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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-6509

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

STEVEN LAVOUR TWITTY,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Cameron McGowan Currie, District 

Judge. (0:98-cr-00826-CMC-1)

Submitted: May 24, 2012 Decided: May 31, 2012

Before MOTZ and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Steven Lavour Twitty, Appellant Pro Se. Jane Barrett Taylor, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Steven Lavour Twitty appeals the district court’s 

orders denying his motions for a reduction of sentence under 18 

U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) and for reconsideration. Twitty 

pleaded guilty to one count of possession with intent to 

distribute and distribution of cocaine and cocaine base in 

violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (2006). He is currently 

serving the statutory maximum sentence of 240 months’ 

imprisonment for that offense. But for that statutory maximum, 

the low end of Twitty’s Guidelines range both before and after 

Amendment 750 exceeded 240 months. Therefore, the district 

court properly found that Amendment 750 had no effect on 

Twitty’s Guidelines range. Accordingly, we affirm the district 

court’s orders. 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
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME FILED AS
PART OF THE QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                1,000

<S>                                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                               SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                                  OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                                    DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                                               13,143
<SECURITIES>                                                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                           380
<ALLOWANCES>                                                              0
<INVENTORY>                                                               0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                     13,707
<PP&E>                                                                  186
<DEPRECIATION>                                                            0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                       13,893
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                                 2,888
<BONDS>                                                                  30
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                                               0
<COMMON>                                                                  5
<OTHER-SE>                                                           10,970
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                         13,893
<SALES>                                                                   0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                        100
<CGS>                                                                     0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                         2,941
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                          0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                        0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                       6,923
<INCOME-TAX>                                                              0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                   6,923
<DISCONTINUED>                                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                                          6,923
<EPS-BASIC>                                                            1.33
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                          1.26


</TABLE>
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 Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. 50-271]

                    The October 18, 2000,                     **Federal Register**                     contained a “Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing,” (65 FR 62393) for the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station. This notice offered an opportunity for comment or hearing requests.                

                    Inadvertently, this was the second offering of such opportunity as a notice had already been published in the September 27, 2000,                     **Federal Register**                     (65 FR 68111). The 30-day comment/hearing request deadline is October 27, 2000, at 4:15 p.m. as stated in the September 27, 2000,                     **Federal Register**                    .                

Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 26th day of October 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Richard P. Croteau, Sr.,

Project Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate I, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 00-28034 Filed 10-31-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
EXHIBIT 32.1
                                                                    ------------

                            CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                            (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

In  connection  with  the  Quarterly  Report  of  Hyperdynamics  Corporation
(Hyperdynamics)  ,  on  Form  10-Q  for the quarter ended September 30, 2005, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), Kent P. Watts,
Chief Executive Officer of Hyperdynamics, does hereby certify, pursuant to   906
of  the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of 2002 (18 U.S.C.   1350), that to his knowledge:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the  Securities  Exchange  Act  of  1934;  and

(2)  The  information  contained  in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects,  the  financial  condition  and  result  of operations of the Company.


Date:  November  21,  2005    By:  /s/  Kent  P.  Watts
                                   -----------------
                                   Kent  P.  Watts
                                   Chief  Executive  Officer
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-60311

ELIZABETH HILL,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

STATE FARM FIRE & CASUALTY COMPANY,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

No. 3:08-CV-323

Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

*

Elizabeth Hill sued in diversity for bad-faith denial of her workers’ compensation claim. The district court granted summary judgment for State Farm

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

March 31, 2011

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 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.

Case: 10-60311 Document: 00511431612 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/31/2011
No. 10-60311

Fire & Casualty Company (“State Farm”) after considerable discovery. The

court explained its ruling in a lengthy and comprehensive statement dictated

into the record after a hearing.

The bare, undisputed facts are that Hill was the salaried office manager

for a law firm and had the job responsibility of taking the firm’s backup computer disk home each workday for safekeeping. She also regularly did some

work at home for the firm. Leaving work after a full day on the job, Hill was severely injured in an auto accident. A representative of the firm arrived on the

scene and extracted the backup tape from the wreckage.

State Farm denied Hill’s workers’ compensation claim as outside the

course and scope of employment but paid the claim after it was administratively

upheld. In this bad-faith suit, the district court properly invoked the “going and

coming” rule, also called the dual-purpose doctrine, which the district court explained basically as follows (relying on Durr’s Dependents v. Schlumberger Oil

Well Surveying Corp., 86 So. 2d 507, 509 (Miss. 1956) (citing 1 LARSON’S WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION LAW § 18.12, at 241)): If the work assignment made the

travel necessary, the worker is in the scope of employment, but if the trip would

have occurred anyway, the travel is personal and not in the scope of employment. The district court concluded that “[t]he fact that Hill finished her normal

workday and was heading home provides an arguable basis for the application

of the dual purpose test.” So, there was no bad faith in denying the claim.

