alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.  No. 00-7080

LARRY LEVEL MCCONNEYHEAD,

Defendant-Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte.

Graham C. Mullen, Chief District Judge.

(CR-93-215, CA-00-249-3-1-MU)

Submitted: December 20, 2000

Decided: January 24, 2001

Before WILKINS and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and

HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

COUNSEL

Larry Level McConneyhead, Appellant Pro Se. Gretchen C.F. Shappert, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c). 
OPINION

PER CURIAM: 

Larry Level McConneyhead seeks to appeal the district court’s

order dismissing his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West

Supp. 2000). McConneyhead asserted claims of ineffective assistance

of counsel and sentencing guidelines calculations in his 28 U.S.C.A.

§ 2255 motion that he fails to raise on appeal to this court. Under

Fourth Circuit Local Rule 34(b), McConneyhead has waived his right

to appellate review of these claims. 

In his informal appellate brief, McConneyhead asserts for the first

time that his sentence violates Apprendi v. New Jersey, ___ U.S. ___,

120 S. Ct. 2348 (2000). Assuming without deciding that this claim is

properly before us, it is without merit. Apprendi requires that, "[o]ther

than the fact of a prior conviction, any fact that increases the penalty

for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury, and proved beyond a reasonable doubt." Id. at 2362.

McConneyhead’s sentence was less than the statutory maximum he

faced. 

Second, McConneyhead asserts he has been unconstitutionally

deprived of access to the courts based on the inadequacy of his prison’s law library. This claim is not properly before us; rather it must

be pursued in a civil rights action that challenges McConneyhead’s

conditions of confinement. We express no opinion as to the merit of

this claim. 

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the

appeal. 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.

DISMISSED

2 UNITED STATES v. MCCONNEYHEAD
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



I, Mary M. Kabacinski, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of School Specialty, Inc., certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that to the knowledge of the undersigned:



| | 1. | The Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended April 24, 2004 (the Report) which this statement accompanies fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of School Specialty, Inc.
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: July 8, 2004



/s/ Mary M. KabacinskiMary M. KabacinskiExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer




This certification accompanies
this Annual report on Form 10-K pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed as filed by School Specialty, Inc. for purposes of Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
(Reap. Dec. 9433)

#### States Mercantile Company et al. *v.*United States

Entry No. 15478, etc.

(Decided May 26, 1959)

*Lawrence & Tuttle*for the plaintiffs.

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

Oliver, Chief Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement enumerated in schedule “A,” hereto attached and made a part hereof, are before me for decision on the following stipulation:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between counsel for the plaintiffs and the Assistant Attorney General for the United States, subject bo the approval 6f the Court:

> *644That the merchandise the subject of the appeals for reappraisement set forth in Schedule A hereto attached and made a part hereof, is properly dutiable on the basis of American Selling Price as defined in Section 402(g) Tariff Act of 1930 as amended.

> That the said American Selling Price as defined in Section 402(g) Tariff Act of 1930 as amended, was as follows for the export periods indicated.

> Item Export Period Price

> Sodium Para-Amino Salicylate (Sodium Amino Salicylate) 1955 (August to December inclusive) $2.70 per lb. less 1% net packed

> 1957 $2.10 per lb. less 1% net packed

> 1958 $1.90 per lb. less 1% net packed

> Calcium P.A.S. (Calcium Aminosalicylate Trihydrate) 1957 $3.75 per lb. less 1% net packed

> 1958 $3.10 per lb. less 1% net packed

> Amino Salicylic Acid 1958 $3.40 per lb. less *1%*net packed

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the appeals set forth in Schedule A be deemed submitted for decision on this stipulation.

On the agreed facts, I hold that the proper basis for appraisement of the merchandise in question is American selling price, as defined in section 402(g) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and that such statutory value for these products is as hereinabove set forth in the stipulation of submission.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 21.1



                             SUBSIDIARIES OF VLASIC

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
NAME OF SUBSIDIARY AND NAME
UNDER WHICH IT DOES BUSINESS                JURISDICTION OF INCORPORATION
----------------------------                -----------------------------
<S>                                         <C>

VFI North Limited                           Great Britain
VFI South Limited                           Great Britain
VF Brands, Inc.                             Delaware
Vlasic Foods Distribution Company           Arkansas
Vlasic Foods Canada, Inc.                   Ontario
Vlasic International Brands Inc.            Delaware
Vlasic International Sales Inc.             New Jersey
Vlasic Standards, Inc.                      New Jersey
VL Payroll Corp.                            Delaware
Aligar, Inc.                                Delaware
Cargal, Inc.                                Delaware
</TABLE>
#### Maudilio MORALES-DIAZ, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 04-73741.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Sept. 12, 2005.*

Decided Sept. 21, 2005.

Suzanne B. Friedman, Esq., Attorney at Law, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.

