alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

The Honorable Paul A. Magnuson, United States District Judge for the District

of Minnesota.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 11-1714

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

v. * District of Minnesota.

*

Charles Gordon Long, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: September 29, 2011

Filed: October 4, 2011

___________

Before LOKEN, BYE, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Invoking Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 36 and the inherent authority of

the federal district courts, federal inmate Charles Long moved--some three years after

he was sentenced for bank robbery upon his guilty plea--for modification or return of

his abridged pre-plea presentence report (PSR). Long argued that the document was

not really a PSR, and that it contained inaccurate and scandalous information which

was being used against him in federal prison. The district court1

 denied the motion,

and he appeals. After careful review, and for the reasons explained by the district
-2-

court, we agree with the court that the document at issue is a PSR within the meaning

of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32, and was therefore properly disclosed to the

Federal Bureau of Prisons; that Long should have addressed any inaccuracies in the

PSR pursuant to Rule 32 at or before sentencing; and that he cannot now use Rule 36

to obtain the relief sought, which involves far more than correction of a clerical error.

See United States v. Yakle, 463 F.3d 810, 811 (8th Cir. 2006) (per curiam).

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We also deny his pending motion to

supplement the record.

______________________________
|                                                                                          
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                          
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                            
|View History: Annual                                                                      
|View History: Annual                                                                      
|View History:                                                                             
|                                                                                          
|Texas Onshore Offshore Natural Gas Total Liquids Extracted in Louisiana (Thousand Barrels)
|                                                                                          
|                                                                                          
|Texas Onshore Offshore Natural Gas Total Liquids Extracted in Louisiana (Thousand Barrels)
|                                                                                          

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2010's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        | 238    |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4499 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Dimethyl carbonate. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 24, 2012 

Mr. BISHOP of Georgia introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Dimethyl 

carbonate. 

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

3 SECTION 1. DIMETHYL CARBONATE. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.12.43 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 Dimethyl carbonate) is amended by striking the date in 

7 the effective period column and inserting ‘‘12/31/2015’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4499 IH

1 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

2 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### UNITED STATES of America v. Alfred P. CRAM.

No. 1608.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.

Sept. 22, 1937.

R. T. McCluggage, Asst. U. S. Atty., of Topeka, Kan.

Erskine Wyman, of Hutchinson, Kan., for appellee.

Before BRATTON and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and SYMES, District Judge.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed on motion of appellant
|                                                                                                                            
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                                            
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                                              
|View History: Annual                                                                                                        
|View History: Annual                                                                                                        
|View History:                                                                                                               
|                                                                                                                            
|Gulf of Mexico Federal Offshore (Central & Eastern) Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions and Discoveries (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                                            
|                                                                                                                            
|Gulf of Mexico Federal Offshore (Central & Eastern) Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions and Discoveries (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                                            

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2010's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        | 153    | 200    | 207    | 295   
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 12     | 15     |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

DANSON EXANTUS-BARR,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D19-603

[May 16, 2019]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for 

the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; Glenn D. Kelley, Judge; 

L.T. Case No. 13CF006645AMB.

Danson Exantus-Barr, Milton, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

MAY, DAMOORGIAN and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MAXIMILIANO QUINTEROS

HERNANDEZ,

Petitioner,

v.

ROBERT M. WILKINSON, Acting

Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 16

- 70259

Agency No. A 028

- 697

- 675

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted February 17, 2021 * *

Before: FERNANDEZ, BYBEE, and BADE, Circuit Judges.

Maximiliano Quinteros Hernandez, a native and citizen of Guatemala,

petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing

his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for

deferral of removal under the Convention Against To rture (“CAT”). We have

* 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). 

# FILED

FEB 19 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 16

- 70259

jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the

agency’s factual findings. Garcia

- Milian v. Holder , 755 F.3d 1026, 1031 (9th Cir.

2014). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of deferral of removal

under CAT because Quinteros Hernandez failed to show it is more likely than not

he would be tortured or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if

returned to Guatemala

. S ee Gonzalez

- Caraveo v. Sessions , 882 F.3d 885, 895 (9th

Cir. 2018) (denial of CAT relief was supported by substantial evidence because the

record evidence did not compel a conclusion contrary to the agency) ; Aden v.

Holder , 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 20 09)

.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
|                                                                                              
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                              
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                
|View History: Annual                                                                          
|View History: Annual                                                                          
|View History:                                                                                 
|                                                                                              
|California Federal Offshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Extensions (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                              
|                                                                                              
|California Federal Offshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Extensions (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                              

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 0     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 1      | 0      | 0      | 0      | --     | --     | --     | --    
|2020's                                                                                                                            | --     | --     |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
#### MOORMAN v. HARRIS.

No. 11918.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. San Antonio.

Jan. 26, 1949.

T. A. Graves, of Cuero, 'for appellant.

David M. Stiles, of Cuero, for appellee.

NORVELL, Justice.

