alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### IN THE UNI TED STAT ES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIF TH CIRCU IT

N o
. 1 0

- 4 1 2 4 5 S u m m a r y C a l e n d a r

U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P l a i n t i f f

- A p p e l l e e

v
. M A N U E L A N T O N I O P A T I N O

- D E L A T O R R E , a l s o k n o w n a s G a m a l i e l B u s t o s V a l v e r d e , D e f e n d a n t

- A p p e l l a n t

A p p e a l f

r o m t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s D i s t r i c t C o u r t f o r t h e S o u t h e r n D i s t r i c t o f T e x a s U S D C N o
. 2 : 1 0

- C R

- 8 1 9

- 1

B e f o r e R E A V L E Y , D E N N I S , a n d C L E M E N T , C i r c u i t J u d g e s
. P E R C U R I A M : *
T h e F e d e r a l P u b l i c D e f e n d e r a p p o i n t e d t o r e p r e s e n t M a n u e l A n t o n i o P a t i n o - D e L a T o r r e h a s m o v e d f o r l e a v e t o w i t h d r a w a n d h a s f i l e d a b r i e f i n

a c c o r d a n c e w i t h A n d e r s v
. C a l i f o r n i a , 3 8 6 U

. S

. 7 3 8 ( 1 9 6 7 ) , a n d U n i t e d S t a t e s v
. F l o r e s , 6 3 2 F

. 3 d 2 2 9 ( 5 t h C i r
. 2 0 1 1 )

. P a t i n o - D e L a T o r r e h a s n o t f i l e d a

r e s p o n s e
. W e h a v e r e v i e w e d c o u n s e l ’ s b r i e f a n d t h e r e l e v a n t p o r t i o n s o f t h e

r e c o r d r e f

l e c t e d t h e r e i n
. W e c o n c u r w i t h c o u n s e l ’ s a s s e s s m e n t t h a t t h e a p p e a l U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f A p p ea l s

F i ft h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D June 16 , 20 11 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Purs uant to 5 T H C I R

. R. 47.5 , the cour t has d ete rm ined t hat this op inion sho uld not * be publ ish ed and is not pr ece dent excep t unde r the lim ite d cir cum st ance s se t for th in 5 T H C I R

. R. 47.5 .4. Case: 10-41245 Document: 00511510548 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/16/2011N o
. 1 0

- 4 1 2 4 5

p r e s e n t s n o n o n f

r i v o l o u s i s s u e f

o r a p p e l l a t e r e v i e w
. A c c o r d i n g l y , c o u n s e l ’ s

m o t i o n f

o r l e a v e t o w i t h d r a w i s G R A N T E D , c o u n s e l i s e x c u s e d f r o m f u r t h e r

r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s h e r e i n , a n d t h e A P P E A L I S D I S M I S S E D

. S e e 5 T H C I R

. R

. 4 2

. 2

.

2 Case: 10-41245 Document: 00511510548 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/16/2011
```
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 21 (Friday, January 31, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 4830]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-2398]

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

January 21, 1997.
    The Department of Treasury has submitted the following public 
information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Copies of 
the submission(s) may be obtained by calling the Treasury Bureau 
Clearance Officer listed. Comments regarding this information 
collection should be addressed to the OMB reviewer listed and to the 
Treasury Department Clearance Officer, Department of the Treasury, Room 
2110, 1425 New York Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220.

U.S. Customs Service (CUS)

    OMB Number: 1515-0002.
    Form Number: CF 7507.
    Type of Review: Reinstatement.
    Title: General Declaration (Outward/Inward).
    Description: This collection of information is used to document 
clearance by the arriving aircraft at the required inspectional 
facilities and inspections by appropriate regulatory agency staffs.
    Respondents: Business or other for-profit, Not-for-profit 
institutions.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 500.
    Estimated Burden Hours Per Respondent: 2 minutes.
    Frequency of Response: Other (on arrival).
    Estimated Total Reporting Burden: 49,950 hours.
    Clearance Officer: J. Edgar Nichols (202) 927-1426, U.S. Customs 
Service, Printing and Records Management Branch, Room 6216, 1301 
Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20229.
    OMB Reviewer: Alexander T. Hunt (202) 395-7860, Office of 
Management and Budget, Room 10202, New Executive Office Building, 
Washington, DC 20503.
Lois K. Holland,
Departmental Reports Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 97-2398 Filed 1-30-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4820-02-P
```
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.30