Regional Counsel, Western Region Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, OIL, DOJ—U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Offiee of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: REINHARDT, RYMER and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Maudilio Morales-Diaz, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) summarily affirming an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his applications for asylum, withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Because the BIA affirmed without opinion, we review the IJ’s decision. *See Li v. Ashcroft,*378 F.3d 959, 961 (9th Cir.2004). Because the IJ did not make an explicit adverse credibility finding, we accept Morales-Diaz’s factual contentions as true. *See Kalubi v. Ashcroft,*364 F.3d 1134, 1137 (9th Cir.2004). We review for substantial evidence, *INS v. Elias-Zacarias,*502 U.S. 478, 481, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992), and we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s determination that Morales-Diaz does not have a well-founded fear of future persecution because Morales-Diaz did not provide evidence establishing that he would face a sufficiently individualized risk upon return to Guatemala. *See Vides-Vides v. INS,*783 F.2d 1463,1469 (9th Cir.1986) (upholding finding that fear was objectively unreasonable where petitioner was not individually threatened and the record failed “to indicate that his situation will be any different from the dangers faced by” his fellow citizens). Morales-Diaz further failed to establish that threats made to his family *899members were closely tied to himself. *See Arriaga-Barrientos v. U.S. INS,*937 F.2d 411, 414 (9th Cir.1991) (holding that where claim is based on violence against family members, petitioner must show a “pattern of persecution closely tied to the petitioner”).

Morales-Diaz, represented by counsel, has waived any challenge to the denial of his applications for withholding of removal and for relief under the CAT by not raising issues regarding those claims in his opening brief. *See Bazuaye v. INS,*79 F.3d 118, 120 (9th Cir.1996).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

Case No. 5D23-1400

LT Case No. 1993-CF-4386

_____________________________

RICKY L. SUTTON,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

3.800 appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County. 

Jeb Branham, Judge. 

Ricky L. Sutton, Madison, pro se. 

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and David Welch, Assistant 

Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee. 

October 17, 2023 

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

WALLIS, KILBANE, and PRATT, JJ., concur.
2

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
No. 96-5801.

#### Renteria-Caicedo *v.*United States.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
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 The Quantum Group, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended April 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Donald B. Cohen, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, certify to my knowledge and in my capacity as an officer of the Company, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



1.

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



2.

The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the Report.



Date: June 22, 2009



| |                                           
| | ------------------------------------------
| | /s/ Donald B. Cohen                       
| | Donald B. Cohen                           
| | Vice President and Chief Financial Officer



A certification furnished pursuant to this Item will not be deemed filed for purposes of section 18 of the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78r), or otherwise subject to the liability of that section. Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the smaller reporting company specifically incorporates it by reference.
EGU MACT RIA - Interagency comments on Ch 8 

 12/14/2011 05:39 PM 

From: "Higgins, Cortney" <Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov> 

 

To: RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

 

Cc: Bill Maxwell/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

Hi Bob, 

Attached are interagency comments on the redline version of Chapters 8 of 

the RIA. 

 

There were no further interagency comments on Chapter 4, but I haven’t 

checked to see if any previous interagency comments on that chapter have 

been addressed. 

 

I’ll send comments on the preamble within the hour. 

 

Regards, 

Cortney 

 

Chapter 8_SummaryofCostsandBenefits_1209_InteragencycommentsunderEO12563.doc
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1998
<CASH>                                          31,493
<SECURITIES>                                 1,880,099
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,865,024
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  2,756,585
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,533,201
<PP&E>                                       3,647,661
<DEPRECIATION>                             (2,193,702)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,987,160
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,798,023
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          816,000
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,373,137
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,987,160
<SALES>                                      4,991,730
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,991,730
<CGS>                                        3,970,837
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,970,837
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               509,206
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                511,687
<INCOME-TAX>                                   199,558
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            312,129
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   312,129
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .38
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22

- 6538

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v.
RAYMOND IDEMUDIA AIG B EKAEN , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Baltimore

. James K. Bredar , Chief District Judge. ( 1:15

- cr - 00462

- JKB

- 2 )

Submitted : August 23, 2022 Decided: August 26, 2022

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge , HEYTENS, Circuit Judge , and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Raymond Idemudia Aigbekaen, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Fitzgerald Aubin, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Ba ltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 22-6538 Doc: 18 Filed: 08/26/2022 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM: Raymond Idemudia Aigbekaen appeals the district court’s order denying relief on
his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) motion for compassionate rel ease. * Upon review, we discern no abuse of discretion in the district court’s determination that, under the pertinent 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors, compassionate release was not warranted. See
United States v. Kibble , 992 F.3d 326 , 329

- 31 (4th Cir.) (providing standard of review and outlining steps for evaluating compassionate release motions) , cert. denied , 142 S. Ct. 383 (2021)

. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

* Because our review of the record confirms that Aigbekaen timely appealed the district court’s April 18, 2022, order, we deny the Government’s motion to dismiss this appeal as untimely. USCA4 Appeal: 22-6538 Doc: 18 Filed: 08/26/2022 Pg: 2 of 2
| (logo) WELLS FARGO | **Corporate Trust Services**

  MAC R1204-010  9062 Old Annapolis Road  Columbia, MD 21045  Tel: 410 884 2000  Fax: 410 715 2380 |
|--------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

J.P.Morgan Chase CommercialMortgage Securities Corp.

