alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Victor G. PINEDA, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 02-4472.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 30, 2003.

Decided Feb. 6, 2003.

Bradley D. Churdar, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellant. J. Strom Thurmond, Jr., United States Attorney, Robert H. Bickerton, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Victor Pineda pled guilty to distributing 249 grams of methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a), (b)(1)(B) (2000), and was sentenced to a term of sixty months imprisonment. His attorney has filed a brief pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), raising as a potentially meritorious issue the district court’s refusal to find that Pineda was a minimal or minor participant in the offense, *U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual*§ 3B1.2 (2001), but asserting that in his view there are no meritious issues for appeal. Pineda has been informed of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief, but has not filed a brief. We affirm the conviction and sentence.

The defendant has the burden of demonstrating that he is entitled to a mitigating role adjustment. *United States v. Akin-koye,*185 F.3d 192, 202 (4th Cir.1999). Pineda maintained at sentencing that he had been a mere courier. A courier is not automatically awarded a minor or minimal role adjustment, *United States v. Withers,*100 F.3d 1142, 1147 (4th Cir.1996), and here the sentencing court had before it evidence from intercepted telephone calls in which Pineda negotiated the sale of the methamphetamine to Armando Garcia, who then sold it to an undercover officer. This evidence did not support Pineda’s claim that he was only a courier. We thus conclude that the district court did not clearly err in finding that a mitigating role adjustment did not apply.

*652Pursuant to *Anders,*this court has reviewed the record for reversible error and found none. We therefore affirm the conviction and sentence. This court requires that counsel inform his client, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If the client requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on the client. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*
Order entered November 13 , 2014

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 14
- 00089
- CR JAY SANDON COOPER, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2

Grayson County, Texas Trial Cour t Cause No. 2011
- 2
- 1391



### O RDER On July 16, 2014, this Court adopted the trial court’s findings that appellant desired to represent himself on appeal. We ordered appellant to file his brief within thirty days. When the brief was not filed by September 12, 2014, we ordered appellant to file his brief by October 3, 2014, and warned that failure to do so would result in submission of the appeal without briefs. On September 16, 2014, appellant filed a letter complaining that certain items were missing from th e clerk’s record, including: August 23, 2011 bond information; documents provided for in camera inspection; March 19, 2014 bill of costs; March 24, 2014 designations of clerk’s and reporter’s records; rule 20 affidavit; order approving rule 20 affidavit; May 28, 2014 bill of costs; June 24 defendant’s request for permission to access clerk’s record; and July 3, 2014 orderconcerning defendant’s request for permission to access clerk’s record. On September 11, 2014,

a supplemental clerk’s record was filed containing many of the documents appellant’s letter indicated were missing. On October 14, 2014, we received a supplemental clerk’s record containing other items, including a letter from the Grayson County Clerk to appellant stating that the documents for in camera inspection and bond information are not part of the clerk’s record. To date, appellant has not filed his brief. Accordingly, we ORDER appellant to file his brief by DECEMBER 1 , 2014

. No further extension requests will be entertained. If appel lant’s brief is not filed by the date specified, we will, without further notice, submit the appeal without briefs. See Lott v. State , 874 S.W.2d 687 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994); see also T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 38.8(b)(4).
We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this o rder , by electronic transmission, to appellant Jay Sandon Cooper and to the Grayson County District Attorney’s Office.
We further DIRECT the Clerk to send a copy of the order, by first

- class mail, to Jay Sandon Cooper, 1520 Janwood Dr., Plano, Texas 75075.

/s/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE
II

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1555

To guarantee the timely payment of social security benefits in March 1996.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

FEBRUARY 1, 1996

Mr. DOLE (for himself, Mr. ROTH, Mr. MCCAIN, and Mr. DOMENICI) introduced the following bill; which was read twice, considered, read the third

time, and indefinitely postponed

A BILL

To guarantee the timely payment of social security benefits

in March 1996.

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

3 SECTION 1. TIMELY PAYMENT OF MARCH 1996 SOCIAL SE4 CURITY BENEFITS GUARANTEED.

5 (a) FINDINGS.—

6 (1) Congress intends to pass an increase in the

7 public debt limit before March 1, 1996.

