alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-41347 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus REYNALDO ACOSTA-GOMEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 4:99-CR-41-ALL

- - - - - - - - - - August 22, 2000 Before KING, Chief Judge, and POLITZ and WIENER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Reynaldo Acosta-Gomez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as required by Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Acosta has received copies of counsel’s motion and brief, but he has not filed a response. Our independent review of counsel’s Anders brief and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jeffrey Willsea, Appellant.

[635 NYS2d 568]

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: By failing to move to withdraw his plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction, defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that he did not voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently enter that plea *(see, People v Pellegrino,*60 NY2d 636). Defendant’s waiver of the right to appeal encompassed the right to challenge the sentence as harsh or excessive *(see, People v Allen,*82 NY2d 761). Were we to reach the issue on the merits, we would conclude that the sentence of consecutive maximum terms of imprisonment is not unduly harsh or severe, given the heinous nature of the crimes. (Appeal from Judgment of Niagara County Court, Hannigan, J.—Sexual Abuse, 1st Degree.) Present—Green, J. P., Lawton, Fallon, Doerr and Balio, JJ.
No. 58638.

protest 229445-K (New York).

#### Alintex, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

An examination of the record failing to disclose any evidence sufficient to overcome the presumption of correctness attaching to the collector’s action, the protest was overruled.
No. 54755.

#### Barth Guttman Textile Corp. and A. Sulka & Co. *v.*United States,

protests 149460-K and 147419-K (New York).

Opinion by

Rao, J.

The protests were dismissed.
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. R E N E L U N A - M A R A D I A G A , a kaR e ne A nt on i o L un a- M ar adi aga, D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t. N os . 09- 10452 09- 10453 D . C. N o s . 4 : 0 8 - c r - 0 1 0 6 6 - D CB 4 : 0 8 - c r - 5 0 0 9 0 - D CB ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt

f orthe D i s tr i c tof

A r i z ona D a vi d C . B ury , D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d F e brua ry15, 2011 ** B efo re: C A N B Y , F E RN A N D E Z , an d M . S M IT H , C i rcu i tJu d g es. I n the s e c ons ol i da t e d appe a l s , R e ne L una - M a r a di a gaappe a l s f r om the 92- m on th sent ence i m po se d fol l ow i ng hi s gui l ty- pl eaconv i ct i on for i l l egal re -e ntry af t erdepo rt at i on , i n v i ol at i on of 8 U . S . C . § 1 32 6, and from the 21 -m on th sent ence 

# FI LED FEB 23 2 011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS09- 10452 & 09- 10453 2 i m pos e d upon r e voc a t i on of s upe rvi s e d r e l e a s e . W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on unde r28 U . S. C. § 1 2 9 1 , a n d w e a f f i rm. L un a- M ar adi aga’ s s ol e argum enton appeali s thatthe di stri ctcourtabused i t s di s c r e t i on byde ny i ng hi s m ot i on f orac ont i nua nc e of

the s e nt e nc i ng a nd di sposi t i on hear i ng . T he di stri ctcourtdi d n otabuse i t s di sc re t i on , as i tgrant ed num e r ous othe rc ont i nua nc e r e que s t s a nd L una - M a r a di a gaf a i l s t o de m ons tr a t e a ny p r e ju d ic e a r is in g f

r o m th e d e n ia l. Se e U

n g a rv . Sa r a

fite , 37 6 U . S . 57 5, 58 9 (19 64 ); U ni te d State s v . Fl

y nt , 756 F . 2d 1352, 1358 ( 9th C i r . 1985) , a m e nde d by764 F . 2d 6 7 5 ( 9 th C ir . 1 9 8 5 ) ; s e e a ls o U n ite d S ta te s v . W

ills , 88 F . 3d 70 4, 71 1 (9th C i r. 1 9 9 6 ) .AF F I RME D.
#### LEON FOLKS, *ET AL.,*PLAINTIFFS-PETITIONERS, v. ABNER SCHREIBER, T/A CENTURY CREDIT CO., DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

*Messrs. Peslcin & O’Donnell*for the petitioners.

*Messrs. Greenberg, Shmerelson & Greenberg*for the respondent.

December 12, 1967.

Denied.
#### The First Reformed Presbyterian Church of York, *Respondent, v.*John L. Scott, Samuel Bowden and others, *Appellants.*

— Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, to be paid by the appellants. Opinion by Smith, P. J.
No. 46799.

