alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). E F/ R es ear ch NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON

UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. E DG ARGO NZ AL E Z S E R R AN O, D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e llan t. N o. 09- 50172 D . C. N o . 2 : 0 8 - c r - 0 1 4 7 8 - PA ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e C e n tr a l D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia P e r c yA nde r s on, D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d F e brua ry16, 2010 ** B e f o r e : F E RN A N D E Z , G O U L D , a n dM . S M I T H , C ir c u it Ju d g e s . E dga rG onz a l e z S e rr a no appe a l s f r om hi s gui l ty - pl e ac onvi c t i on a nd 30- m onth s e nt e nc e f

orbe i ng a n i l l e ga l a l i e n f ound i n the U ni t e d S t a t e s f ol l ow i ng 

# FI LED MA R 05 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALSE F/ Res ea r ch 09- 50172 2 de port a t i on, i n vi ol a t i on of 8 U . S . C . § 1326. P ur s ua ntt o A n de rs v . Ca lifo rn ia , 386 U . S . 738 ( 1967) , S e rr a no’ s c ouns e l ha s f i l e d abr i e f

s t a t i ng the r e a r e no gr ounds f

orr e l i e f , a l ong w i th am ot i on t o w i thdr a w a s c ouns e l of r e c or d. W e ha ve p r o v i d e dth e ap p e l l a n twi th th e o p p o rtu n i tyt o f i l e ap r o s e s up p l e m e n t a l b r i e f . No pr o s e s uppl e m e nt a l br i e f ha s be e n f

i l e d, butthe gove rnm e ntha s f i l e d am ot i on f

or sum m ary a ff

i rm ance . O uri nde pe nde ntr e vi e w of the r e c or d pur s ua ntt o P e n s o n v . O h io , 4 8 8 U . S. 7 5 , 8 0 - 8 1 ( 1 9 8 8 ) , d is c lo s e s n o a r g u ab le g r o u n d s f o rr e lie f o n d ir e c t ap p e a l. A cco rd i n g l y, co u n sel ’ s m o t i o n t o w i th d raw i s G R A N TED , and the di stri ct co u rt ’ s j u d g m en ti s AF F I RME D. T h e g o v ern m en t ’ s m o t i o n i s DE NI E D.
<TABLE> <S> <C>
 
<ARTICLE>      5 
<LEGEND>       THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
               FROM THE ACCOMPANYING CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
               STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
               SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000 
       
<S>                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                             6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                            JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                              JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                     25,709
<SECURITIES>                               75,541
<RECEIVABLES>                              37,624
<ALLOWANCES>                                  696
<INVENTORY>                                     0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                          154,329
<PP&E>                                     20,617
<DEPRECIATION>                              2,414
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                            178,773
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      49,036
<BONDS>                                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           0
<PREFERRED>                                     0
<COMMON>                                       26
<OTHER-SE>                                 60,429
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>              178,773
<SALES>                                    41,699
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           74,022
<CGS>                                      18,568
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              18,568
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           57,854
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          1,917
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,976)
<INCOME-TAX>                                2,305
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (4,281)
<DISCONTINUED>                                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 0
<CHANGES>                                       0
<NET-INCOME>                               (4,281)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                              ($0.17)
<EPS-DILUTED>                              ($0.17)



</TABLE>
November 5, 2015

In accordance with the enclosed Memorandum Opinion, below is the judgment in the numbered cause set out herein to be entered in the Minutes of this Court as of the 5th day of November, 2015.

10-14-00335-CR	JOSEPH CLYDE FORD v. THE STATE OF TEXAS - ON APPEAL FROM THE 19TH DISTRICT COURT OF McLENNAN COUNTY - TRIAL COURT NO. 2013-1178-C1 – AFFIRMED - Memorandum Opinion by Justice Scoggins:

	“This cause came on to be heard on the transcript of the record of the Court below, and the same being considered, because it is the opinion of this Court that there was no error in the judgment, it is ordered, adjudged and decreed by the Court that the judgment be in all things affirmed, and that the appellant pay all costs in this behalf expended and that this decision be certified below for observance.”

# image1.png
Exhibit 32



Certifications of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer

Section 1350



In connection with the Report
of Material Sciences Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended February 28, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Ronald L. Stewart, 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 to 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) The information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.



Dated: July 8, 2005

By:

/s/    RONALD L. STEWARTRonald L. StewartChief Executive Officer and Director




In connection with the
Report, I, Jeffrey J. Siemers, Executive Vice President, Chief Administrative and Financial Officer and Secretary 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
to 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) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
Company.



