alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-4956

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
ALAN ANDREW SARVIS, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (CR-02-3-AW) Submitted: July 27, 2005 Decided: August 9, 2005 Before LUTTIG and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Edward C. Sussman, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. Allen F. Loucks, United States Attorney, Patrick M. Pericak, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Pursuant to a plea agreement, Alan Andrew Sarvis pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute controlled substances, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (2000). Under the terms of his plea agreement, Sarvis waived the right to appeal his conviction and sentence. He was sentenced on June 28, 2002, to 262 months’ imprisonment. Based on Sarvis’ substantial assistance, the Government moved for a four-level downward departure in Sarvis’ sentence. After conducting a hearing pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 35(b), the court resentenced Sarvis in October 2004 to 168 months’ imprisonment. He now seeks to challenge his sentence under United States v. Booker , 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005). Although the Government argues that Sarvis’ appeal is barred by the waiver of his right to appeal in his plea agreement, we find that, in any event, Sarvis cannot assert a Bookerclaim in the context of an appeal from resentencing pursuant to Rule 35(b). A final judgment is one where the judgment of conviction has been rendered, the availability of appeal exhausted, and the time for petitioning the Supreme Court for certiorari has expired. Allen v. Hardy , 478 U.S. 255, 258 n.1 (1986). A later modification to a sentence does not affect the date on which the judgment of conviction became final. See United States v. Sanders , 247 F.3d 139, 143 (4th Cir. 2001). To the extent Sarvis seeks to revisit- 3 - his original sentence under Booker , his appeal is untimely. Sarvis’ judgment became final upon the expiration of the ten-day period to appeal his sentence, i.e., July 8, 2002. Sarvis cannot now resurrect his direct appeal simply because the district court resentenced him pursuant to a Rule 35(b) proceeding. Furthermore, it is well established that this court does not review a defendant’s appeal of the extent of a downward departure unless the departure resulted in an illegal sentence or resulted from an incorrect application of the guidelines. United States v. Hill , 70 F.3d 321, 324 (4th Cir. 1995) (citing 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a) (2000)). Finding neither circumstance present, we dismiss this 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
#### Ozell WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1-378.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. First District.

July 13, 1967.

Rehearing Denied Aug. 30, 1967.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
<PAGE>



                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

            CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(Form S-8) pertaining to the Connect Innovations, Inc. 1998 Stock Plan, and
the Globalbrain.net Inc. 1999 Stock Option Plan of our report dated January 26,
2000, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule
of NBC Internet, Inc. included in its Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year
ended December 31, 1999, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

                                              /s/ Ernst & Young LLP


Palo Alto, California
September 13, 2000
<PAGE>

                       SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                             WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

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

                                    FORM 8-K


                                 CURRENT REPORT
                     PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
                             SECURITIES ACT OF 1934


                                 AUGUST 31, 2000
                Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported)


                               PEPSIAMERICAS, INC.
               (Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Charter)

        DELAWARE                      1-13914                   66-0433580
(State or Other Jurisdiction        (Commission               (IRS Employer
    of Incorporation)               File Number)            Identification No.)


                            3800 DAIN RAUSCHER PLAZA
                              66 SOUTH SIXTH STREET
                          MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402
          (Address of Principal Executive Offices, including Zip Code)


                                 (612) 661-3830
              (Registrant's Telephone Number, including Area Code)

<PAGE>

ITEM 5.  OTHER EVENTS.

         Whitman Corporation and PepsiAmericas, Inc. announced that a
         purported class action lawsuit has been filed in the Court of
         Chancery of Delaware with respect to the proposed merger of
         PepsiAmericas and Whitman Corporation. The complaint, which was
         filed by a purported stockholder of PepsiAmericas, names
         PepsiAmericas, the directors of PepsiAmericas, Dakota Holdings,
         LLC, and Whitman Corporation as defendants.

         The complaint alleges that the consideration to be paid to the
         public shareholders of PepsiAmericas in the merger is unfair and
         inadequate and that the transaction serves the interests of PepsiCo
         to the detriment of PepsiAmericas' minority public shareholders.
         The plaintiff seeks, among other things, class action
         certification, a preliminary and permanent injunction against
         consummation of the proposed merger, and rescission or damages
         should the transaction be consummated.

