alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14

- 50699 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v. ROBERTO SIMON GARCIA

- LARA , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 2:13

- CR

- 1336

- 1

Before REAVLEY, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Roberto Simon Garcia

- Lara appeals the 80

- month within

- guidelines sentence he received for his guilty plea to illegal reentry. Garcia

- Lara argues that his sentence is greater than necessary to meet the sentencing goals of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). He specifically contends that the guid elines sentencing range was too severe because his prior burglary conviction was used to enhance his offense level under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2 and to increase his criminal history score,

* 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 R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR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. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED April 22, 2015 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 14-50699 Document: 00513016421 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/22/2015No. 14

- 50699 because his motive for returning to the United States was to work, because his offense was essentially an international trespass, and because his longest p rior sentence was three years. He argues that his within

- guidelines sentence should not be afforded a presumption of reasonableness because the illegal reentry Guideline, § 2 L 1.2, lacks an empirical basis. We review the substantive reasonableness of a sentenc e for an abuse of discretion. Gall v. United States , 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007)

. A presumption of reasonableness applies to Garcia

- Lara’s within

- guidelines sentence. See Un ited States v. Alonzo , 435 F.3d 551, 554 (5th Cir. 2006). As Garcia

- Lara correctly concedes, the argument that a presumption of reasonableness should not apply to his sentence because § 2L1.2 lacks empirical support has been rejected by this court. See United States v. Duarte , 569 F.3d 528, 529

- 31 (5th Cir. 2009); United States v. Mondragon

- Santiago , 564 F.3d 357, 366

- 67 (5th Cir. 2009). We have also rejected the arguments that illegal reentry is merely an international trespass offense that is treated too harshly under § 2L1.2, see United States v. Aguirre

- Villa , 460 F.3d 681, 683 (5th Cir. 2006), and that a sentence imposed pursuant to § 2L1.2 is greater than necessary to meet § 3553(a)’s goals as a result of any double counting inherent in that Guidel ine, see Duarte , 569 F.3d at 529

- 31. Garcia

- Lara’s contentions regarding his mitigating factors and benign motive do not rebut th e presumption of reasonableness. See United States v. Cooks , 589 F.3d 173, 186 (5th Cir. 2009) ; see also United States v. Go mez Herrera , 523 F.3d 554, 565

- 66 (5th Cir. 2008)

. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

2 Case: 14-50699 Document: 00513016421 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/22/2015
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1


                            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 Report of Purina Mills, LLC (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on March 27, 2003 (the "Report"), I, Robert DeGregorio,
President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,as adopted
pursuant to ss. 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 results of
                  operations of the Company.



                                     By: /s/ Robert DeGregorio
                                        -------------------------------
                                             Robert DeGregorio
                                             President
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 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 Report of Aetrium Incorporated (the Company) on
Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Joseph C.
Levesque, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, Douglas L. Hemer, as Chief
Administrative Officer of the Company, and Paul H. Askegaard, as Treasurer of
the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant 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. Date: March 30, 2004
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Joseph C.
LevesqueName:
    
    Joseph C. LevesqueTitle:
    
    Chairman of the Board, President andChief Executive OfficerDate: March 30, 2004
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Douglas L. HemerName:
    
    Douglas L. HemerTitle:
    
    Chief Administrative OfficerDate: March 30, 2004
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Paul H. AskegaardName:
    
    Paul H. AskegaardTitle:
    
    Treasurer (principal financialand 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.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 1009 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute on Aging Special Emphasis Panel; Alzheimer's Disease Sequencing Project.                    

*Date:*                         February 22, 2024.                    

*Time:*                         12:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institute on Aging, Gateway Building, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Mariel Jais, PharmD, Scientific Review Officer,  Scientific Review Branch, National Institute on Aging, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Gateway Bldg., Suite 2C212, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594-2614,                         *mariel.jais@nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.866, Aging Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: January 2, 2024.

Miguelina Perez, 

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2024-00075 Filed 1-5-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
# 2017 - Appalachian Regional Commission

