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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-6428

WARREN SCOTT TAYLOR,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

H. D. BROWN, Page County Magistrate Judge,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge.

(CA-01-912-7)

Submitted: April 26, 2002 Decided: July 15, 2002

Before WILKINS, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Warren Scott Taylor, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Warren Scott Taylor seeks to appeal the district court’s

orders denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A.

§ 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 2001), and denying his motion for

reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district

court’s opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the

reasoning of the district court. Taylor v. Brown, No. CA-01-912-7

(W.D. Va. Feb. 14, 2002; Feb. 28, 2002). 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
# C_2014031EN.01000902.xml

| 1.2.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 31/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.2.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 31/9

---

Judgment of the General Court of 11 December 2013 — Cisco Systems and Messagenet v Commission

(Case T-79/12) (1)

1

(Competition - Concentrations - European markets for internet communications services - Decision declaring the concentration compatible with the internal market - Manifest errors of assessment - Obligation to state reasons)

2014/C 31/15

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Cisco Systems, Inc. (San Jose, California, United States) and Messagenet SpA (Milan, Italy) (represented by: L. Ortiz Blanco, J. Buendía Sierra, A. de Pablo and K. Jörgens, lawyers)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: N. Khan, S. Noë and C. Hödlmayr, Agents)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the defendant: Microsoft Corp. (Seattle, Washington, United States) (represented by: G. Berrisch, lawyer)

Intervener in support of the defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2011) 7279 final of 7 October 2011 declaring compatible with the internal market the merger transaction involving the acquisition of control of Skype Global Sàrl by Microsoft Corp. (Case COMP/M.6281 — Microsoft/Skype).

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Cisco Systems Inc. and Messagenet SpA to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission and Microsoft Corp. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Cisco Systems Inc. and Messagenet SpA to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission and Microsoft Corp.

---

(1)  OJ C 109, 14.4.2012.

1

---
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-40631

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

ORLANDO GARCIA, also known as Orlando Amador Garcia

Defendant - Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:10-CR-1128-11

Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Orlando Garcia appeals his jury-trial conviction for conspiracy to possess,

with intent to distribute, more than 500 grams of methamphetamine, in

violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(A), and 846. Garcia, who testified

at trial, claims the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction.

Denial of a motion for a judgment of acquittal is reviewed de novo. E.g.,

United States v. Thomas, 690 F.3d 358, 366 (5th Cir. 2012), cert. denied, 2013

WL 598783 (19 Feb. 2013). The conviction will be upheld if, “viewing the

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

April 5, 2013

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

* 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.

 Case: 12-40631 Document: 00512199227 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/05/2013
No. 12-40631

evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact

could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt”. 

Id. (quotation marks and citation omitted).

Garcia’s conspiracy conviction required the Government to prove: “(1) an

agreement existed between two or more persons to violate federal narcotics law,

(2) the defendant knew of the existence of the agreement, and (3) the defendant

voluntarily participated in the conspiracy”. Id. (quotation marks and citation

omitted). 

The Government’s evidence, including numerous recorded telephone

conversations, showed Garcia, his co-defendants, and an unnamed co-conspirator

were members of a prison gang that required its members to sell drugs, and

Garcia devised a plan to sell two pounds of methamphetamine in Arkansas; this

evidence was sufficient to prove he knowingly and voluntarily agreed to violate

federal narcotics laws. E.g., id. at 366-68; United States v. Baptiste, 264 F.3d

578, 587-88 (5th Cir. 2001), rev’d on other grounds, 309 F.3d 274 (5th Cir. 2002). 

The jury was free to reject Garcia’s explanation that he did not intend to carry

out the plan. E.g., United States v. Meza, 701 F.3d 411, 420 (5th Cir. 2012). 

Further, that the methamphetamine was never put on the market or sold is of

no consequence. E.g., Iannelli v. United States, 420 U.S. 770, 777-78 (1975);

United States v. Dixon, 132 F.3d 192, 200-01 (5th Cir. 1997). 