The Commercial Abstract and Title Company of Cuero, Texas, filed this suit and impleaded Weldon W. Darst, Tom Moor-man, the appellant, and W. S. Harris, the appellee. . Moorman owned some real and personal property in Cuero and employed Harris, a licensed real estate dealer, to procure a purchaser therefor. No written agreement was entered into, however, at the time of such employment. Through the joint efforts of Moorman and Harris, Darst became interested in the property and' entered into a written contract whereby he agreed to purchase the same for a consideration of $19,500.00. He put up $1,000.00-earnest money with the title company which acted as escrow agent. Darst failed tO' comply with the purchase contract and Moorman elected to forfeit the earnest money in accordance with the provision of the contract which reads as follows, to-wit:

> “Upon failure of Buyer to comply with the conditions of this contract, seller may, at his .option, enforce specific performance, or may forfeit this earnest money as liquidated damages, in which event the Agent is to receive one-half *(1⁄2)*of said earnest money.”

This contract was signed by Darst as buyer, Moorman as seller and Harris as agent.

The title company waived its claim to attorney’s fees and the court rendered judgment dividing the earnest money between Moorman and Harris.

Moorman has appealed and contends that Harris can not recover because of the provisions of “The Real Estate Dealers License Act”, particularly Article 6573a, § 22, Vernon’s Ann.Civ.Stats.

We are of the opinion that the trial court’s judgment was correct. The cited article has for its purpose the prevention of frauds by requiring claims for commissions in real estate transactions to be in writing. The purpose of the statute was met by the contract here involved. Harris was designated as agent in the contract which was signed by all the interested parties. There is a conflict of decision as to the legal effect of a contractual clause similar to the one above, quoted when the contemplated sale is consummated or an order of specific performance is rendered. Tennant v. Buratti & Montandon, 215 S.W.2d 201, by the Austin Court of Civil Appeals, and Spires v. Mann, 173 S.W.2d 200, by the Eastland Court of Civil Appeals. These cases relate to implied contractual obligations. In the present case, however, the earnest money was forfeited and under the express provisions of the contract Har-risj the agent, wa-s to receive one-half of *183the forfeited sum. Further, it is clear that under the plain, unambiguous wording of the contract Moorman is only entitled to one-half of the earnest money forfeited. To allow him to recover all of the earnest money would be to make and enforce a contractual provision which the parties themselves did not agree to.

The judgment is affirmed. ,
**Exhibit 13.1****CERTIFICATION**     Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of NCLCorporation Ltd. (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that:     The Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2007 (the “Form 20-F”) of theCompany fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934 and information contained in the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.        Date: March 12, 2008 /s/ David Colin Sinclair Veitch   Name:  David Colin Sinclair Veitch   Title:  President and Chief Executive Officer      Date: March 12, 2008 /s/ Kevin M. Sheehan   Name:  Kevin M. Sheehan   Title:  Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellant, v. R. E. FLOYD, Appellee.

No. 4159.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

March 22, 1937.

George I. Neal, U. S. Atty., of Huntington, W. Va., and Charles M. Love, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., of Charleston, W. Va.

George R. C. Wiles, of Charleston, W. Va., for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Case entered dismissed under rule 20 in accordance with agreement of counsel.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                         110,082
<SECURITIES>                                   8,500
<RECEIVABLES>                                  555,483
<ALLOWANCES>                                   10,135
<INVENTORY>                                    218,819
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               1,027,312
<PP&E>                                         772,415
<DEPRECIATION>                                 581,462
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1,218,265
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          514,960
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       1,651,835
<OTHER-SE>                                     8,800
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   679,350
<SALES>                                        812,617
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               842,854
<CGS>                                          149,117
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  149,117
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               615,327
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             2,064
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                72,472
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            72,472
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   72,472
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  .004
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .004
        


</TABLE>
Exhibit
32.1




CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND 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, Robert
F. Kirk, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report
of Avistar Communications Corporation on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended
June 30, 2009 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in
such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the
financial condition and results of operations of Avistar Communications
Corporation.





By:
            /s/
      Robert F. KirkRobert
      F. KirkChief
      Executive OfficerDate: August 4,
      2009
            
            (Principal
      Executive Officer)






I, Elias
A. MurrayMetzger, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the
Quarterly Report of Avistar Communications Corporation on Form 10-Q for the
fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2009 fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that
information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in
all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of
Avistar Communications Corporation.





By:
            /s/
      Elias A. MurrayMetzgerElias
      A. MurrayMetzgerChief
      Financial OfficerDate: August 4,
      2009
            
            (Principal
      Financial and Accounting Officer)
|                                                  
|--------------------------------------------------
|                                                  
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)    
|View History: Annual                              
|View History: Annual                              
|View History:                                     
|                                                  
|Utah Non-Marketed Production  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                  
|                                                  
|Utah Non-Marketed Production  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                  

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 595    | 529    | 1,004  |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 5/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 6/28/2024