#### Protests 900052-G, etc., of E. Butterworth & Co. (New York).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

The government examiner testifying in behalf of the plaintiff stated that the -commodity in question is soft jute thread waste, similar to that involved in Abstract 36301. The only government witness, a manufacturer of jute felt, disagreed with the examiner and stated that in his opinion the commodity is a hard jute waste in which the yarn is twisted tight, that is, sized waste, which he would describe as a treated hard thread. He also testified as to the manner in which the waste is used in the manufacture of jute felt but was unable to state what percentage of the time his industry so uses it and that they only use it when they are unable to obtain the soft jute thread waste. He also admitted that he had no knowledge of the use of the merchandise other than in his own trade. From the record it was held that the plaintiff had sustained its burden of proof and that the government had conceded that the instant merchandise is similar to that involved in Abstract 36301. In accordance therewith the court found the commodity to be paper stock and held it entitled to free entry under paragraph 1750 as claimed.
ACCEPTED

12-14-00302-CV

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS

TYLER, TEXAS

8/12/2015 5:18:55 PM

CATHY LUSK

CLERK

 FILED IN 12th COURT OF APPEALS TYLER, TEXAS 8/12/2015 5:18:55 PM CATHY S. LUSK Clerk
#### The Mayor, Etc., of New York, *Appellant, v.*Ira Davenport, *Respondent, Impleaded, etc.*

— Judgment affirmed. Opinion *Per Curiam.*
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 56 (Friday, March 23, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13827-13828]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-5340]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-280 and 50-281]


Virginia Electric and Power Company; Surry Power Station, Unit 
Nos. 1 and 2; Notice of Withdrawal of Application for Amendment to 
Facility Operating Licenses

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has granted 
the request of Virginia Electric and Power Company (the licensee) to 
withdraw its February 14, 2006, application for proposed amendment to 
Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-32 and DPR-37 for the Surry Power 
Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 (Surry 1 and 2), located in Surry County, 
Virginia.
    The proposed amendments would have revised the Technical 
Specifications (TSs) pertaining to restricting the minimum cooling time 
and burnup of spent fuel assemblies that will be placed into storage in 
the NUHOMS HD spent fuel dry storage system at Surry 1 and 2 starting 
in the summer of 2006. Specifically, the proposed amendments would add 
Figure 5.4-2 to the TSs to ensure that the NUHOMS HD canister remains 
subcritical during operations in the Surry 1 and 2 spent fuel pool.
    The Commission had previously issued a Notice of Consideration of 
Issuance of Amendments published in the Federal Register on May 16, 
2006 (71 FR 28390). However, by letter dated March 12, 2007, the 
licensee withdrew the proposed change.
    For further details with respect to this action, see the 
application for amendments dated February 14, 2006, and the licensee's 
letter dated March 12, 2007, which withdrew the application for license 
amendments. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the 
NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 
Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, 
Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically 
from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management Systems (ADAMS) 
Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, 
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.html. Persons who do not have access to 
ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in 
ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-
397-4209, or 301-415-4737 or by e-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#93e3f7e1d3fde1f0bdf4fce5"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="89f9edfbc9e7fbeaa7eee6ff">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 16th day of March 2007.


[[Page 13828]]


    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Siva P. Lingam,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II-1, Division of Operating 
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
 [FR Doc. E7-5340 Filed 3-22-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
No. 55350.

#### International Selling Corp. *v.*United States,

protest 139970-K (Portland, Oreg.).

Opinion by

Jphnso.n,. J.

- F.ollowing ;the authorities, cited in Abstract 15400 the' court dismissed the protest.
No. 64218.

protest 58/23551 (Los Angeles).

#### D. H. Grant *&*Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Rao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of waterproof cotton cloth similar in all material respects to that the subject of *United States*v. *D. H. Grant & Co., Inc.*(47 C.C.P.A. 20, C.A.D. 723), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 8410 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 8410

  To prohibit judges from issuing gag orders in certain circumstances.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 15, 2024

     Mr. Ogles (for himself, Mr. Good of Virginia, Mrs. Luna, Mrs. 
  Harshbarger, Mr. Crane, and Mr. Burlison) introduced the following 
       bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To prohibit judges from issuing gag orders in certain circumstances.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Let Trump Speak Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON GAG ORDERS.

    No judge of the United States or of any State may issue a gag order 
to the defendant in any criminal or civil proceedings except to prevent 
the disclosure of confidential information provided in discovery, to 
protect the privacy of minors, or as part of a plea agreement.

SEC. 3. RIGHT OF ACTION.

    Anyone issued a gag order in violation of this Act may commence a 
civil action seeking injunctive relief in the appropriate United States 
district court.

SEC. 4. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.