         Whitman Corporation and PepsiAmericas believe that the allegations
         contained in the complaint are without merit and intend to
         vigorously defend the action.

                                                 2
<PAGE>

                                   SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned hereunto duly authorized.

Date:  September 7, 2000                  PepsiAmericas, Inc.

                                        By:     /s/ John F. Bierbaum
                                           -------------------------------------
                                                John F. Bierbaum
                                                Chief Financial Officer














                                        3
**Exhibit 4.4**

 

***Translation for information purpose only***

** **

**CREDIT AGRICOLE INDOSUEZ**

 

FinancingProjects Department

FinancingManagement

 

 
|   | EURO  DISNEY SCA                                |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------|
|   | BP 100                                          |
|   | 77777 MARNE  LA VALLEE CEDEX 4                  |
|   |                                            |
|   | For  the attention of Mr NAIM and Mr LE BOURHIS |
|   |                                            |
|   |                                            |
|   | October 17,  2002                               |

 

 

## Re :Euro Disney

##### CommonAgreement of August 10, 1994

Derogationsrelating to Financial Covenants

 

 

 

Dear Sirs,

 

As Phase IAPartners’Agent and Phase IB Banks and Lenders’Agent, we are pleased to informyou that in compliance with the provisions of Article 3.2. of the CommonAgreement, the Second Voting College (Phase IA Partners) and the Third VotingCollege (Phase IB Banks and Lenders), have decided in accordance with theconditions stipulated in Article 3.1.1. of the Common Agreement to approve yourDerogation Authorisation requested in your letter dated September 30, 2002.

 

Yoursfaithfully,

 

 

 
| Alexandra  BOLESLAWSKI | Samy ZOUAOUI |
|------------------------|--------------|

 

 

 

Copy :  BNP Paribas (M. Aubert/S. Mattenet)

 Caisse des Dépôts et Consignations (C. LeCorre/C. Tanguy)

 

96

----
# FILED
April 29, 1998 Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate C ourt Clerk COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT KNOXVILLE

MARVIN LEE SPENCER ) KNOX COUNTY ) 03A01-9712-CV-00522 Plaintiff-Appellant ) ) ) v . ) ) HON. HAROLD WIMBERLY, JR., ) JUDGE TIM HUTCHISON, Sheriff ) and KNOX COUNTY, TENNESSEE ) ) Defendants-Appellees ) AFFIRMED AND REMANDED

SAM G. SMITH, JR., OF KNOXVILLE FOR APPELLANT WENDALL HALL, Deputy Law Director, OF KNOXVILLE FOR APPELLEES

O P I N I O N

Goddard, P.J.

Appellant Marvin Lee Spencer appeals dismissal of his suit against Appellees Tim Hutchison, Sheriff of Knox County, and Knox County, Tennessee. His complaint alleges that while incarcerated in a Knox County penal institution he suffered injuries by reason of the negligence of the Appellees. In his appellate brief he details his complaints as follows:1 The court reporter had transcribed the testimony of Mr. Spencer

and the Court's opinion, but before she could transcribe that of Mr. Spencer's mother and the Police Captain, her car was broken into and the tapes as to them stolen.
2

Appellant filed his Complaint in the Circuit Court for Knox County, Tennessee on July 8, 1996 alleging that he sustained an aggravation of pre-existing injuries as the sole and proximate result of the defendant Sheriff's failure to supply a bed to the appellant while he was held in a day room of the Knox County Jail; and by the defendant Knox County's failure to examine, diagnose, or treat appellant for his injuries.

After a full evidentiary hearing the Trial Judge dismissed the complaint. Our reading of the record, including the testimony of Mr. Spencer and the statement of the evidence of his mother and Captain Dorothy Pinkston of the Knoxville Sheriff's Department, 1 persuades us that the evidence does not preponderate against the findings of fact of the Trial Judge, and his action in dismissing the complaint is affirmed under Rule 10(a) of this Court.

The cause is remanded for collection of costs below. Costs of appeal are adjudged against Mr. Spencer and his surety.

_______________________________ Houston M. Goddard, P.J.3

CONCUR:

________________________________ Don T. McMurray, J.

________________________________ William H. Inman, Sr.J.
#### In the Matter of Charlesia J. Commissioner of the Administration for Children’s Services of the City of New York, Appellant; Shaquana J., Respondent. Monica Drinane, Nonparty Appellant.