8 (2) In the interim, social security beneficiaries

9 should be assured that social security benefits will be

10 paid on a timely basis in March 1996.
2

•S 1555 IPS

1 (b) GUARANTEE OF SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFIT

2 PAYMENTS.—In addition to any other authority provided

3 by law, the Secretary of the Treasury may issue under

4 chapter 31 of title 31, United States Code, obligations of

5 the United States before March 1, 1996, in an amount

6 equal to the monthly insurance benefits payable under title

7 II of the Social Security Act in March 1996.

8 (c) OBLIGATIONS EXEMPT FROM PUBLIC DEBT

9 LIMIT.—

10 (1) IN GENERAL.—Obligations issued under

11 subsection (b) shall not be taken into account in ap12 plying the limitation in section 3101(b) of title 31,

13 United States Code.

14 (2) TERMINATION OF EXEMPTION.—Paragraph

15 (1) shall cease to apply on the earlier of—

16 (A) the date of the enactment of the first

17 increase in the limitation in section 3101(b) of

18 title 31, United States Code, after the date of

19 the enactment of this Act, or

20 (B) March 15, 1996.

Æ
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

In the Matter of O. R. , a Juvenile

,

Appellant

. '

'

'

'

'

' No. 08

- 1 3

- 00 1 73

- CV

Appeal from the

65 th District Court

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC# 06,00488 )

O R D E R

The Court GRANTS the Appellant ’ s third motion for extension of time to file the brief

until November 14 , 2013

. NO FURTHER MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE

THE APPELLANT ’ S BRIEF WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THIS COURT.

It is further ORDERED that the Hon. M. Clara Hernandez

, the Appellant ’ s Attorney

,

prepare the Appellant ’ s brief and forward the same to this Court on or before November 14

, 201 3

.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 16 th day of October, 201 3

.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure, C.J., Rivera and Rodriguez, JJ.
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER  CALLISTO PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.  FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2009  PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED  PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I am the Chief Executive Officer of Callisto Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Company"). I am delivering this
certificate in connection with the Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 and filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
("Form 10-Q").

Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the
Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the
Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: November 16, 2009

/s/ GARY S. JACOB Gary S. Jacob Chief Executive Officer


---



QuickLinks
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-40201

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

WILLIAM DANIEL PICKETT, JR

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:06-CR-89-ALL

Before WIENER, GARZA, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

William DanielPickett, Jr., has appealed his jury convictions of possession

of cocaine and cocaine base with intent to distribute. Pickett contends that the

district court erred in denying his motion to continue the trial. A district court’s

denial of a motion for a continuance “will be reversed only when the district

court abused its discretion and the defendant suffered serious prejudice.” United

States v. Dupre, 117 F.3d 810, 823 (5th Cir. 1997).

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

June 11, 2008

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 07-40201

2

Pickett contends that the district court’s ruling prejudiced the defense

because his attorney did not have enough time to prepare to cross-examine Kyle

Ogden and Sergeant Kevin Odom. Pickett complains that he did not have an

opportunity to discover prior to the trial that Ogden’s criminal history report

reflected erroneously that Ogden had been arrested for misdemeanor possession

of crack cocaine during the period when he was cooperating with the

Government, when, in fact, the arrest was for a felony offense. Pickett

complains also that he did not have time to prepare to cross examine two other

cooperating witnesses, Russell Collins and Raymond Abram. 

The fact that Ogden’s prior arrest was for a felony offense rather than a

misdemeanor was before the jury. Collins’s and Abram’s testimony went to a

conspiracy count, of which Pickett was acquitted. Pickett has not shown that he

was seriously prejudiced because his attorney did not have an opportunity to

investigate further the facts related to the criminal histories of the cooperating

witnesses. See id.; United States v. Castro, 15 F.3d 417, 422–23 (5th Cir. 1994).

Because the parties do not contend that Pickett should be resentenced

because of recent amendments to the Sentencing Guidelines with regard to crack

cocaine offenses, we do not reach that question. The judgment is

AFFIRMED.
# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 7- 21 08

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ Je ffre y Reu te r
ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el la nt

v.
Jo hn N. Borb on us ; St . Lou is Co un ty, Mi ss ou ri; Sta te of M is so ur i

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an ts - App el le es

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Eas te rn Dis tri ctof M is so ur i - St . Lou is

__ __ __ __ __ __ Subm it te d: Jan ua ry

22 , 20 18 Fil ed : J an ua ry

25 , 20 18 [Un publ is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re BENTON, MURPHY, an d ERI CKSON, Ci rcu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ PER CURI AM.Je ffre y Reu te r ap pe al s fo ll owi ng th e di st ric t co ur t’s di sm is sa l of hi s pr o se 42 1 U.S.C. § 19 83 co m

pl ai nt , i n w h i ch he na m ed as de fen da nt s a st at e co ur t jud ge , St

. Lou is Co un ty, Mi ss ou ri, a nd th e St at e o f Mi ss ou ri.