Summary Description of the Company Bonus Plan and Company Profit Sharing Plan:

       The Company has adopted a bonus incentive plan effective for fiscal year
2002. Certain management and technical employees are eligible for bonuses under
the plan. Bonuses under this plan will be based on three principal factors,
namely, the Company's financial performance relative to plan, measured by
Adjusted EBITDA, the Company's capital spending relative to plan, and the extent
to which the Company has reached customer satisfaction goals as measured by a
quarterly customer survey. Eligible employees will receive target bonuses to the
extent these goals are reached. Such bonuses will increase up to double the
originally proposed amount to the extent that financial performance exceeds plan
by up to 15% and customer survey results exceed original targets. If and to the
extent that financial performance and capital spending fall short of plan or
customer satisfaction ratings fail to meet target levels established during the
first quarter of fiscal 2002, bonuses will be less than originally proposed or
may not be awarded.

     The Company also has revised its profit sharing plan to provide that
eligible employees will receive profit sharing awards of up to 5% of
compensation based on the same Company financial performance, capital spending
and customer satisfaction goals outlined above. Such awards will increase up to
double the original amount to the extent that financial performance exceeds plan
by up to 15% and customer survey results exceed the original targets. If and to
the extent that financial performance and capital spending fall short of plan or
customer satisfaction ratings fail to meet target levels established during the
first quarter of 2002, awards will be less than originally proposed or may not
be awarded.





                                       19
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 183 (Monday, September 22, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 49501]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-25087]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

ACTION: Notice.

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

    The Department of Defense has submitted to OMB for clearance, the 
following proposal for collection of information under the provisions 
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).
    Title, Associated Form, and OMB Number: Survey of Air Force Small 
Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Contract Awardees, OMB Number 0701-
0117.
    Type of Request: Revision.
    Number of Respondents: 17.
    Responses Per Respondent: 1.
    Annual Responses: 17.
    Average Burden Per Response: 12 minutes.
    Annual Burden Hours: 3 hours.
    Needs and Uses: This information collection is a survey on 
noteworthy Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) accomplishments 
and commercialization of small business research and development. The 
information is used to evaluate the success of the program in meeting 
the objectives of Pub. L. 97-219 and to publicize successful SBIR 
research and development (R&D) to potential purchasers. Respondents are 
small business companies who are awarded SBIR dollars to perform needed 
Air Force technologies. This survey is background for a metric which 
indicates to the SBIR Program Manager the companies who have 
commercialized as a result of their Phase II awards.
    Affected Public: Business or Other For-Profit.
    Frequency: Biennially.
    Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.
    OMB Desk Officer: Mr. Edward Springer.
    Written comments and recommendations on the proposed information 
collection should be sent to Mr. Springer at the Office of Management 
and Budget, Desk Officer for DoD, Room 10236, New Executive Office 
Building, Washington, DC 20503
    DoD Clearance Officer: Mr. Robert Cushing.
    Written requests for copies of the information collection proposal 
should be sent to Mr. Cushing, WHS/DIOR, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, 
Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302.

    Dated: September 16, 1997.
Patricia L. Toppings,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 97-25087 Filed 9-19-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5000-04-M
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21-1020

BRIAN HARGRAVE,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

DAIMLER TRUCKS NORTH AMERICA,

 Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at 

Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Jr., District Judge. (1:19-cv-00838-WO-LPA)

Submitted: September 20, 2022 Decided: December 20, 2022

Before WYNN, DIAZ, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Brian Hargrave, Appellant Pro Se. Tory Ian Summey, Keith Michael Weddington, 

PARKER, POE, ADAMS & BERNSTEIN, LLP, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 21-1020 Doc: 10 Filed: 12/20/2022 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Brian Hargrave appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to his 

former employer, Daimler Trucks North America, LLC (“Daimler”), in Hargrave’s action 

alleging unlawful termination because of his race, in violation of Title VII of the Civil 

Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17. On appeal, Hargrave

challenges the court’s finding that no reasonable jury could find in his favor on his unlawful 

termination claim. We affirm.

“We review de novo a district court’s grant or denial of a motion for summary 

judgment, construing all facts and reasonable inferences therefrom in favor of the 

nonmoving party.” Gen. Ins. Co. of Am. v. U.S. Fire Ins. Co., 886 F.3d 346, 353 (4th Cir. 