Dated: July 8, 2005

By:

/s/    JEFFREY J. SIEMERSJeffrey J. SiemersExecutive Vice President, Chief Administrative and Financial Officer and
Secretary




1
#### Bessie MASON, Mazie M. MacAdam, as Ancillary Executrix of the Estate of Earl G. MacAdam, Deceased, and J. J. Donahue, Appellants, v. Jack DORSON, Gertrude Dorson, Daniel A. Udell, Elinor K. Udell and Delray Shores, Inc., a Florida corporation, Appellees.

No. 69-323.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

April 29, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 139 (Thursday, July 19, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34301-34302]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-15470]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Foreign Assets Control


Notice of OFAC Sanctions Actions

AGENCY: Office of Foreign Assets Control, Treasury.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets 
Control (OFAC) is publishing the names of one or more persons that have 
been placed on OFAC's Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked 
Persons List based on OFAC's determination that one or more applicable 
legal criteria were satisfied. All property and interests in property 
subject to U.S. jurisdiction of these persons are blocked, and U.S. 
persons are generally prohibited from engaging in transactions with 
them.

DATES: See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: OFAC: Associate Director for Global 
Targeting, tel.: 202-622-2420; Assistant Director for Sanctions 
Compliance & Evaluation, tel.: 202-622-2490; Assistant Director for 
Licensing, tel.: 202-622-2480; or the Department of the Treasury's 
Office of the General Counsel: Office of the Chief Counsel (Foreign 
Assets Control), tel.: 202-622-2410.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Electronic Availability

    The Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List and 
additional information concerning OFAC sanctions programs are available 
on OFAC's website (www.treas.gov/ofac).

Notice of OFAC Actions

    On July 9, 2018, OFAC determined that the property and interests in 
property subject to U.S. jurisdiction of the following person are 
blocked under the relevant sanctions authorities listed below.

Entity

    1. MAHAN TRAVEL AND TOURISM SDN BHD (a.k.a. MAHAN TRAVEL), No.01, 
Lower Ground Floor, Block C, NO:12 Megan Avenue2, Jalan Yap, Kwan Seng, 
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia; website http://mahantravel.com.my; Email 
Address <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#ed808c858c8386988c818c8198809d989fad948c858282c38e8280"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="402d2128212e2b35212c212c352d303532003921282f2f6e232f2d">[email protected]</span></a>; Additional Sanctions Information--
Subject to Secondary Sanctions; Registration Number 875233-U (Malaysia) 
[SDGT] [IFSR] (Linked To: MAHAN AIR).
    Designated pursuant to section 1(c) of E.O. 13224 for acting for or 
on behalf of Iran's MAHAN AIR, a person

[[Page 34302]]

determined to be subject to E.O. 13224, and section 1(d)(i) of E.O. 
13224 for assisting in, sponsoring, or providing financial, material, 
techological support for, or financial or other services to or in 
support of, MAHAN AIR.

    Dated: July 9, 2018.
Andrea M. Gacki,
Acting Director, Office of Foreign Assets Control.
[FR Doc. 2018-15470 Filed 7-18-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4810-AL-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
252 La. 166

#### Charles S. CASSISI, Jr. v. John F. CERISE.

No. 49230.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 17, 1968.

In re: Charles S. Cassisi, Jr., applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Parish of Jefferson. 208 So.2d 400.

Writs refused. On the facts found by the Court of Appeal we find no error of law in its judgment.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF TRANSMONTAIGNE INC.  FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30,
2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          53,938
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  117,739
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    240,867
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               434,656
<PP&E>                                         360,937
<DEPRECIATION>                                (38,710)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 834,572
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          299,849
<BONDS>                                        202,625
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    170,115
<COMMON>                                           307
<OTHER-SE>                                     161,676<F1>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   834,572
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,071,354
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,111,917<F2>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (10,931)<F3>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              27,472
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (57,104)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (19,167)<F4>
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (37,937)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (46,443)<F5>
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.52)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.52)
<FN>
<F1>INCLUDES ($1,465) UNEARNED COMPENSATION
<F2>INCLUDES $50,136 ASSET IMPAIRMENT
<F3>OTHER INCOME, NET OF OTHER EXPENSES; INCLUDES $13,930 NET GAIN FROM DISPOSITION
OF ASSETS
<F4>BENEFIT
<F5>NET LOSS AVAILABLE FOR COMMON STOCKHOLDERS AFTER $8,506 PREFERRED STOCK
DIVIDENDS
</FN>


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 104 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 104

    To provide for congressional approval of national monuments and 
             restrictions on the use of national monuments.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

             January 23 (legislative day, January 3), 2013

  Mr. Vitter introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To provide for congressional approval of national monuments and 
             restrictions on the use of national monuments.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``National Monuments Act of 2011''.

