alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

TONY R. NAVARRO, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D17-4966

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

)

Opinion filed April 12, 2019.

Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 

9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for 

Hendry County; James D. Sloan,

Judge.

Tony R. Navarro, pro se.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

SILBERMAN, VILLANTI and ATKINSON, JJ., Concur.
```

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 204 (Thursday, October 22, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 64051]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-26862]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Twenty-First Meeting: RTCA Special Committee (222) AMS(R)S

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), U.S. Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of Twenty-First RTCA Special Committee 222 Meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of the 
Twenty-First RTCA Special Committee 222 meeting.

DATES: The meeting will be held November 9th from 9:00 a.m.-4:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at RTCA, Inc., 1150 18th Street 
NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036, Tel: (202) 330-0662.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street 
NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036, or by telephone at (202) 833-
9339, fax at (202) 833-9434, or Web site at http://www.rtca.org or 
Jennifer Iversen, Program Director, RTCA, Inc., jiversen@rtca.org, 
(202) 330-0662.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is 
hereby given for a meeting of RTCA Special Committee 222. The agenda 
will include the following:

Monday, November 9, 2015

1. Greetings & Attendance
2. Review summaries of the January 2015, April 2015, and September 2015 
meetings, including the joint meetings with WG-82 in April and 
September
3. Discussion and resolution of the FRAC comments submitted on DO-262B, 
Change 1. This change affects the Iridium technique-specific material
4. If time permits, the floor will be open to discussion of any other 
business related to the current Terms of Reference of SC-222
5. Review of next scheduled meetings of SC-222 and joint SC-222/WG-82

    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space 
availability. With the approval of the chairman, members of the public 
may present oral statements at the meeting. Plenary information will be 
provided upon request. Persons wishing to present statements or obtain 
information should contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may present a 
written statement to the committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on October 16, 2015.
Latasha Robinson,
Management & Program Analyst, Next Generation, Enterprise Support 
Services Division, Federal Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. 2015-26862 Filed 10-21-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```
Exhibit 31.1








I, Susan B. Sheffield, certify that:





1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of AmeriCredit Automobile Receivables Trust 2023-2  (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);





2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do 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, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;





4. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreements in all material respects; and





5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report.  Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.





In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties:  The Bank of New York Mellon.








By:/s/ Susan B. SheffieldName:Susan B. SheffieldTitle:Executive Vice President and Chief Financial OfficerDate:March 4, 2024
Exhibit 23.1



                      CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration
statements of Boston Edison Company on Form S-3 (File Nos. 33-57840 and
33-59693) and on Form S-8 (File Nos. 33-00810, 33-7558, 33-38434, 33-48424,
33-48425, 33-59662, 33-59682 and 33-58457) and on Form S-4 (File No.
333-23439) of our report dated January 22, 1998 on our audits of the
consolidated financial statements of Boston Edison Company as of
December 31, 1997 and 1996 and for each of the three years in the period
ended December 31, 1997, which report is included in this Annual Report
on Form 10-K.



                                 By:  /s/ Coopers & Lybrand, L.L.P.
                                      ----------------------------------
                                          Coopers & Lybrand, L.L.P.


Boston, Massachusetts
March 27, 1998
##### 



Exhibit 31.1
 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 17 CFR 240.13a-14
PROMULGATED UNDER
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of
Celanese Holdings LLC;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this quarterly 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 quarterly 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 registrant and we 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 registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by
others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report
is being prepared;(b)
    
    [Reserved](c)
    
    evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this quarterly 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(d)
    
    disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) that occurred during
the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the
case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant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 registrants auditors and the
audit committee of registrants Board of Directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
 (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 registrant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 registrants internal control over financial reporting.
  /s/ David N. WeidmanDavid N. WeidmanPresident and Chief Executive Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-1770

HEPHZIBAH BATES, a/k/a Hattie Tea Jenkins-Bates,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

JIMMIE FALLON,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior

