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

___________ No. 96-2166

___________ Latham Riley Bell, * * Petitioner - Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Missouri. United States of America, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Respondent - Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: April 18, 1997 Filed: July 25, 1997

___________ Before LOKEN, MAGILL, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. In December 1990, Latham Riley Bell pleaded guilty to one count of possession withintent to distribute cocaine in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), and one count of using a firearm during and in relation to a drug trafficking crime in violation of 18 U.S.C
. § 924(c)(1). In December 1995, he filed this successive 28 U.S.C. § 225 5 motion seek ing to vacate the § 924(c)(1) conviction in the wake of Bailey v. Unite d Stat es , 116 S. Ct. 501 (1995). The district court granted the motion over th e government’s objection. The court’s remedy was not merely to vacate Bell’s guilty-2-

plea; it set aside the § 924(c)(1) conviction and ordered B ell released from prison. The government appeals. The di strict court’s decision was made without the benefit of our subsequen t decisions concerning Bailey -in spired collateral attacks on convictions that were based upon g uilty pleas. Accordingly, the district court’s orders of March 12, 1996, an d March 18, 1996, are vacated and the case is remanded fo r further consideration in light of Bousley v. Brooks , 97 F.3d 284 (8th Cir. 1996), and Walker v. United States , No. 96-2086, 1997 WL 298449 (8th Cir. June 6, 1997). A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
# C_2016222EN.01003702.xml

| 20.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 222/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222/37

---

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (3rd Chamber) of 12 May 2016 — Guittet v Commission

(Case F-92/15) (1)

((Civil service - Former official - Social security - Accident - Article 73 of the Staff Regulations - Closure of the procedure - Fixing of rate of partial permanent invalidity - Payment supplementary to the lump sum paid in the event of partial permanent invalidity - Implementation of a judgment annulling a measure - Incurable and total deafness))

(2016/C 222/48)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Christian Guittet (Cannes, France) (represented by: L. Levi and A. Tymen, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T.S. Bohr, Agent, and C. Mélotte, lawyer)

Re:

Application for annulment, first, of the decision reassessing the rate of the applicant’s partial permanent invalidity and, secondly, the decision partially rejecting the applicant’s complaint, and an application seeking compensation in respect of the material and non-material harm allegedly suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of 6 October 2014 closing the procedure opened under Article 73 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union following the accident of 8 December 2003, of which Mr Guittet was the victim, in so far as that decision fixed at 65 % the rate of partial permanent invalidity granted to Mr Guittet under Article 12 of the rules common to the institutions of the European Union on insurance against the risk of accident and of occupational disease, in the version in force prior to 1 January 2006; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of 6 October 2014 closing the procedure opened under Article 73 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union following the accident of 8 December 2003, of which Mr Guittet was the victim, in so far as that decision fixed at 65 % the rate of partial permanent invalidity granted to Mr Guittet under Article 12 of the rules common to the institutions of the European Union on insurance against the risk of accident and of occupational disease, in the version in force prior to 1 January 2006;

| 2. | Orders the European Commission to pay Mr Guittet the sum of EUR 5 000; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the European Commission to pay Mr Guittet the sum of EUR 5 000;

| 3. | Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

3.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 4. | Declares that the European Commission is to bear its own costs and orders it to pay the costs incurred by Mr Guittet. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Declares that the European Commission is to bear its own costs and orders it to pay the costs incurred by Mr Guittet.

---

(1)  OJ C 294, 7/9/2015, p. 83.

---
III 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 576 

Supporting the goals of Red Ribbon Week. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 20, 2006 

Ms. MURKOWSKI (for herself, Mr. AKAKA, Mr. BIDEN, Mr. CHAMBLISS, Mrs. 

DOLE, Mr. DOMENICI, Mr. GRASSLEY, Mrs. HUTCHISON, Mr. STEVENS, 

Mr. TALENT, Mr. FRIST, Mr. DEWINE, Mr. INOUYE, Mr. PRYOR, Mr. 

SALAZAR, Mr. SCHUMER, Ms. SNOWE, Mr. VITTER, and Mr. BURNS) submitted the following resolution; which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Supporting the goals of Red Ribbon Week. 