- High School Completion Rates in Appalachia, 2013–2017 This map shows the high school completion rate of persons ages 25 and over in each of the ARC counties.The post High School Completion Rates in Appalachia, 2013–2017 appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
- Relative High School Completion Rates in Appalachia, 2013–2017 This map shows the high school completion rate of persons ages 25 and over in each of the ARC counties, as a percentage of the U.S. average. The post Relative High School Completion Rates in Appalachia, 2013–2017 appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
- College Completion Rates in Appalachia, 2013–2017 This map shows the college completion rate of persons ages 25 and over in each of the ARC counties. The post College Completion Rates in Appalachia, 2013–2017 appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
- Relative College Completion Rates in Appalachia, 2013–2017 This map shows the college completion rate of persons ages 25 and over in each of the ARC counties, as a percentage of the U.S. average. The post Relative College Completion Rates in Appalachia, 2013–2017 appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
- Per Capita Income Rates in Appalachia, 2017 This map shows the per capita income rate in each of the ARC counties. The post Per Capita Income Rates in Appalachia, 2017 appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
- Relative Per Capita Income Rates in Appalachia, 2017 This map shows the per capita income rate in each of the ARC counties, as a percentage of the U.S. average. The post Relative Per Capita Income Rates in Appalachia, 2017 appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
- Per Capita Market Income Rates in Appalachia, 2017 This map shows the per capita market income rate in each of the ARC counties.The post Per Capita Market Income Rates in Appalachia, 2017 appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
- Relative Per Capita Market Income Rates in Appalachia, 2017 This map shows the per capita market income rate in each of the ARC counties, as a percentage of the U.S. average. The post Relative Per Capita Market Income Rates in Appalachia, 2017 appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
- Poverty Rates in Appalachia, 2013–2017 This map shows the poverty rate in each of the ARC counties.The post Poverty Rates in Appalachia, 2013–2017 appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
- Relative Poverty Rates in Appalachia, 2013–2017 This map shows the poverty rate in each of the ARC counties, as a percentage of the U.S. average.The post Relative Poverty Rates in Appalachia, 2013–2017 appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
# C_2008327EN.01003901.xml

| 20.12.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 327/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 327/39

---

Action brought on 19 October 2008 — Imagion v OHIM (DYNAMIC HD)

(Case T-463/08)

(2008/C 327/68)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Imagion AG (Trierweiler, Germany) (represented by: H. Blatzheim, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 13 August 2008 (Case R 488/2008-4); and |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 13 August 2008 (Case R 488/2008-4); and

| — | Order OHIM to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: Word mark ‘DYNAMIC HD’ for services in Classes 35, 38, 41, 42 and 45 (No 6 092 241)

Community trade mark concerned:

Decision of the Examiner: Refusal, in part, of the application

Decision of the Examiner:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law:

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (1) in that the word mark ‘DYNAMIC HD’ is neither descriptive, nor does it lack the necessary distinctive character; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (1) in that the word mark ‘DYNAMIC HD’ is neither descriptive, nor does it lack the necessary distinctive character;

1

| — | Infringement of Article 7(3) of Regulation No 40/94 in that the trade mark applied for has acquired distinctive character through use; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(3) of Regulation No 40/94 in that the trade mark applied for has acquired distinctive character through use;

| — | Breach of the duty to state reasons; |
| --- | --- |

—

Breach of the duty to state reasons;

| — | Breach of the principle of equal treatment. |
| --- | --- |

—

Breach of the principle of equal treatment.

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1).

1

---
# C_2009044EN.01006701.xml

| 21.2.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 44/67 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 44/67

---

Action brought on 24 December 2008 — Dole Food and Dole Germany v Commission

(Case T-588/08)

(2009/C 44/114)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Dole Food Company, Inc. (Wilmington, United States) and Dole Germany OHG (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: J.-F. Bellis, lawyer)

Applicants:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | annul or reduce the amount of the fine imposed; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul or reduce the amount of the fine imposed;

| — | order the Commission to bear the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to bear the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

By means of this application, the applicants seek annulment pursuant to Article 230 EC of the Commission Decision C(2008) 5955 final of 15 October 2008 (Case COMP/39.188 — Bananas) relating to a proceeding under Article 81(1) EC which held them liable for participating in a concerted practice of coordination of quotation prices for bananas imported to the eight Member States of the Northern European region of the Community. They also seek the annulment or the reduction of the fine imposed on them.

In support of their claims, the applicants put forward two pleas.

First, the applicants submit that the Commission erred in determining that the conduct at issue was a restriction of competition by object under Article 81 EC. The applicants contend that in fact, the conduct at issue consisted exclusively in occasional bilateral communications between banana importers involving general market gossip and did not form part of a broader price-fixing or market-sharing cartel and was thus not a restriction of competition by object. These communications took place prior to the setting of quotation prices that is at a stage far removed from the negotiation of actual prices with customers. Further the applicants state that these communications were not, and could not be, to restrict competition in the banana market since quotation prices are not actual prices and do not form the basis for the negotiation of actual prices of green bananas.

Second, the applicants claim that the fine imposed on them was unjustified because the basic amount of the fine is based on the value of sales of goods to which the alleged infringement does not relate. Further, the applicants argue that the fine was also disproportionate because the basic amount of the fine was wrongly set on the premise that the conduct concerned price-fixing.