District Judge. (3:13-cv-00300-REP)

Submitted: August 22, 2013 Decided: August 26, 2013

Before MOTZ, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Hephzibah Bates, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Hephzibah Bates appeals the district court’s order 

dismissing Bates’ complaint as frivolous. We have reviewed the 

record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant 

leave to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm for the reasons 

stated by the district court. Bates v. Fallon, No. 3:13-cv00300-REP (E.D. Va. May 28, 2013). We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 

presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Exhibit 32



Certification of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer required by Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of BNS Holding, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the Company), does
hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that:



The Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 (the Form 10-K) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 10-K fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                     |  |  |  |                                       
|-------------------- |  |  |  | --------------------------------------
|                     |  | 
|Date: March 15, 2005 |  |  |  | /s/ Michael Warren                    
|                     |  |  |  | Michael Warren Chief Executive
Officer
|                     |  | 
|Date: March 15, 2005 |  |  |  | /s/ Michael Warren                    
|                     |  |  |  | Michael Warren Chief Financial
Officer



The foregoing certification is being
furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-K or as a separate disclosure document.



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to BNS Co. and will be retained by BNS Holding, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-15-0000114

07-APR-2015

09:49 AM
2017 ANNUAL INDUSTRY MEETING 

FOR USDA FOODS CONTRACTORS AND SUPPLIERS

Doubletree Hotel by Hilton – Arlington, Virginia

AGENDA 

LIVESTOCK, POULTRY, SEED, and SEAFOOD PROGRAM—Salon A

Tuesday, October 24, 2017

1:00 - 1:15 Welcoming Remarks

Craig Morris, Deputy Administrator, Livestock, Poultry, and Seed Program (LPS)

1:15 - 1:45 Food and Nutrition Service Initiatives

Julie Skolmowski, Chief, Nutrition Services and Access Branch

1:45 - 2:15 Microbiological Data Review

Darin Doerscher, Food Safety and Commodity Specification Division, LPS

2:15 - 3:00 Processing, Grading, and Audit Updates

Richard Lawson, Samantha Rhoderick, Dana Stahl, and Steve Ross, Quality Assessment Division, LPS

3:00 - 3:30 Break

3:30 - 3:45 American Commodity Distribution Association (ACDA) Update

Mike Birkmeyer, Co-Chair of the ACDA Processing Committee

3:45 - 5:00 Business Management Improvement (BMI) Presentation/Discussion

Dave Tuckwiller, Director, Commodity Procurement Staff

Wednesday, October 25, 2017

8:00 - 9:45 BMI Discussion (cont.)

Commodity Procurement Staff

9:45 - 10:15 Economic Outlook

Larry Haller, Agricultural Analytics Division, LPS

10:15 - 10:45 Break

10:45 - 11:00 Update on Issues from Last Year’s Meeting

Carl Schroeder, Food Safety and Commodity Specification Division, LPS

11:00 - 12:00 Product Specification Updates

Anjeanette Johnson, Terry Lutz, Darin Doerscher, Steve Whisenant,

William Stone, and Rod Bowling, Food Safety and 

Commodity Specification Division, LPS

12:00 - 12:30 Contracting Issues Update

Christine Gouger, Commodity Procurement Staff
Final Notes July 9, 2010 

### Steam Study Data Review Notes Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) EPA Method 410.4 ( 1993 ) ( Semi

- Automated Colorimetry )

1. If chlorides were present, mercuric sulfate should be added to the digestion tubes (410.4/4.1)

.

2. S amples should be digested at 150°C for two hou rs. (410.4/11.0) Indicate a ny deviations

noted in the lab’s digestion procedures.

3. A utomated continuous flow analysis equipment should be used to analyze samples (410.4/6.6 ).

4. *If the analyte concentration in a sample was less than 5 times the analyte concen tration in the laboratory reagent blank, report the result as a nondetect. List all affected samples:

5. *If the analyte concentration in a sample was less than 10 times but greater than 5 times the analyte concentration in the laboratory reagent blank, repor t the result as an estimated value. List all affected samples:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                             672
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      211
<ALLOWANCES>                                        10
<INVENTORY>                                        113
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,087
<PP&E>                                             795
<DEPRECIATION>                                     324
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   2,012
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,038
<BONDS>                                            552
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        614
<COMMON>                                             2
<OTHER-SE>                                       (527)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     2,012
<SALES>                                          1,400
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,400
<CGS>                                            1,008
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,008
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   251
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     3
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  64
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     57
<INCOME-TAX>                                        34
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 24
<DISCONTINUED>                                      39
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        63
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.06)
        


                                      

</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-40710

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

FRANCISCO ATRIANO-CUAHUTLE,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:14-CR-181