Whereas the Governors and Attorneys General of the States, 

the National Family Partnership, Parent Teacher Associations, Boys and Girls Clubs of America, and more 

than 100 other organizations throughout the United 

States annually cosponsor Red Ribbon Week during the 

week of October 23 through October 31; 

Whereas a purpose of the Red Ribbon Campaign is to commemorate the service of Enrique ‘‘Kiki’’ Camarena, a 

special agent of the Drug Enforcement Administration 

who died in the line of duty in 1985 while engaged in the 

battle against illicit drugs; 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
2 

•SRES 576 ATS 

Whereas the Red Ribbon Campaign is nationally recognized 

and is in its twenty-first year of celebration to help preserve the memory of Special Agent Camarena and further 

the cause for which he gave his life; 

Whereas the objective of Red Ribbon Week is to promote the 

creation of drug-free communities through drug prevention efforts, education, parental involvement, and community-wide support; 

Whereas drug and alcohol abuse places the lives of children 

at risk and contributes to domestic violence and sexual 

assaults; 

Whereas drug abuse is one of the major challenges that the 

citizens of the United States face in securing a safe and 

healthy future for the families and children of our Nation; 

Whereas emerging drug threats, such as the growing epidemic of methamphetamine abuse and the abuse of 

inhalants and prescription drugs, jeopardize the progress 

made against illegal drug abuse; and 

Whereas parents, youths, schools, businesses, law enforcement agencies, religious institutions, service organizations, senior citizens, medical and military personnel, 

sports teams, and individuals throughout the United 

States demonstrate their commitment to drug-free, 

healthy lifestyles by wearing and displaying red ribbons 

during this week-long celebration: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) supports the goals of Red Ribbon Week; 

3 (2) encourages children and teens to choose to 

4 live drug-free lives; and 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
3 

•SRES 576 ATS 

1 (3) encourages all people of the United 

2 States— 

3 (A) to promote the creation of drug-free 

4 communities; and 

5 (B) to participate in drug prevention ac6 tivities to show support for healthy, productive, 

7 and drug-free lifestyles. 

Æ 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

AARON D. JUDE,

Defendant.

Case No. 2:12-cr-207

Judge Peter C. Economus

ORDER

There being no objections, the Court hereby ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge’s Report and 

Recommendation (Dkt. 15) that the plea agreement and Defendant’s guilty plea be accepted. 

The Court accepts Defendant’s plea of guilty to Count One of the indictment, on which 

Defendant is hereby adjudged guilty. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

/s/ Peter C. Economus

Case: 2:12-cr-00207-PCE-TPK Doc #: 16 Filed: 12/04/12 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: <pageID>
No. 64346.

protests 195456-K, etc. (New York).

#### Abraham & Straus, a Division of the Federated Department Stores, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of candlesticks similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 62036, except that they are not plated with platinum, gold, or silver, nor colored with gold lacquer, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
Case No. 9,213.

#### The MARY HALE. GEIGER et al. v. The MARY HALE.

[5 Adm. Rec. 471.]

District Court, S. D. Florida.

March 3, 1856.

Salvage — Risk—Exposure — Amount — Seamen on Boarj) — Extraordinary Service.

[1. Eight vessels saved materials and cargo of *a*vessel lost on Keysal Bank, of the value of 835.364. The services were rendered in bad weather, and under circumstances of some exposure and risk to the salving vessels. *Hdd,*that the salvors were entitled to from 36 per cent, to 45 per cent, of the value of the property saved.]

[Cited in Baker v. The Slobodna. 35 Fed. 542.]

[2. The services of the mate and four men of the wrecked vessel in crossing the gulf in an open boat to procure assistance, being extraordinary and beyond the line of their duty, were salvage services, for which they were entitled to 8300. — 8100-to the mate, and 850 to each of the men.]

[This was a libel by John H. Geiger and others against the cargo and materials of the ship Mary Hale for salvage services.]

Wm. E. Haekley and S. J. Douglas, for li-bellants.

