alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 31.2**I, Joseph F. Spanier, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Breeze-Eastern Corporation;     2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this quarterly report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, resultsof operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisquarterly report;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:          (a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;          (b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;          (c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):          (a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;          (b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.        Date: August 9, 2007 /s/  Joseph F. Spanier   Joseph F. Spanier   Chief Financial Officer  
27
1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

EASTERN DIVISION 

SONTAY T. SMOTHERMAN, 

 

 Petitioner, Civ. No. 2:14-cv-972 

 Crim. No. 2:12-cr-055(3) 

 v. Judge Frost 

 Magistrate Judge King 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Respondent. 

ORDER 

 On April 24, 2015, the Magistrate Judge denied Petitioner’s Motion for Discovery, ECF 

No. 281, and recommended that Petitioner’s Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 276, and 

Motion for Relief from Judgment, ECF No. 280, be denied and that the Motion to Vacate

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, ECF No. 270, be dismissed. Order and Report and

Recommendation, ECF No. 287. Petitioner has objected to the recommendation. Objection, 

ECF No. 289. 

In recommending that the Motion to Vacate be dismissed, the Magistrate Judge reasoned 

that all of Petitioner’s claims had been presented to, and rejected by, the United States Court of 

Appeals for the Sixth Circuit on direct appeal. Order and Report and Recommendation, pp. 4-8. 

See United States v. Smotherman, 564 Fed.Appx. 209 (6th Cir. 2014); see also Smotherman v. 

United States, 134 S.Ct. 2863 (2014). Petitioner’s objections do not address this reasoning. 

Instead, Petitioner complains that the Magistrate’s Judge’s recommendation was untimely and he 

insists that his claims are meritorious. 

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), this Court has conducted a de novo review. For the 

reasons detailed by the Magistrate Judge, Petitioner’s Objection, ECF 289, is OVERRULED. 

Case: 2:12-cr-00055-GLF-TPK Doc #: 291 Filed: 05/06/15 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
2 

The Order and Report and Recommendation, ECF 287, is ADOPTED and AFFIRMED. 

Petitioner’s Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 276, and Motion for Relief from Judgment, 

ECF No. 280, are DENIED and the Motion to Vacate, ECF No. 270, is DISMISSED. 

The Clerk is DIRECTED to enter FINAL JUDGMENT. 

 /s/ GREGORY L. FROST 

 GREGORY L. FROST 

 United States District Judge 

Case: 2:12-cr-00055-GLF-TPK Doc #: 291 Filed: 05/06/15 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 9016 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 9016

    To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide for enhanced 
  punishments for offenders who commit sexual abuse while unlawfully 
                     present in the United States.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 11, 2024

  Mr. Ogles introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide for enhanced 
  punishments for offenders who commit sexual abuse while unlawfully 
                     present in the United States.

    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 ``Justice for American Women and 
Children Act of 2024''.

SEC. 2. INCREASED SENTENCE FOR RAPE BY A PERSON UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN 
              THE UNITED STATES.