2018). Summary judgment is appropriate “if the movant shows that there is no genuine 

dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). We will uphold the district court’s grant of summary judgment unless 

we conclude that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party on the 

evidence presented. See Reyes v. Waples Mobile Home Park Ltd. P’ship, 903 F.3d 415, 

423 (4th Cir. 2018). 

Upon review of the parties’ briefs and the record, we find no reversible error in the 

district court’s determination that Hargrave failed to establish that Daimler’s legitimate, 

nondiscriminatory reason for his termination was a pretext for discrimination. 

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order granting summary judgment to Daimler. 

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 

USCA4 Appeal: 21-1020 Doc: 10 Filed: 12/20/2022 Pg: 2 of 3
3

presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

AFFIRMED

USCA4 Appeal: 21-1020 Doc: 10 Filed: 12/20/2022 Pg: 3 of 3
UNITED TACONITE FLOW SHEET No. 5: Rev 2 (EXTERNAL) 

PELLET PLANT FILTERING 

FINAL CONCENTRATE 

CSEE SHEET 4) LIMESTONE 

!coNCENTRATE THICKENERS I 

TRUCK DR RAIL 

UNLOADING 

I I UTLD'w' PUMPS 

PNEUMATIC 

CONVEYING 

DRY 

STORAGE I I SLURRY TANK 

VIATER SNAP BLDVI 

' VACUUM 

LIMESTONE ' I 

MIXING FILTERS 

TANK (5) 9' X 10'; (2) 7' X 10' 

I OUTSIDE L 

STORAGE I ALTERNATE 

FILTER CAKE 

VIET 

STORAGE 

SCALE I 

----1 BINDER FEEDER I 

I CONCENTRATE BINS 

FEED PUMPS I 

I TO BALLING CIRCUITS .. SEE SHEET 6
EXHIBIT 32.2


                   CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                              CET SERVICES, INC.
                      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


     I certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the Annual Report on Form
10-KSB of CET Services, Inc. for the period ending December 31, 2007:

     (1)     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 aspects, the financial condition and results of operations of CET
Services, Inc.






/s/ Dale W. Bleck
Dale W. Bleck
Chief Financial Officer
April 4, 2008



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to CET Services, Inc. and will
be retained by CET Services, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission upon request.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2194 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2194

                 For the relief of Nadezda Shestakova.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 25, 2006

  Mr. Stevens introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                 For the relief of Nadezda Shestakova.

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENCE.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for purposes of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.), Nadezda 
Shestakova shall be held and considered to have been lawfully admitted 
to the United States for permanent residence as of the date of the 
enactment of this Act upon payment of the required visa fee.

SEC. 2. REDUCTION OF NUMBER OF AVAILABLE VISAS.

