alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 177 (Wednesday, September 12, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 46242]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-19775]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 10542]


Certification Pursuant to Sections 7045(a)(3)(A) of the 
Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs 
Appropriations Act, 2018

    By virtue of the authority vested in me as the Secretary of State, 
including pursuant to section 7045(a)(3)(A) of the Department of State, 
Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2018 (Div. 
K, Pub. L. 115-141) (SFOAA), I hereby certify that the central 
government of Honduras is:
    <bullet> Informing its citizens of the dangers of the journey to 
the southwest border of the United States;
    <bullet> combating human smuggling and trafficking;
    <bullet> improving border security, including preventing illegal 
migration, human smuggling and trafficking, and trafficking of illicit 
drugs and other contraband; and
    <bullet> cooperating with United States Government agencies and 
other governments in the region to facilitate the return, repatriation, 
and reintegration of illegal migrants arriving at the southwest border 
of the United States who do not qualify for asylum, consistent with 
international law.
    This certification shall be published in the Federal Register and, 
along with the accompanying Memorandum of Justification, shall be 
reported to Congress.

    Dated: August 11, 2018.
Michael R. Pompeo,
Secretary of State.
[FR Doc. 2018-19775 Filed 9-11-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4710-29-P
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 10**  **- 7603** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

– Appellee ,

v.

EDWIN ARNOLDO REYES , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Distric t of Maryland , at Greenbelt

. Peter J. Messitte, Senior District Judge. ( 8:01

- cr
- 00533

- PJM

- 20 )

Submitted : May 6, 2011 Decided: May 25, 2011

Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Edwin Arnoldo Reyes, Appellant Pro Se. Deborah A. Johnston, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Edwin Arnoldo Reyes appeals from the district court ’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (2006) motion for reduction
of sentence based upon Amendment 503 to the Sentencing

Guidelines. We review an order granting or denying a
§ 3582(c)(2) motion for abuse of discretion. United States v.

Munn , 595 F.3d 18 3, 186 (4th Cir. 2010). Under § 3582(c)(2),
the district court may modify the term of imprisonment “of a
defendant who has been sentenced . . . based on a sentencing
range that has subsequently been lowered

. ” Here, Reyes’ sentencing range was not lowered , as Reyes was sentenced after the amendment in question became effective. As such, § 3582 is
inapplicable. Accordingly, we affirm the order of the district
court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal contentions are adequately pre sented in the materials
before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

AFFIRMED
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLAImages

# DLA Images

Search

Search

                                  - All Images 
                                  - Other 

                                  - Upload Date
                                  - Photo Date
                                  - Title

Share

----

Download Image: Small ()Medium ()Full Size (0.13 MB)

Tags:DLA Distribution, Defense Logistics Agency Distribution, GDE, Global Distribution Excellence, DLA Distribution Oklahoma City, Outstanding Employee with a Disability of the Year Award, dla, Defense Logistics Agency

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
Exhibit 32

 

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 Annual Reportof China Bull Management Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended     September 30, 2014, as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, Chief ExecutiveOfficer & Chief Financial Officer, certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 ofthe Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:

 

   1. The report fully complies with the requirementsof Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

Date:   October 3, 2016

 

 

 

 

                                                                                                                    By: /s/ Andrew Chien

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

                                            AndrewChien, CEO and CFO
-81 -80 -79 -78 -77 -76 -75

37 38 39 40


### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 500 1000 1500 500 18 12 06 00 05/26 

### NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

## Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 26 May 07

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 38.86 N 77.06 WMeters AGL
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-1959

In re: LARRY RAY MITCHELL,

 Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus

(No. 5:16-ct-03057-D)

Submitted: January 17, 2017 Decided: January 19, 2017

Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Larry Ray Mitchell, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Larry Ray Mitchell petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking 

an order for his immediate release. We conclude that Mitchell

is not entitled to mandamus relief.

Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only 

in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. U.S. Dist. Court, 426 

U.S. 394, 402 (1976); United States v. Moussaoui, 333 F.3d 509, 

516-17 (4th Cir. 2003). Further, mandamus relief is available 

only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. 

In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 

1988). This court does not have jurisdiction to grant mandamus 

relief against state officials, Gurley v. Superior Court of 

Mecklenburg Cnty., 411 F.2d 586, 587 (4th Cir. 1969), and does 

not have jurisdiction to review final state court orders, Dist. 

of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 482 

(1983).