    (a) Aggravated Sexual Abuse.--Section 2241 of title 18, United 
States Code, is amended--
            (1) in subsection (a), in the matter following paragraph 
        (2), by inserting ``, except as otherwise provided in this 
        section,'' before ``be fined under this title'';
            (2) in subsection (b), in the matter following paragraph 
        (2)(B), by inserting ``, except as otherwise provided in this 
        section,'' before ``be fined under this title'';
            (3) in subsection (c), by inserting ``, except as otherwise 
        provided in this section,'' before ``be fined under this 
        title''; and
            (4) by adding at the end the following:
    ``(e) Unlawfully Present Offenders.--Whoever commits an offense 
under this section while present in the United States without lawful 
status under the immigration laws (as such term is defined in section 
101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act) may be sentenced to 
death.''.
    (b) Aggravated Sexual Abuse.--Section 2242 of title 18, United 
States Code, is amended, in the matter following paragraph (3)--
            (1) by inserting ``, except as otherwise provided in this 
        section,'' before ``be fined under this title''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following: ``Whoever commits 
        an offense under this section while unlawfully present in the 
        United States/NOTE: present in the United States without lawful 
        status under the immigration laws (as such term is defined in 
        section 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act) may be 
        sentenced to death.''.
                                 <all>
```
# Adjusted Top 3

# Unadjusted Top 3

# Adjusted Top 4

# Unadjusted Top 4
Jump to navigation

            - About
            - Browse Collections
            - Advanced Search
            - Contact

## You are here

- Home  › 
- Browse Collections  › 
- U.S. Government Posters

# Voyager at Uranus: satellites

                - U.S. Government Posters

## Description

                    -           Title        
                    -  Voyager at Uranus: satellites 
                    -           Creator        
                    -  Jet Propulsion Laboratory (U.S.) 
                    -           Subject: Time        
                    -  1980-1990 
                    -           Subject: Place        
                    -  Uranus (Planet) 
                    -           Physical Description        
                    -  159 × 89 cm 
                    -           Number of Pages        
                    -  1 
                    -           Host institution        
                    -  University of Iowa. Libraries. Government Publications 
                    -           Digitization Specifications        
                    -  Scanned with Zeutschel OS 12000 Scanner at 300 ppi, 24-bit color. Archival tiff image available. 
                    -           Rights Management        
                    -  This is a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States. 
                    -           Contact Information        
                    -  Please contact the Government Publications Department at The University of Iowa Libraries: lib-govpub@uiowa.edu 
                    -           Item Type (AAT)        
                    -  Posters 
                    -           Item Type (IMT)        
                    -  jpeg 
                    -           Identifier        
                    -  NAS1.43_V94_54.jpg 
                    -           OCLC Collection Number        
                    -  429489521 

                - Contact the Libraries
                - Library locations & hours
                - News & Events
                - Help using the Libraries
                - Assistance for people with disabilities
                - Our diversity statement
                - Thank a Librarian
                - Web site/page feedback  OR  general suggestions
                -  

                -  
                - 100 Main Library (LIB)
                - 125 West Washington St.
                - Iowa City, IA 52242-1420
                - 319-335-5299 (Service Desk)
                - ©2020  The University of Iowa
                -
No. 47521.

#### Protest 81869-K of Traders Service Corporation (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

At the trial the plaintiff offered in evidence, without objection, a memorandum made by the deputy collector in charge of liquidations at the port in question and it was stipulated that the deputy collector, if called as a witness, would testify in Accordance with the statements made therein. The memorandum stated in part that the. appraiser had reported the goods in question as of American origin, having been made in Vermont. As the certificate of outward manifest (Jb’orm 4467) required by article 397 (a) (3), Customs Regulations of 1937, had not been furnished prior to liquidation, the said duty was assessed. After the expiration of the 90-day review period, the importer requested the collector’s office to waive the evidence of exportation under authority of' article 398. The memorandum stated that the collector’s office, being satisfied that the merchandise was of domestic origin and that no drawback had been paid, would have acceded to this request if the protest had still been reviewable by that office. It further stated that the collector’s office would have no objection to a stipulation being entered iñto that' the collector ’.was .willing t'o waive the evidence, and would now waive it, if permitted. The Government contended that the regulations of the Secretary'of the Treasury are mandatory, have the force of law, and that since they were not complied with the court is without power to grant any relief. The importer, however, contends the court has the power to sustain the protest and accept the waiver that has been made by the collector.

The entry papers showed that the importer filed a declaration of the foreign shipper and an affidavit of the owner but that the certificate of exportation was not filed. In view of *Stone*v. *United States*(7 Ct. Cust. Appls. 439, T.D. 37009) it was found that although the proof has been held to be mandatory under article 397, paragraphs 1, 2, and 3, the filing of the certificate of exportation under article 397(a) (3) only becomes a condition precedent to. free entry when the collector is not satisfied that the goods are of domestic origin, and that article 398, as amended, further liberalizes the regulations. It was therefore held that the Government’s contention that this court is without power to grant relief in this ease is without merit.

The protest was therefore sustained and the collector directed to reliauidate the entry and make refund of all duties taken.
# C_2008079EN.01003901.xml

| 29.3.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 79/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.3.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 79/39

---

Corrigendum to the notice in the Official Journal in Case F-103/07

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 45 of 22.12.2007, p. 45
  )

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 45 of 22.12.2007, p. 45

(2008/C 79/75)

The notice in the OJ in Case F-103/07 Duta v Court of Justice is to be read as follows:

Duta

Court of Justice

‘Action brought on 5 October 2007 — Duta v Court of Justice

(Case F-103/07)

(2006/C 000/01)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Radu Duta (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: F. Krieg, lawyer)

Defendant: Court of Justice of the European Communities

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Tribunal should:

| — | annul the contested decisions, |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decisions,

| — | refer the case back to the competent authority, |
| --- | --- |

—

refer the case back to the competent authority,

| — | order the defendant to pay the sum of EUR 1 as damages, |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the sum of EUR 1 as damages,

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

By his action, the applicant challenges the rejection of his candidature for a post of Legal Secretary to a judge of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities. The rejection took place by circular letter of 24 January 2007, although the judge in question had previously shown a lively interest in the applicant's candidature.