    Upon the granting of permanent residence to Nadezda Shestakova as 
provided in this Act, the Secretary of State shall instruct the proper 
officer to reduce by 1 during the current fiscal year the total number 
of immigrant visas available to natives of the country of the alien's 
birth under section 203(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 
U.S.C. 1153(a)).
                                 <all>
```
#### J. M. FLOWERS, Appellant, v. EXCHANGE LEASING CORP., et al., Appellees.

No. 69-77.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

Aug. 12, 1969.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 9, 1969.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 190 (Wednesday, October 1, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51471-51472]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-25940]


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

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Notice of Agreement(s) Filed

    The Commission hereby gives notice of the filing of the following 
agreement(s) under the Shipping Act of 1984.
    Interested parties can review or obtain copies of agreements at the 
Washington, DC offices of the Commission, 800 North Capitol Street, 
N.W., Room 962. Interested parties may submit comments on an agreement 
to the Secretary, Federal Maritime Commission, Washington, DC 20573, by 
October 14, 1997.
    Agreement No.: 202-010689-067.
    Title: Transpacific Westbound Rate Agreement.
    Parties:

American President Lines, Ltd.
Hapag-Lloyd Container Linie GmbH
Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha, Ltd.
A.P. Moller-Maersk Line
Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, Ltd.
P&O Nedlloyd B.V.
P&O Nedlloyd Limited
Neptune Orient Container Line, Inc.
Nippon Yusen Kaisha, Ltd.
Orient Overseas Container Line, Inc.
Sea-Land Service, Inc.


[[Page 51472]]


    Synopsis: The proposed amendment would reduce from three days to 
two days, the notice period required before a member line may take 
independent action on cargo which will not fit in standard sized 
containers or on ``out-of-gauge cargo.'' The parties have requested a 
shortened review period.

    Dated: September 25, 1997.

    By Order of the Federal Maritime Commission.
Joseph C. Polking,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-25940 Filed 9-30-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-M
## In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06

- 18

- 00075

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF S.K., S.M., JR., AND A.M., CHILDREN

On Appeal from the 336th District Court

Fannin County, Texas

Trial Court No. FA

- 17

- 43335

Before Morriss, C.J., Moseley and Burgess, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Morriss2 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION

The appellant ha s filed a motion with this Court seeking to voluntarily dismiss t h is appeal.

Pursuant to Rule 42.1(a)(1) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, the motion is granted. See

T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.1(a)(1). Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal

.

Josh R. Morriss, III

Chief Justice

Date Submitted: November 6, 2018

Date Decided: November 7, 2018
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-30373

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff−Appellee,

versus

AZIZI ANSARI,

Defendant−Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

No. 2:07-CR-337-1

Before SMITH, COSTA, and HO, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Azizi Ansari, federal prisoner #30027-086, moves to proceed in forma 

pauperis (“IFP”) on appeal from the order denying his motion to reconsider the 

denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion. Ansari filed the § 3582(c)(2) motion 

seeking to have his 240-month sentence for conspiracy to possess with intent 

* 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

February 5, 2020

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 19-30373 Document: 00515298733 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/05/2020
No. 19-30373

2

to distribute MDMA (ecstasy) reduced per Amendments 591, 599, and 742 to 

the Sentencing Guidelines. The district court denied Ansari’s IFP motion on 

the basis that any appeal would be frivolous. 

To proceed IFP, a litigant must show that he is economically eligible and 

that his appeal is taken in good faith, that is, he will raise a nonfrivolous issue. 

Carson v. Polly, 689 F.2d 562, 586 (5th Cir. 1982). This court’s inquiry into 

good faith “is limited to whether the appeal involves legal points arguable on 

their merits (and therefore not frivolous).” Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 

(5th Cir. 1983) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted).

Section 3582(c)(2) permits the district court to modify a sentence “in the 

case of a defendant who has been sentenced to a term of imprisonment based 

on a sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered by the Sentencing 

Commission,” but only if the modification is consistent with the guidelines policy statements. § 3582(c)(2). A defendant is eligible for a sentence reduction 

if the guideline range originally applicable to him has been lowered as a result 

of an amendment to the Guidelines. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(a)(1). Because 

Ansari was sentenced after the effective date of Amendments 591 and 599, he 

has failed to show that his term of imprisonment was based on a sentencing 

range that has been subsequently lowered. Thus, he is not eligible for a reduction under § 3582(c)(2). See § 1B1.10(a)(1); United States v. Doublin, 572 F.3d 

235, 237 (5th Cir. 2009). Ansari has abandoned his argument that he is entitled to a reduction based on Amendment 742. See Yohey v. Collins, 

985 F.2d 222, 224−25 (5th Cir. 1993).

Accordingly, Ansari has not shown that his proposed appeal raises a 

nonfrivolous issue. The request for leave to proceed IFP is therefore DENIED, 

and his appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 

202 n.24 (5th Cir. 1997); Howard, 707 F.2d at 219-20; 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 19-30373 Document: 00515298733 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/05/2020
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                              5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Form 10-Q
for the period ended March 31, 2000 and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                           1,000

<S>                                    <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                          3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                      DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                         JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                           MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                      24,090
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                              206,496
<ALLOWANCES>                                 3,984
<INVENTORY>                                124,238
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           394,897
<PP&E>                                     531,209
<DEPRECIATION>                             120,125
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           1,219,802
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      261,525
<BONDS>                                    667,522
<COMMON>                                       203
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<OTHER-SE>                                  61,823
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             1,219,802
<SALES>                                    315,679
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           315,679
<CGS>                                      228,052
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              228,052
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               112
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          16,888
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             20,310
<INCOME-TAX>                                 9,566
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         10,744
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                10,744
<EPS-BASIC>                                  .47
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .46




</TABLE>