AFFIRMED.

2

 Case: 12-40631 Document: 00512199227 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/05/2013
No. 48211.

Suit 4407.

#### *W. J. Byrnes & Co.*v. *United States.*

C. D. 642 affirmed March 1, 1943. O. A. D. 229.
#### Marshall Field & Co. et al. *v.*United States

No. 6931.

Entry Nos. 603, etc; 4327.

Invoices dated London, England, June 24, 1946, etc.

Certified June 25, 1946, etc.

Entered at Chicago, Ill., July 25, 1946, etc. and at Boston, Mass., February 18, 1946.

(Decided February 28, 1947)

*James W. Bevans*for the plaintiffs.

*Paul P. Rao,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Oliver, Presiding Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule A, hereto attached and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

(Stipulation omitted.)

On the agreed facts I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such values are the appraised values, less the additions made by the importers on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 145 (Tuesday, July 29, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40538-40539]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-19852]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of 
Closed Meeting

    Purusant to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following

[[Page 40539]]

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis 
Panel (SEP) meeting:

    Name of SEP: Studies of HIV in Women Under the Women's 
Interagency HIV Study.
    Date: September 10-11, 1997.
    Time: 8:30 a.m. to Adjournment.
    Place: Holiday Inn Bethesda, 8120 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 
20814, (301) 652-2000.
    Contact Person: Dr. Peter R. Jackson, Scientific Review Adm., 
6003 Executive Boulevard, Solar Bldg., Room 4C10, Bethesda, MD 
20892, (301) 496-2550.
    Purpose/Agenda: To evaluate grant applications.

    Name of SEP: Women's Interagency HIV Study Date Management and 
Analysis Center.
    Date: September 11-12, 1997.
    Time: 1:30 p.m. to Adjournment.
    Place: Holiday Inn Bethesda, 8120 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 
20814, (301) 652-2000.
    Contact Person: Dr. Peter R. Jackson, Scientific Review Adm., 
6003 Executive Boulevard, Solar Bldg., Room 4C10, Bethesda, MD 
20892, (301) 496-2550.
    Purpose/Agenda: To evaluate grant applications.
    These meetings will be closed in accordance with the provisions 
set forth in secs. 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5, U.S.C. 
Applications and/or proposals and the discussions could reveal 
confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable 
material and personal information concerning individuals associated 
with the applications and/or proposals, the disclosure of which 
would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Programs Nos. 93.855, 
Immunology, Allergic and Immunologic Diseases Research; 93.856, 
Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes 
of Health)

    Dated: July 22, 1997.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Committee Management Officer, NIH.
[FR Doc. 97-19852 Filed 7-28-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
No. 47122.

#### Protest 980027-G of Carey *&*Skinner, Inc. (Buffalo).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

Several witnesses were called by the plaintiff and -one by the Government. From the testimony presented by two competent and uncontradicted witnesses of the plaintiff to the effect that the merchandise is not used for the amusement of children, but purchased as souvenirs and used as ■ornaments, the articles in question were held dutiable as in chief value of wood. 'The claim at 33% percent under paragraph 412 was therefore sustained.
#### Carl Fischer Musical Instrument Co., Inc. *v.*United States

No. 7844.

Entry No. 59227, etc.

(Decided June 20, 1950)

*Siegel, Mandell & Davidson (Sidney Mandell*of counsel) for the plaintiff,

*David N. Edelstein,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Oliver, Chief Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule “A,” hereto attached and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between counsel for the respective parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court, that at the time of exportation of the merchandise involved in the reappraisement numbers noted above, such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers for home consumption in the principal markets of the country from which exported in the usual wholesale quantity and in the ordinary course of trade, plus, when not included in such price, the cost of containers and coverings of whatsoever nature and all other costs, charges, and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition, packed, ready for shipment to the United States at the per se values found by the Appraiser plus 30 per cent, less 30 per cent discount, plus 9 per cent tax, plus 1.01 per cent tax, plus packing as invoiced.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that there was no higher export value for the merchandise herein at the time of exportation.