[721 NYS2d 786]

—In a child protective proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the Commissioner of the Administration for Children’s Services and the Law Guardian separately appeal from an order of the Family Court, Kangs County (Lopez-Torres, J.), entered September 8, 2000, which, after a fact-finding hearing, at which it was determined that the child was neglected, dismissed the petition insofar as asserted against the mother.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, the petition is reinstated insofar as asserted against the mother, and the matter is remitted to the Family Court, Kings County, for a dispositional hearing.

The petitioner established by a preponderance of the evidence that the mother allowed the infliction of physical abuse on the 20-month-old sister of Charlesia J. *(see, Matter of Marcos C.,*186 AD2d 446), and that Charlesia was therefore derivatively neglected *(see,*Family Ct Act § 1046 [a] [i]; *Matter of Cruz,*121 AD2d 901, 902; *Matter of Christina Maria C.,*89 AD2d 855). Under Family Court Act § 1046 (a) (ii), proof that a child has sustained injuries that would ordinarily not be sustained or exist unless by reason of the acts or omissions of *483the parent responsible for the care of the child, is prima facie evidence of child abuse or neglect *(see also, Matter of Philip M.,*82 NY2d 238, 243). The petitioner met its burden in this case by proving that the fatal injuries sustained by the sister of Charlesia J. were of such a nature as would ordinarily not have been sustained except by reason of acts or omissions that took place while the mother was caring for the infant *(see,*Family Ct Act § 1046 [a] [ii]; [b] pi]). The mother failed to rebut the evidence of parental culpability *(see, Matter of Philip M., supra,*at 244). O’Brien, J. P., Santucci, Florio and Schmidt, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>

                       SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

                             Washington, D.C. 20549

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

                                    Form 8-K

                                 CURRENT REPORT
                       PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
                       THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

       Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported): September 5, 2000


                           AAMES FINANCIAL CORPORATION
             (Exact name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)


          DELAWARE                  0-19604               95-340340
----------------------------      ------------       -------------------
(State or Other Jurisdiction      (Commission          (IRS Employer
     of Incorporation)            File Number)       Identification No.)


                       350 South Grand Avenue, 52nd Floor
                          Los Angeles, California 90071
                    ----------------------------------------
                    (Address of Principal Executive Offices)


                                 (323) 210-5000
              ----------------------------------------------------
              (Registrant's Telephone Number, Including Area Code)


                                       NA
          -------------------------------------------------------------
          (Former Name or Former Address, if Changed Since Last Report)

<PAGE>


ITEM 5.  OTHER EVENTS

         Reference is made to the press release of Registrant issued on
September 5, 2000 which contains information meeting the requirements of this
Item 5 and is incorporated herein by this reference. A copy of the press
releases are attached to this Form 8-K as Exhibit 99.1.


ITEM 7.  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND EXHIBITS

     (c)               EXHIBITS

     99.1              Press release issued September 5, 2000.






                                       2
<PAGE>

                                   SIGNATURES

         Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, the Registrant has duly caused this Current Report on Form 8-K to be
signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.


                                       AAMES FINANCIAL CORPORATION





Dated: September 22, 2000              By: /s/ RALPH W. FLICK
                                           ----------------------------------
                                           Ralph W. Flick
                                           Assistant Secretary






                                       3
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT INDEX


EXHIBIT NO.       DESCRIPTION OF EXHIBIT

    99.1          Press release issued September 5, 2000.







                                       4
# C_2004300EN.01001601.xml

| 4.12.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 300/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.12.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 300/16

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Second Chamber)

of 21 October 2004

in Case C-447/02 P: KWS Saat AG v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (1)

1

(Appeal - Community trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Absolute ground for refusal - Distinctive character - Colour per se - Orange colour)

(2004/C 300/31)

Language of the case: German

In Case C-447/02 P: appeal under Article 49 of the EC Statute of the Court of Justice, lodged on 11 December 2002 by KWS Saat AG, established in Einbeck (Germany) (represented by C. Rohnke), the other party to the proceedings being: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (Agents: D. Schennen and G. Schneider) — the Court (Second Chamber), composed of: C.W.A. Timmermans, President of the Chamber, C. Gulmann, J.-P. Puissochet, N. Colneric and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues (Rapporteur), Judges; P. Léger, Advocate General; M. Múgica Arzamendi, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 21 October 2004, in which it:

| 1. | dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | orders KWS Saat AG to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

orders KWS Saat AG to pay the costs.