---
**Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Eighth Chamber) of 11 June 2009 – Hedgefund Intelligence v OHIM – Hedge Invest (InvestHedge)**

**(Case T-67/08)**

Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the Community figurative mark InvestHedge – Earlier Community figurative mark Hedge Invest – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

Community trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services
– Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 33, 53-56)

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | ACTION against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 28 November 2007 (Case R 148/2007-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Hedge Invest SpA and Hedgefund Intelligence Ltd. |

**Information relating to the case**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| Applicant for the Community trade mark: | Hedgefund Intelligence Ltd |
| Community trade mark sought: | The figurative mark InvestHedge for goods and services in Classes 9, 16, 36 and 41 – Application No 3081081 |
| Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: | Hedge Invest SpA |
| Mark or sign cited in opposition: | The Community figurative mark HEDGE INVEST for services in Class 36 |
| Decision of the Opposition Division: | Opposition upheld for all the contested services in Classes 36 and 41 |
| Decision of the Board of Appeal: | Appeal dismissed |

**Operative part**

The Court:

1.      Dismisses the action;

2.      Orders Hedgefund Intelligence Ltd to pay the costs.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 122 (Wednesday, September 12, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H5869]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                                 PRAYER

  Reverend Matthew Mello, the Church of the Resurrection, Lakeland, 
Florida, offered the following prayer:
  Dear God, we give You thanks for giving us another day.
  We ask for Your blessings to this legislative body as they govern the 
welfare of all the people of this great Nation. Endow them with wisdom, 
discernment, courage, and conviction to engage the issues of our day, 
and for the generations to come to be better off as a result of all 
decisions made within this assembly hall.
  Bind them together in a shared commitment to You, a passionate 
patriotism, and a deep dedication to find creative solutions in the 
concerns that confront us and divide us in these times.
  We remember our Ambassador, Christopher Stevens, and his colleagues.
  We ask that this be done this day and in the days to come, giving 
honor and glory to You, our God, and we pray Your blessings be upon us 
always.
  In Your name we pray.
  Amen.

                          ____________________
```
IIB 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4335 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 8, 2018 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

AN ACT 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide for 

headstones and markers for, and interment in national 

cemeteries of, deceased spouses and dependent children 

of members of the Armed Forces serving on active duty, 

and for other purposes. 

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


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 4335 RFS

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Servicemember Family 

3 Burial Act’’. 

4 SEC. 2. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS PROVISION 

5 OF HEADSTONES AND MARKERS FOR, AND IN6 TERMENT IN NATIONAL CEMETERIES OF, 

7 SPOUSES AND DEPENDENT CHILDREN OF 

8 MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES SERVING 

9 ON ACTIVE DUTY. 

10 (a) HEADSTONES AND MARKERS.—Section 

11 2306(b)(2) of title 38, United States Code, is amended— 

12 (1) in subparagraph (B), by inserting ‘‘, or the 

13 spouse of a member of the Armed Forces serving on 

14 active duty under conditions other than dishonor15 able, as shown by a statement from a general court16 martial convening authority, at the time of the 

17 spouse’s death if such death occurs before October 

18 1, 2024’’ after ‘‘veteran’’; and 

19 (2) in subparagraph (C), by inserting ‘‘, or the 

20 eligible dependent child of a member of the Armed 

21 Forces serving on active duty under conditions other 

22 than dishonorable, as shown by a statement from a 

23 general court-martial convening authority, at the 

24 time of the child’s death if such death occurs before 

25 October 1, 2024’’ after ‘‘veteran’’. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
3 

HR 4335 RFS

1 (b) INTERMENT IN NATIONAL CEMETERIES.—Sec2 tion 2402(a)(5) of such title is amended by inserting ‘‘, 

3 and the spouse, minor child, and, in the discretion of the 

4 Secretary, unmarried adult child of a member of the 

5 Armed Forces serving on active duty under conditions 

6 other than dishonorable, as shown by a statement from 

7 a general court-martial convening authority, at the time 

8 of the spouse’s or child’s death if such death occurs before 

9 October 1, 2024’’ after ‘‘paragraph (7)’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives May 7, 2018. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Anthony Chesnard, Appellant.

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Lange, J.), rendered March 9, 1990, convicting him of sexual abuse in the first degree (three counts), and endangering the welfare of a child (three counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, and the case is remitted to the County Court, Westchester County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (5).

We find that the court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in allowing the two seven-year-old complainants and the 11-year-old complainant to testify under oath. The court’s preliminary examination of each child adequately demonstrated that each of the three children understood the nature of testifying under oath and that each child was competent to be sworn as a witness *(see,*CPL 60.20 [2]). Under the circumstances, the court’s determinations on this issue should not be disturbed *(see, People v Nisoff,*36 NY2d 560; *People v Cangiano,*156 AD2d 575; *People v Tyler,*154 AD2d 490; *People v Hardie,*144 AD2d 484).

The sentence imposed was not excessive or unduly harsh. Sentences imposed after trial may be more than those suggested as part of a proposed plea agreement *(see, People v Oliver,*63 NY2d 973; *People v Norfleet,*146 AD2d 812). Also, *255the mere speculation that due to his advanced age or his prior health problems, the defendant might suffer harm if incarcerated, does not suffice to warrant a modification of the sentence imposed *(see, People v Kelsky,*144 AD2d 386).

We have considered the defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Thompson, J. P., Bracken, Harwood and Balletta, JJ., concur.