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

On the agreed facts I find the foreign value, as that value is defined in section 402 (c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by section 8 of the Customs Administrative Act of 1938, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such values were the *per se*values found by the appraiser *350plus 30 per centum, less 30 per centum discount, plus 9 per centum tax, plus 1.01 per centum tax, plus packing as invoiced.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
EXHIBIT
                                     10.30<PAGE>



Amendment to the 
Stock Option Agreement


      This Amendment to the Stock Option Agreement, made as
of the 23rd day of April, 1998, is between Staff Builders,
Inc., a Delaware corporation (the 'Corporation') and David
Savitsky (the 'Optionee').

      WHEREAS, the Corporation and Optionee entered into a
Stock Option Agreement dated July 1, 1997 (the 'Agreement');
and 

      WHEREAS, the parties now desire to amend the Agreement
so as to reduce the number of shares as to which the option
is granted;

      NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants
and agreements contained herein, the parties hereto agree as
follows:

      Schedule A of the Agreement is hereby amended so that
        the number of shares as to which the option is 
        granted shall be 197,000.

      Except as expressly amended herein, all other terms,
conditions, agreements, representations and warranties
contained in the agreement shall remain in full force and
effect. 
      
      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this
Amendment as of the date and year first written above.
      
                              STAFF BUILDERS, INC.:
      
      
                              BY:/s/Stephen Savitsky
      
                              GRANTEE:
      
      
                              /s/ David Savitsky
                              David Savitsky
## Indian River Unit 4

Engineering, Architecture, Construction, Environmental and Consulting Solutions Location: Dagsboro, Del.

Client: NRG Energy

Completion Date: December 2011



### PROJECT SUMMARY Burns & McDonnell is providing EPCM services for the retrofit of circulating dry scrubbers/pulse

- jet fabric filters (CDS/PJFF) and selective catalytic reduction (SCR) systems for Unit 4 at Indian River near Dagsboro, Del.



### SERVICES PROVIDED

 Engineering, procurement and construction management (EPCM)

 Detailed design

 Design management

 Procurement management

 Construction management

 New equipment startup and commissioning



### PROJECT BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION NRG reached a consent decree agreement (CDA) with the Delaware Department of Natural Resources & Environmental Control to reduce the nitrous oxide (NOx) and sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions at Indian River Station Unit 4. The unit is part of on a multi

- unit site near Dagsboro in Sussex County, Del.

The Indian River Station consists of four operating coal

- fired units. As part of the CDA, Units 1 and 2 will cease operation by May 1, 2011, and May 1, 2010, respectively. Per separate agreement, Unit 3 will cease operation in 2013. Unit 4 achieved a COD in 1980 and burns low

- sulfur Eastern bituminous coal in a pulverized coal boiler.

Burns & McDonnell was contracted by NRG to complete EPCM services associated with the project. The company is providing design and procurement management services under an engineering services agreement and construction management and startup of the new equipment under a construction management agreement.



### PROJECT FEATURES

 Riley SCRs

 Alstom CDS/PJFF

 Induced draft (ID) fans

 Byproduct storage and handling

 Lime handling and storage

 Electrical substation

 Balance

- of

- plant (BOP) systems

© 2015 Burns & McDonnell. All Rights Reserved. www.burnsmcd.com
Grants Reporting and Tracking System Forestry Data Pull



### MEMORANDUM

DATE: June 8 , 201 6

TO : Record for EPA

- HQ

- OW

- 2015

- 0668

CC: Prasad Chumble , USEPA

FROM : Chris Solloway , USEPA

SUBJECT: Query description for Excel sheet of 319 Projects

Queries were extracted from projects meeting the following conditions:

(1) Projects were awarded between Award Fiscal Year 2002 and 2016 (data quality is less certain

prior to 2002; last 6 years are subject to some modification moving forward

— these are live files,

and not all grants are closed out)

(2) Project Status is NOT equal to: Discontinued, Never Initiated; Not Initiated

(3) The source category of pollution is “Silvi culture”

a. AND the BMPs implemented include: Access Roads, Forest Trails and Landings;

Recreation Trails & Walkways, or Road Ditch Creation/Improvements

(4) OR The source category of pollution is: Agriculture, Construction, Hydromodification, or Other

NPS Pollution

a. AND the secondary/sub category of pollution is: Forest Management, Road

Construction/Maintenance, Streambank/Shoreline Modification/Destabilization
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 226 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 226

      To clarify that the revocation of an alien's visa or other 
            documentation is not subject to judicial review.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 31, 2011

   Mr. Grassley (for himself, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Cornyn, Mr. 
  Sessions, and Mr. Roberts) introduced the following bill; which was 
       read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
      To clarify that the revocation of an alien's visa or other 
            documentation is not subject to judicial review.

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

SECTION 1. JUDICIAL REVIEW OF VISA REVOCATION.

    Section 221(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 
1201(i)) is amended by striking ``There shall be no means of judicial 
review'' and all that follows and inserting the following: 
``Notwithstanding any other provision of law, including section 2241 of 
title 28, United States Code, any other habeas corpus provision, and 
sections 1361 and 1651 of such title, a revocation under this 
subsection may not be reviewed by any court, and no court shall have 
jurisdiction to hear any claim arising from, or any challenge to, such 
a revocation.''.

SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendment made by section 1 shall--
            (1) take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act; 
        and
            (2) apply to all visas issued before, on, or after such 
        date.
                                 <all>
```
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**





**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**18
      U.S.C. 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**








In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of nFinanSe Inc. (the "Company") on Form
      10-QSB for the period ended September 29, 2007, as filed with the Securities
      and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jerry R. Welch, in
      my
      capacity as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
      U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
      2002, that:





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





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











***/s/
                Jerry R. Welch***Date:  
                November 9, 2007
            Jerry
                R. Welch
              Chief
                Executive Officer
No. 43279.

Suit 4234.

#### *United States*v. *D. H. Armaghanian.*

Abstract 39919 affirmed. C. A. D. 81.
No. 44426.

#### Protests 13165-K, etc., of J. S. Hoffman Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of *Stokby*v. *United States*(4 Cust. Ct. 343, C. D. 358) it was held that 10 percent allowance should have been made for the weight of the gelatinous material in question.
No. 47750.

#### Protest 80030-K of Butler Bros. (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

At the trial the report of the assistant appraiser and the collector’s report, received in evidence, indicated that the total number contained in said cases was 160 dozen rather than 320 dozen. In accordance therewith the protest was sustained.
Before the Third Division,

June 19, 1961

No. 65822.

#### W. A. Taylor & Co. *v.*United States,

protest 770267-G (Baltimore).

Opinion by

Richardson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *R. C. Williams & Co., Inc.*(40 C.C.P.A. 130, C.A.D. 508), and *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C.D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-2000
<CASH>                                           9,888
<SECURITIES>                                       382
<RECEIVABLES>                                   11,607
<ALLOWANCES>                                     9,359
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                28,170
<PP&E>                                          20,545
<DEPRECIATION>                                   6,260
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 119,900
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           14,296
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           30,450
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           241
<OTHER-SE>                                      73,057
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   119,900
<SALES>                                        108,411
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               108,411
<CGS>                                           97,072
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  264,094
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 262
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (156,722)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       210
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (156,722)
<DISCONTINUED>                                   2,482
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (173,754)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (8.30)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (8.30)


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1







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 on Form 10-QSB of Media and Entertainment.com, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended June 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Winston Johnson, principal executive and financial officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, that:



(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.







Date: August 6, 2004

By:  /s/ Winston Johnson

Winston Johnson

Principal executive and financial officer