alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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

September 30, 2005

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 04-40446

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

JAVIER GARCIA-VARGAS

Defendant - Appellant

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:03-CR-412-1

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

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Before KING, Chief Judge, DeMOSS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

This court affirmed the sentence of Javier Garcia-Vargas. 

See United States v. Garcia-Vargas, No. 04-40446, 115 Fed. Appx.

288 (5th Cir. Dec. 17, 2004). The Supreme Court vacated and

remanded for further consideration in light of United States v.

Booker, 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005). We requested and received

supplemental letter briefs addressing the impact of Booker. 
No. 04-40446

-2-

Garcia contends that the district court’s application of a

sentencing guidelines enhancement based on the court’s finding

that Garcia’s unlawful weapons possession occurred in connection

with felony possession of marijuana violated the Sixth Amendment. 

He concedes that such argument is raised for the first time on

appeal and is reviewable for plain error only. See United States

v. Mares, 402 F.3d 511, 520-21 (5th Cir. 2005), petition for

cert. filed (U.S. Mar. 31, 2005) (No. 04-9517). 

 As Garcia admits, the district court made no statements

indicating that it would have imposed a lower sentence under an

advisory guidelines regime. Accordingly, although the district

court’s enhancement of Garcia’s sentence constitutes error that

is plain, i.e., obvious, Garcia cannot demonstrate that the error

affected his substantial rights. See id. at 521-22. 

Garcia correctly acknowledges that this court has rejected

the argument that a Booker error is a structural error or that

such error is presumed to be prejudicial. See United States v.

Martinez-Lugo, 411 F.3d 597, 611 (5th Cir. 2005). He likewise

concedes that our precedent forecloses his contention that

application of Booker’s remedial opinion to him violates the Ex

Post Facto Clause. See United States v. Scroggins, 411 F.3d 572,

577 (5th Cir. 2005). He raises these arguments to preserve them

for further review. Garcia’s reliance on the plain error

analysis set forth in United States v. Dazey, 403 F.3d 1147 (10th

Cir. 2005), is unavailing in light of Mares. 
No. 04-40446

-3-

 Because nothing in the Supreme Court’s Booker decision

requires us to change our prior affirmance in this case, we

reinstate our judgment affirming Garcia’s conviction and

sentence. 

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of West Texas Resources,
Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended December 31, 2014, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), we, Stephen E. Jones, President and Chief Executive Officer
of the Company, and John D. Kerr, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 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.
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|By:    |  | /s/ Stephen E. Jones                  |  | Dated: | February 17, 2015
|------ |  | ------------------------------------- |  | ------ | -----------------
|       |  | Stephen E. Jones                      |  |        |                  
|Title: |  | President and Chief Executive Officer |  |        |                  
|       |  |                                       |  |        |                  
|       |  |                                       |  |        |                  
|By:    |  | /s/ John D. Kerr                      |  | Dated: | February 17, 2015
|       |  | John D. Kerr                          |  |        |                  
|Title: |  | Chief Financial Officer               |  |        |                  



This certification is made solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, subject to the knowledge standard contained therein, and not for any other purpose.
EXHIBIT 21.1



               BEI MEDICAL SYSTEMS COMPANY, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                              LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES

                                                                  % OF VOTING
     NAME                                                       SECURITIES OWNED

1.   BEI Medical Systems Company, Inc., a Delaware corporation            100%

2.   Meditron Devices, Inc., a Delaware corporation                       100%

3.   Xylog Corporation, a New Jersey corporation                          100%

4.   BEI Medical Systems International, Inc., a Delaware corporation      100%

5.   Calculus Instruments Company, Inc., a New Jersey corporation         100%

6.   Ovamed Corporation, a California corporation                         100%

7.   Zinnanti Surgical Instruments, a California corporation              100%
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

					NO. 2-04-375-CR

THE STATE OF TEXAS	STATE

		V.

JOSE LUIS URBINA		  						  APPELLEE

	----------

	FROM COUNTY CRIMINAL COURT NO. 3 OF DENTON COUNTY

	----------

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

	----------

	We have considered the “State’s Motion To Dismiss Appeal And Issue Mandate.”  The motion complies with rule 42.2(a) of the rules of appellate procedure.  Tex. R. App. P. 42.2(a).  No decision of this court having been delivered before we received this motion, we grant the motion and dismiss the appeal.  See id.; Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f).  As agreed by the parties, the mandate will issue immediately.  See Tex. R. App. P. 18.1(c).	

	It is further ordered that the State shall pay all costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue.  See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 44.01(f) (Vernon Supp. 2004-05).

								PER CURIAM

PANEL D:	GARDNER, WALKER, and MCCOY, JJ.  