The relief sought by Mitchell is not available by way of 

mandamus. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of 

mandamus. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and 

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 
3

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

PETITION DENIED
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-7450

TAHRIM SUPREME C. JIHAD, a/k/a Vincent Edward

Little,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

R. MCKENZIE, Sergeant; LIEUTENANT MCMICHAEL;

SENIOR WARDEN FOWLER; CAPTAIN GILLISPIE, in

their individual and official capacities,

acting under color of state law,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Charleston. Cameron McGowan Currie, District

Judge. (CA-93-2521-2-22AJ)

Submitted: January 11, 1996 Decided: January 24, 1996

Before RUSSELL, HALL, and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tahrim Supreme C. Jihad, Appellant Pro Se. William Llewellyn Pope,

Roy F. Laney, POPE & RODGERS, Columbia, South Carolina, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order dismissing his 42

U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. Appellant's case was referred to a

magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (1988). The

magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised

Appellant that failure to file timely objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based

upon the recommendation. Despite this warning, Appellant failed to

object to the magistrate judge's recommendation.

The timely filing of objections to a magistrate judge's

recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of the

substance of that recommendation when the parties have been warned

that failure to object will waive appellate review. Wright v.

Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985). See generally Thomas

v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Appellant has waived appellate review

by failing to file objections after receiving proper notice.

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. 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.

AFFIRMED
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-40529 (Summary Calendar)

SERGIO MORAIDA, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus J. LAMBRIGHT, Correctional Officer, Gurney Unit; T. GREENWOOD, CPT, Gurney Unit; UNIDENTIFIED SMITH, Major, Gurney Unit; BRENDA CHANEY, Asst. Warden, Gurney Unit; MICHAEL WILSON, Warden, Gurney Unit; JANIE M. COCKRELL, Warden, Regional Director, TDCJ-ID, WAYNE SCOTT DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION; JAMES A. COLLINS, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION, Defendants-Appellees.

__________________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 6:95-CV-581

__________________________________________

August 5, 1997 Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR
. 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 5 TH C IR R. 47.5.4. 2 PER CURIAM: * Sergio Moraida, # 674366, appeals the 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) (now (e)(2)(B)(I)) dismissal of his due process claim and the judgment for the defendant on his excessive force claim after a bench trial. Moraida makes generalized attacks on the factual findings of the magistrate judge. He contends that he accidently touched Lambright’s elbow and that he was not belligerent or aggressive. He alleges perjury and conflicting statements and testimony by the defendants’ witnesses. Moraida offers no reason to question the magistrate judge’s factual findings. They are not clearly erroneous and will not be disturbed on appeal. Odom v. Frank , 3 F.3d 839, 843 (5th Cir. 1993). Moraida argues that he did not pose a reasonably perceived threat to warrant being assaulted by Officer Lambright and that there was no need for force. “[W]henever prison officials stand accused of using excessive force in violation of the Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause, the core judicial inquiry is . . . whether force was applied in a good-faith effort to maintain or restore discipline, or maliciously and sadistically to cause harm.” Hudson v. McMillian , 503 U.S. 1, 6-7 (1992). The magistrate judge’s conclusions on the core inquiry are correct. Moraida challenges the magistrate judge’s dismissal of his due process claim against Greenwood and the supervisory officials. Moraida did not state a due process claim because his punishment was 15 days solitary confinement and classification as medium custody for 90 days. He did not have a liberty interest. Sandin v. Conner , 115 S. Ct. 2293, 2300 (1995). Moraida argues that he should have been appointed counsel in the district court because he is Spanish-speaking and cannot speak fluent English. Moraida does not point out any errors in3

the magistrate judge’s statement of the facts which allegedly resulted from his inability to communicate the facts of his claim. The magistrate judge did not abuse her discretion in denying appointment of counsel. Ulmer v. Chancellor , 691 F.2d 209, 213 (5th Cir. 1982).
AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0000925054
<NAME>                        SPECTRIAN CORP /DE/
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                           31,460
<SECURITIES>                                     68,128
<RECEIVABLES>                                    21,499
<ALLOWANCES>                                        376
<INVENTORY>                                      15,362
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  6,202
<PP&E>                                           56,935
<DEPRECIATION>                                   24,159
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  175,051
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            24,797
<BONDS>                                           5,912
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<COMMON>                                        146,228
<OTHER-SE>                                       (1,886)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    175,051
<SALES>                                         168,798
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                168,798
<CGS>                                           132,684
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   132,684
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 31,658
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (4,865)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   9,321
<INCOME-TAX>                                        399
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               8,922
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                      8,922
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      0.90
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      0.83
                                               


</TABLE>
# Gazzetta ufficiale C 222I/2021

| | ISSN 1977-0944 |
| --- | --- |
| Gazzetta ufficiale
  dell’Unione europea | C 222I |
| | |
| Edizione in lingua italiana | Comunicazioni e informazioni | 64° anno11 giugno 2021 |

ISSN 1977-0944

Gazzetta ufficiale

dell’Unione europea

C 222I

Edizione in lingua italiana

Comunicazioni e informazioni

64° anno11 giugno 2021

---

| Sommario | pagina |
| --- | --- |
| | II   Comunicazioni |
| | COMUNICAZIONI PROVENIENTI DALLE ISTITUZIONI, DAGLI ORGANI E DAGLI ORGANISMI DELL'UNIONE EUROPEA |
| | Consiglio |
| 2021/C 222 I/01 | Dichiarazione della Commissione | 1 |