    Nothing in this Act may be construed as limiting a judge's 
authority to issue orders to officers of the court.
                                 <all>
```
#### William A. Sweet, Respondent, *v.*Edmund Merry and others, *Appellants.*

— Judgment and order reversed and new trial ordered, costs to abide event. Opinion by Bareer, J.
**Memo to Docket**

**Subject: Call Betwe en Freeport McMoRan Miami Inc**  **. (FMMI) Date: May 21, 2014**  **Participants:**

**Summary:** This call was requested by FMMI to discuss certain technical issues related to the proposed rule. EPA and FMMI discussed the following:  Verifying which units and control devices were subject to the 99.7% performance standard  Alternate method of measuring inlet sulfur for secondary capture control device  FMMI discussed construction schedules and reiterated request for a compliance date four ye ars from publication of final rule Name : Organization : Chris West Freeport- McMoRan Jeff Harrington AMEC (FMMI contractor) Margaret Peloso Vinson & Elkins ( outside counsel) Jay Spehar Freeport- McMoRan Todd Weaver Freeport- McMoRan Eugene Chen EPA R9 Geoffrey Glass EPA R9 Charlotte Withey EPA R9
#### William S. Maynard v. Thomas J. Hoskins and others.

A copy of tlie bond given on appeal in chancery, should be sent up by the Register with the record. It is not sufficient that the Register cortifies that au ap* poal bond was duly approved and filed.

This court will not dismiss an appeal duly taken, for a failure of the Register to send up a copy of the appeal bond; but a further return will bo ordered for tho purpose of bringing it up.

*Heard and decided April 17th.*
EXHIBIT 31.2CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TOSECTION 302 OFTHE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
I, John R. Bailey, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Global Energy Group,Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows ofthe registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrantand have:
 a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known tous by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, asof the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’sboard of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.
Date: September 29, 2004              /s/ John R. Bailey   John R. Bailey   President, Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, John A. Scarlett, M.D., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of
Tercica, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2004 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly
presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Tercica, Inc.



Date: August 16, 2004



By:

/s/ John A. Scarlett, M.D.John A. Scarlett, M.D.Chief Executive Officer




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



This certification accompanies the Form 10-Q to which it relates, is not deemed filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of Tercica, Inc. under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the
date of the Form 10-Q), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
Before the Third Division,

May 3, 1946

No. 51083.

#### Protests 113128-K, etc., of Louis Cohen et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Case number: 01-13-00648-CV

Style: In re Honorable Christopher Dupuy, Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus 

from State of Texas ex rel. Hughes v. Dupuy, cause 

number 13-CV-0701, pending in the 10th District court 

of Galveston County, Texas, the Honorable Robert J. 

Kern presiding.

Relator has filed a petition for writ of mandamus and an emergency motion 

to stay a show cause and contempt hearing scheduled for July 30, 2013 at 10:30 

A.M. Relator’s emergency motion is granted. The July 30, 2013 show cause and 

contempt hearing is stayed. The stay is effective until this mandamus proceeding is 

finally decided. 

The Court further requests that real party in interest respond to the petition. 

In its response, real party in interest is requested to include full briefing on (1) the 

trial court’s jurisdiction over the underlying civil removal suit, (2) real party in 

interest’s authority to bring and prosecute the underlying civil removal suit, and (3) 

the propriety of the order prohibiting media contact. 

The response, if any, is due on Monday, August 12, 2013. Rule 9.2(b) of 

the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, the “mailbox rule,” is suspended for the 

filing of the response, if any, in this case; the response must be received in the 

clerk’s office or filed in accordance with this Court’s rules on electronic filing no 

later than Monday, August 12, 2013. See TEX. R. APP. P. 2, 9.2(b).

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Harvey Brown

Acting for the Court

Date: July 29, 2013
EXHIBIT 32.3

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF

UCDP FINANCE, INC.

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In
connection with the quarterly report of UCDP Finance, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending October 1, 2006 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Robert K.
Gault, Jr. certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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 results of operations of the Company.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: November 14, 2006



By:

/s/ ROBERT K. GAULT, JR.Robert K. Gault, Jr. President (Principal Executive Officer)
```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 64 (Monday, April 4, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18555-18556]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-7903]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

Statement of Organization, Functions, and Delegations of 
Authority

    Part F of the Statement of Organization, Functions, and Delegations 
of Authority for the Department of Health and Human Services, Centers 
for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), (Federal Register, Vol. 75, No. 
56, pp. 14178, dated Wednesday, March 24, 2010) is amended to reflect 
updates to the functions for the Center for Strategic Planning (FCK).
    Part F. is described below:
     Section FC. 20. (Functions) reads as follows:

Center for Strategic Planning (FCK)

     Provide senior leadership over the strategic planning 
process and the development of CMS strategic goals, metrics, and plans.
     Direct the development of financial and health care trend 
analysis and management insight report to inform senior CMS leadership 
strategic decision making.
     Set priorities for CSP direction, budget, personnel, and 
staff development.
     Translate statistical data into information useful to 
agency leadership.
     Provide leadership to the development of performance 
dashboards and databases for key agency initiatives.
     Provide leadership in maintaining and ensuring quality of 
data resources needed for testing and evaluating demonstrations and 
innovations.
     Direct the development of enterprise business plans, 
process requirement for CMS post ACA

[[Page 18556]]

administrative, provider, and customer services process.
     Facilitate plans for IT Integration of data resources and 
data services.
     Coordinate policy analysis, development and execution for 
CMS.
     Build and maintain agency capacity to perform analysis of 
regional variation in the quality and cost of care.
     Conduct and manage surveys to capture information about 
beneficiary populations that our programs serve that is not available 
in the administrative data. This includes the Medicare Current 
Beneficiary Survey (MCBS) and the Medicare Health Outcomes Survey 
(HOS).
     Conduct and manage the Research Data Assistance Center 
(RESDAC), Research Data Distribution Center (RDDC) and Chronic 
Condition Warehouse (CCW) activities.
     Operationalize research-usable files for Medicare, 
Medicaid, and CHIP administrative data.

    Dated: March 24, 2011.
Marilyn Tavenner,
Principal Deputy Administrator and Chief Operating Officer, Centers for 
Medicare & Medicaid Services.
[FR Doc. 2011-7903 Filed 4-1-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4120-01-P
```