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED: November 24, 2004
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 (0.37 MB)

Tags:DLA Aviation, community service , TEAM BUILDING, People and Culture, Morale

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-6465

HENRY LEE SMELTZER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus THEODIS BECK, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. Paul Trevor Sharp, Magistrate Judge. (1:05-cv-00493-PTS) Submitted: September 28, 2006 Decided: October 5, 2006 Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Henry Lee Smeltzer, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Carla Hollis, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Henry Lee Smeltzer seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Smeltzer has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We deny Smeltzer’s motion for a hearing en banc and 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
National and Governmental Advisory Committees to the 

U.S. Representative to the Commission for Environmental Cooperation

Teleconference Agenda

Friday, February 15, 2013

12:30 p.m. - 1:30 p.m. Eastern Standard Time

Call-in number: 1-866-299-3188 Code: 2022330072

1201 Constitution Ave. NW 

EPA East Building, Room 1132

Washington, DC 20460

Purpose: To learn about the status of Tribes in the United States, Canada and Mexico and about 

the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

12:30 pm Call to Order and Introductions 

Oscar Carrillo, Designated Federal Officer, EPA

Opening Remarks

Cynthia Jones-Jackson, Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee 

Management & Outreach, (OFACMO) EPA

Mark Joyce, Associate Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee 

Management & Outreach, EPA

12:35 pm Agenda Overview & Ground Rules for Teleconference

Octaviana Trujillo, Chair of the Governmental Advisory Committee 

Brian Houseal, Chair of the National Advisory Committee

12:40 pm Presentation on the Status of Tribes in North America by Mr. James Anaya, 

Special Rapparteur on the rights of Indigenous Peoples in the United Nations

1:10pm Question and Answer Period

1:25pm Public Comments

1:30 pm ADJOURN
### *** E.O. 12866 Review - Draft - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

**Category Primary**  **Estimate Low Estimate**  **High Estimate Year**  **Dollar Discount** 

**Rate Period** 

**Covered Notes**  **Benefits** NA $8,700.00 $25,000.00 2010 7% 2030

NA $9,500.00 $27,000.00 2010 3% 2030 NA NA NA NA 7% NA NA NA NA NA 3% NA Qualitative **Costs** $3,400 NA NA 2010 7% 2030 $3,400 NA NA 2010 3% 2030 NA NA NA 7% NA NA NA 3% Qualitative **Transfers** NA NA NA 7%

NA NA NA 3% From/To From: To:

NA NA NA 7% NA NA NA 3% From/To From: To: **Effects** State, Local, and/or Tribal Government

Small Business

Wages

Growth Other Annual Monetized ($millions/year) Federal Annual Monetized ($millions/year) Annual Monetized ($millions/year)
Annual Quantified **Estimates Units** 

Annual Monetized ($millions/year) Annual Quantified (tons)

For the Tier 3 vehicle

-related provisions, we have identified 4 car/truck manufacturers, 8 Independent Commercial

Importers, and 5 alternative fuel converters that qualify as small businesses. For the Tier 3 fuel

-related provisions, we have identified 10 gasoline refiners and importers that qualify as small businesses. EPA conducted outreach to small entities and convened a Small Business Advocacy Review Panel to obtain advice and recommendations of representatives of the small entities that potentially would be subject to the Tier 3 rule’s requirements. The proposed rule contains a number of small entity flexibilities that are expected to significantly mi nim ize the impact of the proposed standards on these small business entities. EPA prepared an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) that examines the impact of the proposed rule on small entities. The IRFA can be found in Chapter 10 of the Draft Regulatory Impact Analysis. This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). The proposed standards will be implemented at the Federal level and impose compliance costs only on vehicle manufacturers and fuel refiners. Tribal governments would be affected only to the extent they

purchase and use regulated vehicles and fuels. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to these rules.

Note: The range of total annual benefits in 2030 represent a low end that includes premature mortality

estimates based on Pope et al., 2002 for PM 2.5 and Bell et al., 2004 for ozone, and an upper end that includes premature mortality estimates based on Laden et al., 2006 for PM 2.5 and Levy et al., 2005 for ozone. More details regarding the benefits can be found in preamble Section VIII.

Note: More details regarding costs can be found in preamble Section VII.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Justice

###### Antitrust Division

                    Notice is hereby given that, on December 21, 2011, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301*et seq.*                     (“the Act”), Connected Media Experience, Inc. (“CMX”) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, Hui Miao (individual member), Suwon City, Republic of Korea, has been added as a party to this venture.                

No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and CMX intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.

                    On March 12, 2010, CMX filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on April 16, 2010 (75 FR 20003).                

                    The last notification was filed with the Department on October 3, 2011. A notice was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on November 15, 2011 (76 FR 70758).                

Patricia A. Brink,

Director of Civil Enforcement, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 2012-352 Filed 1-10-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P
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 (0.12 MB)

Tags:Initiatives, DLA Strategic Plan, DSCC, DLA Land & Maritime, columbus, People and Culture

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
Exhibit 32.3





CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Keith S. Franz, Chief Financial Officer, in connection with the Quarterly Report of CĪON Investment Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2020, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Quarterly Report”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





1. The Quarterly Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





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





Date: August 13, 2020





/s/ Keith S. Franz


Keith S. Franz


Chief Financial Officer


(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)


CĪON Investment Corporation
S. J. Res. 32 

One Hundred Thirteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Friday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and fourteen 

Joint Resolution 

Providing for the reappointment of John W. McCarter as a citizen regent of the 

Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution. 

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the

United States of America in Congress assembled, That, in accordance with section 5581 of the Revised Statutes (20 U.S.C. 43), 

the vacancy on the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution, 

in the class other than Members of Congress, occurring by reason 

of the expiration of the term of John W. McCarter of Illinois on 

March 14, 2014, is filled by the reappointment of the incumbent. 

The reappointment is for a term of 6 years, beginning on March 

15, 2014, or the date of enactment of this joint resolution, whichever 

occurs later. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.