---

(1)   OJ C 55 du 8.3.2003.

1

---
EXHIBIT 32.1

                           SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION

         In connection with the quarterly report of mLight Tech, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Ed Sanders, President of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. SS. 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; and

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

May 16, 2011                            /s/ Ed Sanders
                                        --------------
                                        Ed Sanders, President, Principal
                                        Executive Officer, Principal Financial
                                        and Accounting officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 44436

STATE OF IDAHO

,

Plaintiff

- Respondent

,

v.

JEREMIAH WAYNE JONES

,

Defendant

- Appellant

. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 2017 Unpublished Opinion No. 346

Filed: February 2, 2017

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED

OPINION AND SHALL NOT

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Ada County. Hon. Richard D. Greenwood , District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of five years, with a minimum period of confinement of two and one

- half years, for assault, affirmed

.

Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Andrea W. Reynolds

, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Bois e, for appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming , Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

________________________________________________

Before GRATTON, Chief Judge; MELANSON, Judge; and HUSKEY, Judge

________________________________________________

PER CURIAM

Jeremiah Wayne Jones pled guilty to unlawful possession of a firearm . I.C. § 18

- 3316

. In exchange for his guilty plea, additional charges were dismissed including an allegation that he

was a persistent violator. The district court sentenced Jo nes to a unified term of five years, with

a minimum period of confinement of two years

. Jones appeals. 1

1 Jones also pled guilty to and was sentenced for a misdemeanor. However, he does not challenge that judgment of conviction and sentence on appeal.2 Sentencing is a matter for the trial court’s discretion. Both our standard of review and the

factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of the sentence are well established and

need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez , 121 Idaho 1 14, 117

- 18, 822 P.2d 1011, 1014

-
15 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lopez , 106 Idaho 447, 449

- 51, 680 P.2d 869, 871

- 73 (Ct. App.

1984); State v. Toohill , 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct. App. 1982). When reviewing

the length of a sentence, we consider the defendant’s entire sentence. State v. Oliver , 144 Idaho

722, 726, 170 P.3d 387, 391 (2007). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record

in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.

Therefore, Jones ’s judgm ent of conviction and sentence are affirmed.
# C_2014420EN.01000801.xml

| 22.11.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 420/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.11.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 420/8

---

Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries

2014/C 420/07

In accordance with Article 35(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), a decision has been taken to close the fishery as set down in the following table:

1

| Date and time of closure | 6.11.2014 |
| --- | --- |
| Duration | 6.11.2014-31.12.2014 |
| Member State | Spain |
| Stock or Group of stocks | BSF/56712- |
| Species | Black scabbardfish (Aphanopus carbo) |
| Zone | EU and international waters of V, VI, VII and XII |
| Type(s) of fishing vessels | — |
| Reference number | 73/DSS |

Date and time of closure

6.11.2014

Duration

6.11.2014-31.12.2014

Member State

Spain

Stock or Group of stocks

BSF/56712-

Species

Black scabbardfish (Aphanopus carbo)

Aphanopus carbo

Zone

EU and international waters of V, VI, VII and XII

Type(s) of fishing vessels

—

Reference number

73/DSS

---

(1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.

1

---
I

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3852

To amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit a Federal firearms

licensee from selling or delivering a firearm or ammunition to an intoxicated person.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 10, 1994

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota introduced the following bill; which was

referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit a Federal

firearms licensee from selling or delivering a firearm

or ammunition to an intoxicated person.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. PROHIBITION AGAINST SALE OR DELIVERY OF

4 A FIREARM OR AMMUNITION TO AN INTOXI5 CATED PERSON.

6 Section 922(b)(1) of title 18, United States Code, is

7 amended by inserting after ‘‘believe is’’: ‘‘intoxicated from

8 the use of alcoholic beverages or controlled substances to
2

•HR 3852 IH

1 the extent that his/her normal faculties are impaired or

2 is’’.

Æ