alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 46127

STATE OF IDAHO ,

Plaintiff

- Respondent ,

v.

JUSTIN JAMES LOERA ,

Defendant

- Appellant

. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Filed: March 14, 2019

Karel A. Lehrman, 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THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY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. Nancy Baskin , District Judge.

Order relinquishing jurisdiction and sentence

, affirmed

.
Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Maya P. Waldron , Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

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

________________________________________________ Before GRATTON, Chief Judge; HUSKEY, Judge; and LORELLO, Judge

________________________________________________

PER CURIAM

Justin James Loera pleaded guilty to operating a motor vehicle without the owner’s

consent , Idaho Code § 48

- 227 . The district court imposed a unified five

- year sentence, with
three years determinate . The district court retained jurisdiction, and Loera was sent to participate
in the rider program. The district court relinquished jurisdiction. Loera appeals, claiming that

his sentence is excessive and constitutes an abuse of discretion.

Senten ces are reviewed for an abuse of discretion. Our appellate standard of review and
the factors to be considered when evaluating the reasonableness of a sentence are well

established. State v. Burdett , 134 Idaho 271, 1 P.3d 299 (Ct. App. 2000); State v. Sa nchez , 115
Idaho 776, 769 P.2d 1148 (Ct. App. 1989); State v. Reinke , 103 Idaho 771, 653 P.2d 1183 (Ct.2 App. 1982); State v. Toohill , 103 Idaho 565, 650 P.2d 707 (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).
The order of the district court relinquishing jurisdiction and Loera ’s sentence are

affirmed.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ASOPURU OKEMGBO,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

 v.

WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT

OF ECOLOGY,

Defendant-Appellee.

No. 14-35206

D.C. No. 2:12-cv-05119-TOR

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Washington

Thomas O. Rice, Chief Judge, Presiding

Submitted September 13, 2016** 

Before: HAWKINS, N.R. SMITH, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

Asopuru Okemgbo appeals pro se from the district court’s summary

judgment in his employment action alleging Title VII and First Amendment

claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo,

FILED

SEP 19 2016

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Vasquez v. County of Los Angeles, 349 F.3d 634, 639 (9th Cir. 2003), and we

affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Okemgbo’s Title

VII discrimination claim because Okemgbo failed to raise a genuine dispute of

material fact as to whether defendant’s proffered legitimate, nondiscriminatory

reason for terminating his employment was pretextual. See id. at 640-42 & 640 n.5

(setting forth the burden shifting framework for Title VII employment

discrimination claims).

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Okemgbo’s First

Amendment claim because Okemgbo failed to establish a genuine dispute of

material fact as to whether defendant violated his constitutional rights. See Nichols

v. Dancer, 657 F.3d 929, 932-33 (9th Cir. 2011) (setting forth test for evaluating

free speech claim in the public employment context); Vernon v. City of Los

Angeles, 27 F.3d 1385, 1392-93 (9th Cir. 1994) (setting forth test for free exercise

claim in the public employment context).

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued

in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on 

appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.

2 14-35206
**Exhibit 31.2****CERTIFICATIONS**I, J. Matthew Bond, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of PRA International; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and otherfinancial information included in this report, fairly present inall material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, theperiods presented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsiblefor establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made knownto us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s first fiscal quarter that has materially affected, oris reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors: a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the designor operation of internal control over financial reporting whichare reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s abilityto record, process, summarize and report financial information;and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.     Signature:     /s/ J. Matthew Bond  Name: J. Matthew Bond  Title: Chief Financial OfficerDate: August 8, 2005
391 A.2d 674

#### Commonwealth v. Bennett, Appellant.

Submitted March 20, 1978.

Nathaniel P. D’Amico, for appellant; Flora L. Becker, Assistant District Attorney, and Edward G. Rendell, District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Order affirmed.
Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA-2016-4220 Directorate Identifier: 2015-NM-076-AD

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If 

they do not, click (or Tab) into and then out of the changed cell.

Estimated Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Do not include oncondition costs here

Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, 

propeller, appliance)

Work-hours

(include 

access, testing, 

and close-up)

Labor 

cost 

(@$85/h

our)

Parts Cost Total Costs 

(labor + 

parts)

Number of 

U.S. 