Upo n care fu l rev ie w, we co nc lu de th at th e di sm is sa l w as pr op er, as Ju dg e Bo rb on us an d th e St at e were imm un e fro m su it , an d th e co m pl ai nt di d no t id en ti fy an
un co ns ti tu ti on al Co un ty cus to m or p ol ic y . See Mi rel es v. W aco , 50 2 U.S. 9, 11 -1 2 ( 1 9 91 ) (p er cu ria m ) (d is cu ss in g ab so lu te jud ic ia l imm un it y ); Mo nr oe v. Ark

. S t a t e U n i v., 49 5 F.3 d 59 1, 59 4 (8 th Ci r. 20 07 ) (Ele ve nt h Am en dm en t ba rs su it s f o r a n y ki nd of rel ie f ag ai ns t s ta te s) ; s ee al so Mo ne ll v. Dep ’t of So c. Serv s., 4 36 U.S. 65 8, 69 4 (1 97 8) (m

un ic ip al li ab il it y un de r § 19 83 req ui res co n s t i t u t io na l vi ol at io n
c o mm it te d pu rs ua nt to of fic ia l go ve rn m en t cu st om or po li cy ). W e fin d th e d i s t r i c t

co ur t al so pr op erl y de ni ed Reu te r’s m ot io n to am en d th e co m pl ai nt , an d di d no t ab us e it s di sc ret io n in de nyin g hi s m ot io ns f o r r e li ef un de r Fed eral Ru le of Ci vi l Pro ced ur e 59

. See Geier v. Mo. Ethi cs Co m m ’n, 71 5 F.3d 67 4, 67 8 (8t h Ci r. 20 13 ) (d is tri ct co ur t m ay de ny le av e to a men d c o m pl ai nt if am en dm en t wou ld be fu ti le ); Uni te d St at es v. Met ro

. St

. Lou is Sewer Dis t., 4 4 0 F.3 d 93 0, 93 3 (8 th Ci r. 20 06 ) (s ta nd ardof r ev ie w forde ni al of Rul e 5 9( e) m ot io ns ).

Acco rd in gl y , we affi rm

th e jud gm en t. See 8t h C ir. R . 47 B.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

The Hon or ab le St ep he n N. Lim ba ug h, Jr ., Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e 1 East ern Dis tri ctof M is so ur i.
-2

-
**Exhibit 23.2**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to the incorporation by reference inPost-Effective Amendment No. 1 to Registration Statement (No.333-122431) on Form S-3, Registration Statement (No. 333-132983) on Form S-8, and Registration Statement (No. 333-145122) on Form S-3 of Medivation, Inc. (a development stage company)of our report dated February 12, 2007 relating to our audit of the consolidated financial statements, which appears in this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Medivation, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2007. 

SINGER LEWAK GREENBAUM & GOLDSTEIN LLP 

Los Angeles, California

February 15, 2008
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.                  

###### Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board

# DATES:

Applicable immediately and until December 1, 2024.

# ADDRESSES:

Send comments concerning this notice to: U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, Clarendon Blvd., Suite 1300, Arlington, VA 22201-3367.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Neysa M. Slater-Chandler, Director of Administration,                         *slater-chandler@nwtrb.gov.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Section 4314(c)(1) through (5) of Title 5 of the United States Code, requires each agency to establish, in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Office of Personnel Management, one or more SES Performance Review Boards. Section 4314(c)(4) of Title 5 requires that notice of appointment of board members be published in the                     **Federal Register**                    .                

The following executives have been designated as members of the Performance Review Board for the U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board:

R. Todd Davis, Associate Technical Director, Nuclear Programs and Analysis, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board

Timothy J. Dwyer, Acting Deputy Technical Director, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board

Richard E. Tontodonato, Associate Technical Director, Nuclear Weapon Programs, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board

Candice Trummell, Senior Policy Advisor, Office of Environmental Management, U.S. Department of Energy

Dated: January 9, 2024.

Neysa M. Slater-Chandler,

Director of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board.