Winer Bethel, for respondent.

MARVIN, District Judge.

This ship, laden with cotton, from New Orleans bound to Trieste, was lost on Keysal Bank. The mate with four men, at the request of the master, crossed the gulf in an open boat, and brought information of the ship’s condition to the wreckers in this port. Eight wrecking vessels,within a few days proceeded to the wreck, and saved the ship’s materials and nine hundred and seventy bales of cotton. The ship’s materials and two hundred and seventy three bales of the cotton have been sold; the residue of the cargo and materials saved is 835,-364.37. These services were mostly rendered in bad weather, and under circumstances of some exposure and risk to the salving vessels; and, in my judgment, thirty six per cent, on the value is a reasonable salvage except as to the Relámpago, which vessel ought to be allowed forty-five per cent, on the amount saved by her.

The services of the mate and the four men in crossing the gulf in an open boat to procure assistance were extraordinary and beyond the line of their duty, and entitle them to compensation. One hundred difflars to the mate and fifty to each of the men is a reasonable compensation.
Exhibit 99.1


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         I, Gordon R. Arnold,  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 Sierra Monitor  Corporation on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly
period  ended March 31, 2003 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-QSB  fairly  presents  in all
material  respects the  financial  condition and results of operations of Sierra
Monitor Corporation.

         A signed original of this written statement required by section 906 has
been  provided to Sierra  Corporation  and will be  retained  by Sierra  Monitor
Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.

Date: May 9, 2003                                 By: /s/ Gordon R. Arnold
                                                      -------------------------
                                                      Gordon R. Arnold
                                                      Chief Executive Officer
                                                      Chief Financial Officer


                                                                   Page 15 of 15
Exhibit 32.2


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Argan,  Inc., a Delaware  corporation
(the "Company"),  on Form 10-QSB for the period ended,  April 30, 2006, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
I, Arthur F. Trudel,  Senior Vice President and Chief  Financial  Officer of the
Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to  Section  906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of  2002,  that  to the  best of my
knowledge:

      1.    The Report fully complies with the  requirements of Section 13(a) or
            15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      2.    Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
            respects,  the financial  condition and results of operations of the
            Company.


Date: June 13, 2006    By: /s/ Arthur F. Trudel
                            ------------------------------------------------
                                              Arthur F. Trudel
                            Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer




A signed  original of this document has been provided to the Company and will be
retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon request.
# EUR-Lex - 21999D0415(10) - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 21999D0415(10)

**Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 64/98 of 14 July 1998 amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement **

*
Official Journal L 100 , 15/04/1999 P. 0052 - 0053 *

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE

No 64/98

of 14 July 1998

amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, as adjusted by the Protocol Adjusting the Agreement on the European Economic Area, hereinafter referred to as "the Agreement", and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas Annex II to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 95/97 of 9 December 1997(1);

Whereas Council resolution of 8 July 1996 on cooperation between administrations for the enforcement of legislation on the internal market(2) and Council resolution of 8 July 1996 on legislative and administrative simplification in the field of the internal market(3) are to be incorporated into the Agreement,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The following points shall be inserted after point 12 (Council resolution of 16 June 1994 (94/C 179/01)) of Chapter XIX of Annex II to the Agreement: "13. 96/C 224/03: Council resolution of 8 July 1996 on cooperation between administrations for the enforcement of legislation on the internal market (OJ C 224, 1.8.1996, p. 3),

14. 96/C 224/05: Council resolution of 8 July 1996 on legislative and administrative simplification in the field of the internal market (OJ C 224, 1.8.1996, p. 5)."

Article 2

The texts of Resolution 96/C 224/03 and Resolution 96/C 224/05 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, which are annexed to the respective language versions of this Decision, are authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 15 July 1998, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the Agreement have been made to the EEA Joint Committee.

Article 4

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Communities.

Done at Brussels, 14 July 1998.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

F. BARBASO

(1) OJ L 193, 9.7.1998, p. 51.

(2) OJ C 224, 1.8.1996, p. 3.