Registered 

Products

Total Cost 

for U.S. Fleet

Revise Limitations 1.0 $ 85.00 $0 $ 85.00 2 $ 170.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

The known number of products in compliance:

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $ 170

Costs covered under warranty (if known) $

On-Condition Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Work-hours 

(include access, 

testing, and closeup)

Labor cost 

(@$85/hour)

Parts Cost Cost per Product

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table 

that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs):
Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant? 

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain for 

either a Yes or No answer.

YES NO 

Explanation: 

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for 

aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation?

YES* NO 

*Explanation:
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

No. 21

- 40284 Summary Calendar

**United States of America,**

Plaintiff

— Appellee **,**

versus

**Henry Benitez**

**- Cruz,** 

Defendant

— Appellant

**.**

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 1:20

- CR

- 263

- 1

Before **Southwick, Oldham,** and **Wilson,** Circuit Judges

. **Per Curiam :**  *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Henry Benitez

Cruz has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Benitez

- Cruz has not filed a response. We have reviewed

* Pursuant to **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  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 cuit**  **R ule**  47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED January 3, 2022

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 21-40284 Document: 00516151159 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/03/2022No. 21

- 40284

2 counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for a ppellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is **GRANTED** , counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the **APPEAL IS DISMISSED**

. See **5th Cir. R.** 42.2

. Case: 21-40284 Document: 00516151159 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/03/2022
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Respondent

v. JOSE LUIS TORRES, Petitioner : : : : : : : : : : : No. 872 MAL 2014 Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW , this 7th day of April, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is DENIED
.
EXHIBIT 31.1
 CERTIFICATIONS
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of IASIS Healthcare LLC;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(s) 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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
     5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
    /s/ David R. WhiteDavid R. WhiteChairman of the Board
and Chief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT
32.1





CERTIFICATION
OF THE PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER


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





In connection with the quarterly
report of GlobalOptions Group, Inc., (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the
quarter ended September 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Harvey W. Schiller, Principal
Executive 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, 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 results of operations of the
      Company.





November
      12,
      2009
              
              /s/ Harvey W. SchillerName:
              Harvey
      W. SchillerTitle:
              Chairman
      of the Board and
                Chief
      Executive Officer
                (Principal
      Executive Officer)
IV 

107TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 502

Expressing the sense of the Congress in support of Breast Cancer Awareness 

Month, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 7, 2002

Mr. VITTER submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred 

to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the Congress in support of Breast 

Cancer Awareness Month, and for other purposes.

Whereas every 3 minutes a woman is diagnosed with breast 

cancer; 

Whereas 182,000 new cases of breast cancer are expected to 

be diagnosed in the United States in 2002; 

Whereas breast cancer is the leading cause of death in 

women between the ages of 40 and 55; 

Whereas 1 in 8 women who lives to age 85 will develop breast 

cancer in her lifetime; 

Whereas when breast cancer is found early the survival rate 

is 96 percent; 

Whereas mammograms and monthly breast self-examinations 

are the key components of early detection; and 
2

•HCON 502 IH 

Whereas Breast Cancer Awareness Month provides a special 

opportunity to provide education about the importance of 

monthly breast self-examinations and annual mammograms: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 

2 concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that—

3 (1) Breast Cancer Awareness Month provides a 

4 special opportunity to provide education about the 

5 importance of monthly breast self-examinations and 

6 annual mammograms; 

7 (2) it is appropriate to salute the more than 

8 2,000,000 breast cancer survivors in the United 

9 States and the efforts of victims, volunteers, and 

10 professionals who combat breast cancer each day; 

11 (3) national and community organizations 

12 should be recognized and applauded for their work 

13 in promoting awareness about breast cancer and for 

14 providing information and treatment to its sufferers; 

15 and 

16 (4) organizations and health practicioners are 

17 urged to use this opportunity to promote awareness, 

18 monthly self-examinations, and annual mammo19 grams.

Æ
Exhibit 32.2
 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)
    
    the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended June
30, 2010 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section
15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and(ii)
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 Dated: August 3, 2010
 By:
    /s/ James A. CalderJames A. CalderChief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
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.                  