[FR Doc. 2024-00703 Filed 1-16-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6820-AM-P
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 7 (Wednesday, January 10, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 1520]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-00306]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

[B-2-2024]


Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 134, Notification of Proposed Production 
Activity; Volkswagen Group of America, Inc.; (Passenger Motor 
Vehicles); Chattanooga, Tennessee

    Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., submitted a notification of 
proposed production activity to the FTZ Board (the Board) for its 
facility in Chattanooga, Tennessee within FTZ 134. The notification 
conforming to the requirements of the Board's regulations (15 CFR 
400.22) was received on January 4, 2024.
    Pursuant to 15 CFR 400.14(b), FTZ production activity would be 
limited to the specific foreign-status material(s)/component(s) 
described in the submitted notification (summarized below) and 
subsequently authorized by the Board. The benefits that may stem from 
conducting production activity under FTZ procedures are explained in 
the background section of the Board's website--accessible via 
www.trade.gov/ftz. The proposed material(s)/component(s) would be added 
to the production authority that the Board previously approved for the 
operation, as reflected on the Board's website.
    The proposed foreign-status components include: high voltage 
heating positive coefficient modules; stainless steel exhaust systems 
with catalyst; spindle drives; light on detection sensors; and, rain 
sensors (duty rate ranges from duty-free to 4.2%). The request 
indicates that certain materials/components are subject to duties under 
section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (section 232) and 
section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 (section 301), depending on the 
country of origin. The applicable section 232 and section 301 decisions 
require subject merchandise to be admitted to FTZs in privileged 
foreign status (19 CFR 146.41).
    Public comment is invited from interested parties. Submissions 
shall be addressed to the Board's Executive Secretary and sent to: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7c1a08063c080e1d1819521b130a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="0167757b4175736065642f666e77">[email protected]</span></a>. The closing period for their receipt is February 20, 
2024.
    A copy of the notification will be available for public inspection 
in the ``Online FTZ Information System'' section of the Board's 
website.
    For further information, contact Christopher Wedderburn at 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#783b100a110b562f1d1c1c1d0a1a0d0a16380c0a191c1d561f170e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="2c6f445e455f027b494848495e4e595e426c585e4d4849024b435a">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: January 4, 2024.
Elizabeth Whiteman,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024-00306 Filed 1-9-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Exhibit 99.1
 
 SM&A Agrees To Be Acquired by
Odyssey Investment Partners
 
 For Immediate Release
 Newport Beach, CA  October 31, 2008




---



##### 



About SM&A
  About Odyssey Investment Partners, LLC
 www.odysseyinvestment.com
 About Caltius Mezzanine
  Information Regarding Solicitation of Proxies
  Participants in the Solicitation
  2




---



##### 



Conference Call and Webcast
 rd
 Cautionary Statement
 Some statements made in this news release refer to future actions, strategies, or results that
involve a number of risks and uncertainties. Any number of factors could cause actual results to
differ materially from expectations, including a shift in demand for SM&As Competition Management
and Program Services; fluctuations in the size, timing, and duration of client engagements; delays,
cancellations, or shifts in emphasis for competitive procurement activities; declines in future
defense, information technology, homeland security, new systems, and research and development
expenditures aerospace and defense industries along with System Integration and Information
Technology industries, and other risk factors listed in SM&As SEC reports, including the report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007. Actual results may differ materially from those
expressed or implied. The company does not undertake any duty to update forward-looking statement.
 Contact:
    
    SM&A:
    
    SM&A:
    
    Investor Contact:James R. Eckstaedt
    
    Katie Haddock
    
    Lytham Partners, LLCChief Financial Officer
    
    Dir. of Corp. Communications
    
    Joe Diaz, Robert Blum(949) 975-1550
    
    (949) 975-1550
    
    (602) 889-9700Odyssey Investment Partners:
    
    Caltius Mezzanine:Mark Semer / Joe Kuo
    
    Michael KaneKekst and Company
    
    Managing Principal(212) 521-4802 / 4863
    
    (310) 996-9585
 ###
 3
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

NO. 03-15-00699- CR
Ashley Roxanne Hend erson, Appellant

v. The State of Texas, App ellee

F ROM TH E DISTRI CT COURT O F LAMP ASAS CO UNTY, 27TH JUDICI AL DISTRICT

NO. 928 7, H ONO RAB LE JO HN GAUNTT, JUDGE P RESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N Appellant Ashley Rox anne Hende rson filed a motion to dismiss seeking to withdraw her notice of appea l. Hende rson’s motion to withdraw her notice of appea l is g rante d. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.2(a). T he appe al is dismis sed.

J eff Rose, Chief J ustice Be fore Chief J ustice Rose, Jus tices Pemberton a nd Field Dismissed on Appellant’s Motion Filed: De cembe r 31, 2015 Do Not Publish