(3) OJ C 224, 1.8.1996, p. 5.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 20, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 03-61087

Conference Calendar

 

DAVID WARD,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

GEORGE AGNEW,

Defendant-Appellee.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 3:03-CV-1054-BN

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

Before JOLLY, JONES, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

David Ward, Mississippi state prisoner # 42745, appeals

the 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) dismissal as legally frivolous

of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 lawsuit against George Agnew, retained

to serve as Ward’s counsel in a criminal matter. Ward contends

that the district court erred in dismissing his case because

Agnew deprived him of his Sixth Amendment rights. This court

reviews the district court’s dismissal for abuse of discretion. 

See Siglar v. Hightower, 112 F.3d 191, 193 (5th Cir. 1997). 
No. 03-61087

- 2 -

The district court concluded that Ward’s lawsuit was

foreclosed by Polk County v. Dodson, 454 U.S. 312, 325 (1981),

because Agnew was not acting under the color of state law for

the purposes of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 liability. The district court’s

reliance on Dodson was appropriate; and it is uncontested by

Ward on appeal. Since the allegations in Ward’s complaint were

squarely foreclosed by Dodson, the district court did not abuse

its discretion in dismissing his lawsuit as frivolous. See

Siglar, 112 F.3d at 193.

Because Ward has not shown that there is a nonfrivolous

appellate issue, his appeal is also dismissed as frivolous. 

See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2; Brinkmann v. Johnston, 793 F.2d 111, 112-13

(5th Cir. 1986). 

The dismissal of the appeal as frivolous and the

district court’s dismissal of Ward’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action

as frivolous both count as “strikes” under the three-strikes

provision of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons,

103 F.3d 383, 387-88 (5th Cir. 1996). Therefore, Ward is warned

that if he accumulates three “strikes,” he will not be able to

proceed in forma pauperis in any civil action or appeal filed

while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is

under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(g).

APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTIONS WARNING ISSUED.
No. 56155.

protest 173670-K (New York).

#### John J. Ryan & Sons, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           1,470
<SECURITIES>                                       201
<RECEIVABLES>                                   25,481
<ALLOWANCES>                                       163
<INVENTORY>                                     10,352
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                44,107
<PP&E>                                         280,750
<DEPRECIATION>                                 103,531
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 229,501
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           16,580
<BONDS>                                         29,636
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        10,259
<OTHER-SE>                                     150,568
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   229,501
<SALES>                                         26,620
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                26,747
<CGS>                                           11,946
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   11,946
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 6,301
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 404
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  8,096
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,832
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              5,264
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,264
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .51
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .51
        

</TABLE>
| (logo) WELLS FARGO | **Commercial Mortgage  Servicing**D1050-084, 8th Fl  401 South Tryon Street.  Charlotte, NC 28202  1-800-326-1334 |
|--------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

**ANNUAL STATEMENT OFCOMPLIANCE**

 

Reference is hereby made tothat certain Trust and Servicing Agreement dated as of March 1, 2016, by andamong DEUTSCHE MORTGAGE & ASSET RECEIVING CORPORATION, as Depositor, WELLSFARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Master Servicer and Special Servicer,WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee, and DEUTSCHE BANK TRUSTCOMPANY AMERICAS, as Certificate Administrator, Paying Agent and Custodian withrespect to Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, COMM  2016-787S(the "Agreement"). Capitalized terms used herein not otherwisedefined shall have the meanings assigned in the Agreement.

 

Pursuant to Section 11.07 ofthis Agreement, I, Daniel Bober, Executive Vice President of CommercialMortgage Services do hereby certify that:

 

1. A review of the activitiesof the Master Servicer during the period from March 1, 2016 through December31, 2016 (the “Reporting Period”), and of its performance per theAgreement during such period has been made under my supervision, and 

 

2. To the best of myknowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer has fulfilled all of itsobligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout theReporting Period.

 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, theundersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 28th day of February 2017.

 

/s/ Daniel Bober

Daniel Bober

Executive Vice President

Wells Fargo Bank

 

| Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. | (logo) Together we’ll  go far |
|------------------------|-------------------------------------|