###### Small Business Administration

Pursuant to the authority granted to the United States Small Business Administration under the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, under Section 309 of the Act and Section 107.1900 of the Small Business Administration Rules and Regulations (13 CFR 107.1900) to function as a small business investment company under the Small Business Investment Company License No. 01/71-0392 issued to Venture Capital Fund of New England IV, LP and said license is hereby declared null and void.

United States Small Business Administration.

Dated: September 15, 2011.

Sean J. Greene,

 AA/Investment.

[FR Doc. 2012-853 Filed 1-17-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
IV

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 216

Expressing the sense of the Congress that a commemorative stamp should

be issued honoring Felix Octavius Carr Darley.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 5, 2001

Mr. CASTLE submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred

to the Committee on Government Reform

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the Congress that a commemorative

stamp should be issued honoring Felix Octavius Carr Darley.

Whereas Felix Octavius Carr Darley, a prolific 19th century

illustrator and designer, was born on June 22, 1821, in

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and completed most of his

major works while living in Claymont, Delaware, before

he died on March 27, 1888;

Whereas Darley was the illustrator for Washington Irving’s

‘‘The Legend of Sleepy Hollow’’, ‘‘Rip Van Winkle’’,

‘‘Tales of a Traveler’’, and the five-volume ‘‘Life of

George Washington’’;

Whereas Darley created the sketches for Henry Wadsworth

Longfellow’s ‘‘Evangeline’’, and was the illustrator for

the American publications of Charles Dickens, including

‘‘A Tale of Two Cities’’;
2

•HCON 216 IH

Whereas Darley designed and executed the two woodcut illustrations for the first printing of Edgar Allen Poe’s ‘‘The

Gold-Bug’’ in the Philadelphia Dollar Newspaper;

Whereas Darley provided illustrations for the first known

publication of Clement Moore’s ‘‘A Visit from St. Nicholas’’, the edition featuring the first change of the last

line from ‘‘happy Christmas to all’’ to ‘‘merry Christmas

to all’’;

Whereas, in 1875, Darley engaged in preparing 500 drawings

to illustrate a book entitled ‘‘History of the United

States’’, by B. J. Lossing;

Whereas Darley illustrated more than 500 designs for James

Fenimore Cooper’s works, including a project involving

designs for 64 steel engravings and 120 wood engravings,

leading to the publication of ‘‘The Cooper Vignettes’’

which showcased the artist’s works;

Whereas Darley provided the line drawings for Nathaniel

Hawthorne’s ‘‘The Scarlet Letter’’;

Whereas Darley was elected a member of the Academy of Design in 1852;

Whereas Darley was a member of the Artist’s Fund Society

and was one of the early members of the American Society of Painters in Watercolors;

Whereas Darley was inducted into the Society of Illustrators

Hall of Fame in 2001; and

Whereas, for his accomplishments, Darley is credited by

many scholars with helping to create the pioneer image

of American History: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That it is the sense of the Congress that—
3

•HCON 216 IH

1 (1) a commemorative stamp should be issued

2 honoring Felix Octavius Carr Darley; and

3 (2) the Citizens’ Stamp Advisory Committee

4 should recommend to the Postmaster General that

5 such a stamp be issued.

Æ
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-14-00382-CR

Roderick Dixon

v.

The State of Texas

§

§

§

§

§

From the 371st District Court

of Tarrant County (1376529W)

February 18, 2016

Opinion by Justice Gardner

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

there was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of 

the trial court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By __/s/ Anne Gardner________________

 Justice Anne Gardner
In the

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06-23-00051-CV

SMART WAGON CORPORATION AND

MONTGOMERY PIKE BURKHART, SR., Appellants

V.

SS FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, Appellee

On Appeal from the 6th District Court

Lamar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 91087

Before Stevens, C.J., van Cleef and Rambin, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Justice van Cleef
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The appellants filed a motion with this Court seeking to voluntarily dismiss this appeal. 

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

See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1). Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal.

Charles van Cleef

Justice

Date Submitted: August 7, 2023

Date Decided: August 8, 2023