Sommario

pagina

II   Comunicazioni

COMUNICAZIONI PROVENIENTI DALLE ISTITUZIONI, DAGLI ORGANI E DAGLI ORGANISMI DELL'UNIONE EUROPEA

Consiglio

2021/C 222 I/01

Dichiarazione della Commissione

1

---

| IT | |
| --- | --- |

IT

---

II Comunicazioni

COMUNICAZIONI PROVENIENTI DALLE ISTITUZIONI, DAGLI ORGANI E DAGLI ORGANISMI DELL'UNIONE EUROPEA

Consiglio

| 11.6.2021 | IT | Gazzetta ufficiale dell’Unione europea | CI 222/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.6.2021

IT

Gazzetta ufficiale dell’Unione europea

CI 222/1

---

Dichiarazione della Commissione

(2021/C 222 I/01)

Per un regime efficace di controllo delle esportazioni dell’UE, la Commissione riconosce l’importanza di un programma comune di rafforzamento delle capacità e di formazione nel campo del rilascio delle licenze e dell’applicazione. La Commissione, in consultazione con il gruppo di coordinamento sui prodotti a duplice uso, si impegna a esaminare le implicazioni che un programma di rafforzamento delle capacità e di formazione può comportare sotto il profilo delle risorse umane e finanziarie, con l’obiettivo di individuare le opzioni per la progettazione, configurazione e attuazione di un tale programma.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 359 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 359

To improve the administration of the Women's Rights National Historical 
         Park in the State of New York, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 5, 1993

Ms. Slaughter introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To improve the administration of the Women's Rights National Historical 
         Park in the State of New York, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. INCLUSION OF ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES.

    Section 1601(c) of the Act of December 28, 1980 (16 U.S.C. 410 ll) 
is amended as follows:
            (1) Strike ``initially''.
            (2) Strike ``and'' at the end of paragraph (8).
            (3) Strike the period at the end of paragraph (9) and 
        insert a semicolon.
            (4) Add the following at the end thereof:
            ``(10) not to exceed 1 acre, plus improvements, as 
        determined by the Secretary, in Seneca Falls for development of 
        a maintenance facility;
            ``(11) dwelling, 1 Seneca Street, Seneca Falls;
            ``(12) dwelling, 10 Seneca Street, Seneca Falls;
            ``(13) parcels adjacent to Wesleyan Chapel Block, including 
        Clinton Street, Fall Street, and Mynderse Street, Seneca Falls; 
        and
            ``(14) dwelling, 12 East Williams Street, Waterloo.''.

SEC. 2. MISCELLANEOUS AMENDMENTS TO 1980 ACT.

    Section 1601 of the Act of December 28, 1980 (16 U.S.C. 410 ll) is 
amended as follows:
            (1) Add the following sentence at the end of subsection 
        (g): ``Funds available to the Secretary for the purposes of the 
        park shall be available to establish and administer education 
        and research facilities and programs on the history of women's 
        rights within the park pursuant to cooperative agreements with 
        appropriate public or private entities.''.
            (2) In subsection (h)(5) strike ``ten years'' and insert 
        ``25 years''.
            (3) In subsection (i) strike ``$700,000'' and ``$500,000'' 
        and insert ``$1,500,000'' and ``$15,000,000'' respectively.

                                 <all>
```
#### Paul LICHTEFELD, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. Jerry CUTSHAW, individually, and dba Interiors Contracting, Max J. Smith, an individual, and Max J. Smith and Associates, Inc., a Utah corporation, Defendants and Appellees.

No. 880124.

Supreme Court of Utah.

Nov. 21, 1989.

Stephen G. Morgan and Todd S. Richardson, Salt Lake City, for plaintiff and appellant.

Thomas R. Grisley, Salt Lake City, for Jerry Cutshaw.

James A. Murphy, Salt Lake City, for Max J. Smith.

PER CURIAM:

On motion of defendants, the trial court dismissed plaintiff’s complaint on the ground that Utah Code Ann. § 78-12-25.5 (Supp.1989) bars plaintiff’s action. Plaintiff appeals, arguing that the statute, Utah’s architects and builders statute of repose, is unconstitutional as depriving plaintiff of constitutional rights. Recently this Court ruled that the statute violates article I, section 11 of the Utah Constitution, the open courts clause. *See Horton v. Goldminer’s Daughter,*785 P.2d 1087 (Utah 1989); *Sun Valley Water Beds of Utah v. Herm Hughes & Son, Inc.,*782 P.2d 188 (1989).

The judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings.

HOWE, Associate C.J., having disqualified himself, does not participate herein.