM-1) 

Submitted: August 20, 2009 Decided: August 24, 2009 

Before WILKINSON and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, 

Senior Circuit Judge. 

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Barbara Hughes, Appellant Pro Se. Sherrie Scott Capotosto, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2 

PER CURIAM: 

Barbara Hughes appeals the district court’s order 

denying her motion for reconsideration of its forfeiture order. 

We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. 

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district 

court. United States v. Hughes, No. 2:07-cr-00014-RAJ-TEM-1 

(E.D. Va. Jan. 15, 2009). We dispense with oral argument 

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented 

in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process. 

AFFIRMED
(Reap. Dec. 8731)

#### Continental Merchandise Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Entry No. 788461-1/2.

(Decided January 17, 1957)

*Siegel, Mandell & Davidson*for the plaintiff.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Wilson, Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, subject to the approval of the Court, that

> (1) Said merchandise consists of binoculars and leather carrying cases which in *Iíerber*v. *United States*C. D. 1519, this Court held to be subject to appraisement separately according to the value of each class of articles.

> (2) At the time of exportation of such merchandise to the United States, the price at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities in the ordinary course of trade for exportation to the United States, the foreign value of such or similar merchandise being no higher, is in United States currency as set forth in the invoice embraced in the entry above enumerated, plus cases and packing as invoiced.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that this case may be submitted on the foregoing stipulation.

On the agreed facts I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the binoculars and leather carrying cases here involved, and that such values were in United States currency as set forth in the invoice embraced in the entry.

Insofar as the appeal relates to all other merchandise, it is dismissed.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
----

**EXHIBIT 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

     In  connection  with the  Annual  Report  of IntelGenx Technologies Corp.(the "Company")  on Form 10-KSB for the period  ending  December 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"), I, Horst Zerbe, Chief Executive Office r of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

     (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/ Horst Zerbe-------------------------------Horst Zerbe Chief Executive Officer

March 29, 2007

----