Before STEWART, Chief Judge, and ELROD and HIGGINSON, Circuit 

Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Francisco Atriano-Cuahutle pleaded guilty to an indictment charging a 

violation of 18 U.S.C. § 111 and was sentenced within the guidelines range to 

21 months of imprisonment. He now appeals, arguing that this court should 

vacate and remand for correction of the clerical errors in the judgment and the 

presentence report (PSR). Atriano-Cuahutle contends that he was charged 

* 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

April 14, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 14-40710 Document: 00513003879 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/14/2015
No. 14-40710

with and pleaded guilty to resisting, opposing, impeding, intimidating, and 

interfering with a federal officer and not to assaulting a federal officer, as the 

offense is described in the judgment and the PSR. He asserts that assault of a 

federal officer is a separate and distinct offense from the others with which he 

was charged, despite the fact that the offenses are proscribed by the same 

statute and punished in the same manner. 

Rule 36 provides that “the court may at any time correct a clerical error 

in a judgment, order, or other part of the record, or correct an error in the 

record arising from oversight or omission.” FED. R. CRIM. P. 36. A clerical 

error occurs when the court intends to do one thing but through clerical 

mistake or oversight does another. United States v. Buendia-Rangel, 553 F.3d 

378, 379 (5th Cir. 2008).

Regardless of whether the § 111 offense of assault is separate and 

distinct from the § 111 offense of resisting, opposing, intimidating, and 

impeding, the record shows that the district court’s description of the offense

is not a clerical error. The court did not err in recitation and did not do 

something unintended through mistake or oversight. See Buendia-Rangel, 553 

F.3d at 379. The district court intended for the PSR and the judgment to 

describe the offense of conviction as an assault. 

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

2

 Case: 14-40710 Document: 00513003879 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/14/2015
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

QINGFA ZHU,

Petitioner,

v.

LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 15

- 70603

Agency No. A087

- 824

- 146

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted June 14, 2016 **

Before: BEA, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.

Qingfa Zhu , a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board

of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s

(“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum. We have jurisdiction under 8

U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factu al findings,

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

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** We deny Zhu’s request for oral argument. The panel unanimously

concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.

App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

JUN 20 2016

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 15

- 70603

applying the standards created by the REAL ID Act. Ren v. Holder , 648 F.3d

1079, 1083

- 84 (9 th Cir. 2011) . We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency ’s determination that Zhu failed to

present sufficiently detai led and consistent testimony, or reasonably available

corroboration, to meet his burden of proof for asylum

. See id

. at 1093

- 94

(denying petition where asylum applicant failed to provide corroborative evidence

requested by the IJ or explain why he could n ot do so) . Thus, Zhu ’s asylum claim

fail s

.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
*District Judge of the Western District of Louisiana, sitting

by designation.

 

**Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_______________________

No. 96-11027 

_________________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

CHRIS PAUL WILLIAMS,

Defendant-Appellant.

____________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court 

For the Northern District of Texas

(3:95-CR-211-D)

_____________________________________________

June 10, 1997

Before WIENER and PARKER, Circuit Judges, and LITTLE, District

Judge.*

PER CURIAM:**

In this direct criminal appeal, Defendant-Appellant Chris Paul

Williams asks us to reverse his convictions following guilty

verdicts by a jury on charges of money laundering and conspiracy to

conduct a financial transaction with the proceeds of a specified

unlawful activity. Williams also contests his sentence of seventy-
2

eight months incarceration plus a mandatory assessment of $100.00,

a fine of $5,000.00, and three years supervised release. The

gravamen of his complaints regarding his convictions comprises

assertions that the evidence was insufficient to prove that the

alleged financial transaction was conducted with drug proceeds or

that it affected interstate commerce; that the conduct alleged in

the indictment is not the type behavior contemplated by Congress in

enacting the money laundering statute, 18 USC § 1956; and that the

district court abused its discretion in admitting evidence of

(1) Williams’ prior conviction for possession with intent to

deliver cocaine, and (2) his cash purchase of a Lexus automobile.

Regarding his sentence, Williams complains that the district court

erred in imposing a two-level enhancement for obstruction of

justice based on its findings that Williams committed perjury at a

post-trial detention hearing, and in sentencing him at the top of

the Guidelines range.

We have carefully reviewed the record on appeal and duly

considered the facts and the law as presented to us by able

counsel, both in their briefs and their oral arguments before this

panel. Our review convinces us that Williams received a fair

trial, free of reversible error in all respects (including the

evidentiary ruling of the court) and that the evidence is more than

sufficient to sustain his convictions. We are equally convinced

that the court committed no reversible error in assessing and

imposing Williams’ sentence, and that his sentence is lawful in all
3

respects. Consequently, Williams’ convictions and sentence are 

AFFIRMED.