SEC. 2. DESIGNATION OF NATIONAL MONUMENTS.

    The Act of June 8, 1906 (16 U.S.C. 431 et seq.), is amended--
            (1) in section 2 (16 U.S.C. 431), by striking ``sec. 2. 
        That the'' and inserting the following:

``SEC. 2. DESIGNATION OF NATIONAL MONUMENTS.

    ``After obtaining congressional approval of the proposed national 
monument and certifying compliance with the National Environmental 
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) with respect to the 
proposed national monument, the''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:

``SEC. 5. RESTRICTIONS ON PUBLIC USE.

    ``The Secretary of the Interior shall not implement any 
restrictions on the public use of a national monument until the 
expiration of an appropriate review period (as determined by the 
Secretary of the Interior) providing for public input and congressional 
approval.''.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 12.1
                                 CERTIFICATIONS

I, William P. Stewart, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of W.P. Stewart & Co., Ltd.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the company and have:

         a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
         disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
         supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
         company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us
         by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
         which this report is being prepared;

         b) evaluated the effectiveness of the company's disclosure controls and
         procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
         effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end
         of the period covered by this report, based on such evaluation; and

         c) disclosed in this report any change in the company's internal
         control over financial reporting that occurred during the period
         covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is
         reasonably likely to materially affect, the company's internal control
         over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
company's auditors and the audit committee of the company's board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent function):

         a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
         or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
         reasonably likely to adversely affect the company's ability to record,
         process, summarize and report financial information; and

         b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
         other employees who have a significant role in the company's internal
         control over financial reporting.

Date:    March 15, 2004


/s/ William P. Stewart, Jr.
------------------------------------
William P. Stewart, Jr.
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
#### Reba Louise SMITH, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 73-360.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Jan. 8, 1974.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 12, 1974.

*523Phillip A. Hubbart, Public Defender, and Mark King Leban, Asst. Public Defender, and Kurt Marmar, Legal Intern, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and J. Robert Olian, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appel-lee.

Before PEARSON, HENDRY and HAVERFIELD, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Defendant-appellant was informed against, tried by jury, convicted, and sentenced to ten (10) years in the state penitentiary for manslaughter.

Appellant raises two points on appeal, (1) the trial court erred in denying the motion to suppress her confession without an unequivocal and explicit finding of vol-untariness, and (2) the trial court erred in denying the above motion where there was no clear showing of a knowing and intelligent waiver of the defendant’s constitutional rights.

As to the first point, we find McDole v. State, Fla.1973, 283 So.2d 553-to be controlling. In *McDole,*the Supreme Court first quoted Sims v. Georgia, 385 U.S. 538, 87 S.Ct. 639, 17 L.Ed.2d 593 (1967), which held that a trial judge need not make formal findings of fact or write an opinion with respect to the voluntariness of a confession, but his conclusion that a confession is voluntary must appear from the record with unmistakable clarity. Thereupon, the court determined that such “unmistakable clarity” does not appear simply from the trial judge’s statement that the motion to suppress the confession is denied as was done in the case sub judice.

Accordingly, we reverse the judgment and sentence herein appealed and remand the cause for a new trial.

Reversed and remanded.
*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.

1

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

August 30, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-50866

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JOSE DIMAS MEDINA-ARGUETA, also

know as Jose Dimas Medina,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for

the Western District of Texas

(USDC No. 1:04-CR-169-1)

_________________________________________________________

Before REAVLEY, GARZA and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jose Dimas Medina-Argueta pleaded guilty to harboring illegal aliens and

conspiring to harbor illegal aliens. He appeals his sentence arguing that the district court
2

erred in applying the “vulnerable victim” enhancement under United States Sentencing

Guidelines § 3A1.1(b)(1). We agree that the district court erred in applying the

enhancement. United States v. Medina-Argueta, – F.3d –, 2006 WL 1752145, at *3 (5th

Cir. June 27, 2006). However, Medina-Argueta’s sentence falls within a properly

calculated guideline range, and thus, his sentence remains presumptively reasonable. Id.

at *4. Because Medina-Argueta does not contend that his sentence is unreasonable based

on the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), we affirm his sentence. 

AFFIRMED.
#### MARYLAND CASUALTY COMPANY, a corporation, Appellant, v. Richard L. JENKINS et al., Appellees.

No. 73-457.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Aug. 27, 1973.

Appeal dismissed.