The applicant pleads, first, the nullity of the decision to reject his complaint. It was dealt with by the “Committee of the Court of First Instance with power to determine complaints” the composition of which does not meet the requirements for a fair hearing as defined by Article 6(1) of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The members of the Court of First Instance sitting as that committee cannot determine with complete impartiality cases concerning one of their colleagues.

Secondly, the applicant pleads that he was the victim of discrimination. The judge in question did not exercise his or her discretion reasonably.

Finally, the applicant submits that, in any event, the contested decisions infringe the general principles of transparency, good faith and the protection of legitimate expectations.’.

---
No. 47497.

#### Protest 60625-K/90400 of N. Shure Co. (Chicago).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of Abstract 35129 the mechanical mice in question were held dutiable at 45 percent under paragraph 397 as claimed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                       3,677,594
<SECURITIES>                                 5,501,311
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,746,535
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (206,822)
<INVENTORY>                                  5,201,030
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            18,854,100
<PP&E>                                      14,333,385
<DEPRECIATION>                             (8,995,217)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              25,283,506
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,504,760
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        41,205
<OTHER-SE>                                  20,833,605
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                25,283,506
<SALES>                                     34,452,727
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            34,020,807
<CGS>                                       20,870,926
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               31,778,293
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              61,997
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              3,052,414
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,197,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,855,414
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.95
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.95
        

</TABLE>
JAMES DOUG MCCRAY

,

Petitioner,

v.

FLORIDA COMMISSION ON
OFFENDER REVIEW

,

Respondent. ___________________________/ IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
DISPO SITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 16

- 2521

Opinion filed December 8, 2016.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari

-- Original Jurisdiction

.

Seth E. Miller, Tallahassee , for Petitioner.

Rana Wallace, General Counsel, and Mark J. Hiers, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Commission on Offender Review, Tallahassee , for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari is denied on the merits

.

ROBERTS, C.J., ROWE and WINSOR, JJ.

, CONCUR.
Case No. 9,885.

#### In re MOULTON et al.

[4 Pac. Law Rep. 127.]

District Court, D. California.

Oct. 1, 1872.

Bankruptcy — •'Priokitv op Lip.v« — F' aot).

[In the matter of Moulton & Masson, bankrupts.] Motion by judgment creditor to dissolve injunction.

M. G. Cobb, for assignee in bankruptcy.

Thomas V. O’Brien, for judgment creditor.

HOFFMAN, District Judge.

An execution levy upon judgment obtained without fraud or collusion in a state court prior to institution of bankruptcy proceedings gives a lien, under sections 14 and 20 of the bankrupt act [14 Stat.- 522, 526], that must first be satisfied. Evidence that the judgment was against ’’ a partnership, ’ though only one partner was ‘ served; that it was in favor of an assignee who had paid no .consideration for the assigned accounts upon which the judgments were obtained; that- -the judgment creditor had offered one of the judgment debtors (subsequently bankrupt) 25 per cent, of the judgment to consent to an immediate sale under execution; that before entry of judgment another creditor threatened to put defendants (afterwards bankrupts) in bankruptcy unless the plaintiff would discontinue suit or divide proceeds, the plaintiff thereupon promising to discontinue (other evidence being offered to show that the conversation last mentioned between plaintiff and creditor took place after judgment and levy), — evidence of such circumstances does not establish such a case of fraud, under the bankrupt act, as would authorize interference of a court of bankruptcy. Injunction dissolved.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

United States of America

v. 2:12-cr-222

Antonio Santiago Rodriguez 

ORDER

There being no objections, the court hereby adopts the Report

and Recommendation of the magistrate judge (Doc. 19) that the

defendant’s guilty plea be accepted. The court accepts the

defendant’s plea of guilty to Count 1 of the information, and he is

hereby adjudged guilty on that count. The court will defer the

decision of whether to accept the plea agreement until the

sentencing hearing.

Date: December 4, 2012 s\James L. Graham 

 James L. Graham

 United States District Judge

Case: 2:12-cr-00222-JLG-EPD Doc #: 20 Filed: 12/04/12 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: <pageID>
# C_2007283EN.01001802.xml

| 24.11.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 283/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.11.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 283/18

---

Action brought on 12 September 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Sweden

(Case C-419/07)

(2007/C 283/33)

Language of the case: Swedish

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: K. Mojzesowicz and V. Bottka, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Kingdom of Sweden

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | Declare that, by failing correctly to implement Article 2 of Directive 2002/77/EC of 16 September 2002 on competition in the markets for electronic communications networks and services (1) (the Competition Directive), the Kingdom of Sweden has failed to fulfil its obligations thereunder; |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare that, by failing correctly to implement Article 2 of Directive 2002/77/EC of 16 September 2002 on competition in the markets for electronic communications networks and services (1) (the Competition Directive), the Kingdom of Sweden has failed to fulfil its obligations thereunder;

1

| — | order the Kingdom of Sweden to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Kingdom of Sweden to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The digital broadcasting licences issued by the Swedish Government are State measures which, inter alia, regulate the use of digital broadcasting services and thus indirectly the supply of such services in the Kingdom of Sweden. The requirement in the currently valid licences that the licence holder is to comply with section 2 of the cooperation agreement indirectly gives the State company Boxer a monopoly for access control services (including encryption), contrary to Article 2(1) of the Competition Directive. The retention of the obligation to comply with that section of the cooperation agreement thus prevents undertakings interested in offering a complete range of digital broadcasting services from enjoying the rights which Article 2(2) and (3) is intended to guarantee to them. The Commission therefore notes that Sweden has failed correctly to implement the Competition Directive in its national legal order with regard to digital transfer and broadcasting services over the terrestrial network.

inter alia

---

(1)  OJ 2002 L 249, p. 21.

1

---
Before the Third Division,

April 24, 1952

No. 56587.

protests 471949-G, etc. (New York).

#### R. U. Delapenha Co. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of grenadine the same in all material respects as that the subject of *La Manna, Azema & Farnan, Inc.*v. *United States*(39 C. C. P. A. 44, C. A. D. 461), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.