383 Madison Avenue

31st Floor

New York, New York 10179

 

Re: Annual Statement ofCompliance for DBJPM 2016-C1 Mortgage Trust Commercial Mortgage Pass-ThroughCertificates, Series 2016-C1

 

Per the Pooling and ServicingAgreement dated as of April 1, 2016 (the "Agreement"), theundersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., asCertificate Administrator ("Wells Fargo"), hereby certifies asfollows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2016 (the "ReportingPeriod"):

 

(a) A review of Wells Fargo'sactivities during the Reporting Period and of its performance under theAgreement has been made under such officer's supervision; and

 

(b) To the best of suchofficer's knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of itsobligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout theReporting Period.

 

 

February 27, 2017

 

 

/s/ Brian Smith

BRIAN SMITH

Vice President

 

 

| Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. | (logo) Together we’ll  go far |
|------------------------|-------------------------------------|
Yorkshire Power Group Limited
Wetherby Road
Scarcroft
Leeds
LS14 3HS


				10 
June 1998


Mr Armando A Pena
1 Riverside Plaza
Columbus  Ohio 43215

Mr Richard C Kelly
1225 17th Street
Denver  Colorado 80502

Dear Sirs

Yorkshire Power Group Limited (the "Company") proposes to file its 
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the Fiscal Year ended 31 March 1998, 
its Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q for the Quarters ended 30 June 
1998, 30 September 1998 and 31 December 1998, and, if necessary, 
any Current Reports on Form 8-K (collectively, the "Exchange Act 
Reports") with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the 
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

The Company and the undersigned directors and officers of the 
Company, individually as a director and/or as an officer of the Company, 
hereby make, constitute and appoint each of you our true and lawful 
attorney for each of us and in each of our names, places and steads to 
sign and cause to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission 
the Exchange Act Reports and any appropriate amendments thereto, to 
be accompanied by any necessary exhibits.

The Company hereby authorises you or any one of you to execute the 
Exchange Act Reports and amendments thereto on its behalf as 
attorney-in-fact for it and its authorised officers, and to file the same as 
aforesaid.

The undersigned directors and officers of the Company hereby authorise 
you or any one of you to sign the Exchange Act Reports on their behalf 
as attorney-in-fact and to amend, or remedy any deficiencies with 
respect to, the Exchange Act Reports by appropriate amendment or 
amendments and to file the same as aforesaid.

Very truly yours

YORKSHIRE POWER GROUP LIMITED


By ...........................................................

	Wayne H Brunetti
	Chairman and Director


 .......................................................

	Donald M Clements Jr
	Director


 ............................................................

	Armando A Pena
	Director and Chief Financial Officer





 ...........................................................

	Dr E Linn Draper Jr
	Director





 ................................................................

	Richard C Kelly
	Director




 ...............................................................

	Teresa S Madden
	Director
### JUDGMENT 

## Court of Appeals First District of Texas

NO. 01

- 1 4

- 0 0 623

- C R
DEVONTE RASHARD HAYES , Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee Appeal from the 337 th District Court of Harris County (Tr. Ct. No. 1356324 )
After due consideration, the Court grants the motion to dismiss this appeal filed by the appellant, Devonte Rashard Hayes

. It is therefore CONSIDERED , ADJUDGED , and ORDERED that the appeal be dismissed

. It is further ORDERED that this decision be certified below for observance. Judgment rendered May 12 , 20 1 5

. Judgment rendered by pan el consisting of Justice s Keyes , Bland, and Massengale

.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 95 (Thursday, May 17, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 27807]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-9460]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2576-083]


Northeast Generation Company; Notice Granting Late Intervention

May 10, 2007.
    On August 2, 2006, the Commission issued a notice of application 
soliciting comments, motions to intervene, and protest for the 
Housatonic River Hydroelectric Project No. 2576, located on the 
Housatonic River, in Fairfield, Litchfield, and New Haven Counties, 
Connecticut. The notice established September 1, 2006, as the deadline 
for filing motions to intervene in the proceeding.
    On September 8, 2006, the Candlewood Lake Authority filed a late 
motion to intervene in the proceeding. Granting the late motion to 
intervene will not unduly delay or disrupt the proceeding, or prejudice 
other parties to it. Therefore, pursuant to Rule 214,\1\ the late 
motion to intervene filed by the Candlewood Lake Authority is granted, 
subject to the Commission's rules and regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 18 CFR 385.214 (2006).

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-9460 Filed 5-16-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P