We have reviewed the briefs, pertinent portions of the record, and the applicable law and have heard the arguments of counsel. Because there is no error, the summary judgment is AFFIRMED, essentially for the reasons given by

the district court.

2

Case: 10-60311 Document: 00511431612 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/31/2011
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3378 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3378

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the nonbusiness 
energy property credit to include the insulation component of insulated 
                                siding.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 29, 2013

 Mr. Welch (for himself and Mr. Gibbs) introduced the following bill; 
         which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the nonbusiness 
energy property credit to include the insulation component of insulated 
                                siding.

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

SECTION 1. NONBUSINESS ENERGY PROPERTY TO INCLUDE INSULATION COMPONENT 
              OF INSULATED SIDING.

    (a) In General.--Paragraph (2) of section 25C(c) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of 
subparagraph (C), by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (D) 
and inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the end the following new 
subparagraph:
                    ``(E) the insulation portion of any building 
                cladding system (including vinyl siding with integral 
                insulating material) that has a minimum thermal 
                resistance of R-2.''.
    (b) Dollar Limitation.--Subsection (b) of section 25C(b) of such 
Code is amended by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (4) and by 
inserting after paragraph (2) the following new paragraph:
            ``(3) Certain insulation.--In the case of amounts paid or 
        incurred for components described in subsection (c)(2)(E) by 
        any taxpayer for any taxable year, the credit allowed under 
        this section with respect to such amounts for such year shall 
        not exceed the excess (if any) of $250 over the aggregate 
        credits allowed under this section with respect to such amounts 
        for all prior taxable years ending after December 31, 2005.''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to property placed in service after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 10.51







EDISON INTERNATIONAL


NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICER BASE SALARIES


 


The executive officers listed below are the individuals who will be designated as Edison International’s named executive officers in its proxy statement for the 2006 annual meeting of shareholders and who are currently serving as executive officers of Edison International.  The 2006 base salary level for each of the named executive officers is as follows:


 



	
            Named Executive Officer
 	
            2006 Base Salary Level
 
	
             

John E. Bryson, Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of Edison International and Chairman of the Board of Southern California Edison Company (“SCE”)

 
 	
             

$1,210,000(1)
 
	
            Alan J. Fohrer, Chief Executive Officer of SCE

 
 	
            $651,040(1)
 
	
            Thomas R. McDaniel, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of Edison International

 
 	
            $611,000
 
	
            Theodore F. Craver, Jr., Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of Edison Mission Energy

 
 	
            $604,200
 
	
            John R. Fielder, President of SCE

 
 	
            $407,777(1)
 



                            


 

 


	
             
	
            (1)
 	
            Messrs. Bryson, Fohrer and Fielder will also be designated as named executive officers by SCE in its proxy statement for its 2006 annual meeting of shareholders.  The amounts shown for the officers are the aggregate 2006 base salaries for service to Edison International and SCE, and are inclusive of (and not in addition to) any 2006 base salary amounts reported by SCE.
Exhibit 21.1

                             FRONTLINE CAPITAL GROUP
                           STATEMENT OF SUBSIDIARIES


NAME                                                      STATE OF ORGANIZATION
----                                                      ---------------------
CommerceInc. Corporation                                  Indiana
EmployeeMatters, Inc.                                     Delaware
OneXstream.com, Inc.                                      Delaware
OnSite Access, Inc.                                       Delaware
Reckson Office Centers, LLC                               Delaware
Reckson Strategic Venture Partners, LLC                   Delaware
RSI CIC, Inc.                                             Delaware
RSI ESO, Inc.                                             Delaware
RSI Fund Management, LLC                                  Delaware
RSI I/O Holdings, Inc.                                    Delaware
RSI-OnSite Holdings, LLC                                  Delaware
RSI-OSA Holdings, Inc.                                    Delaware
RSI RITS, Inc.                                            Delaware
RSVP Holdings, LLC                                        Delaware
VANTAS, Incorporated                                      Nevada



                                     IV-39
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 26 (Tuesday, February 8, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 6211]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-2806]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

[FEMA-1311-DR]


Georgia; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster 
Declaration

AGENCY:  Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

ACTION:  Notice.

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

SUMMARY:  This notice amends the notice of a major disaster for the 
State of Georgia, (FEMA-1311-DR), dated January 28, 2000, and related 
determinations.

EFFECTIVE DATE:  January 31, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Madge Dale, Response and Recovery 
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, 
(202) 646-3772.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  The notice of a major disaster for the 
State of Georgia is hereby amended to include the following areas among 
those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the 
catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President in his 
declaration of January 28, 2000:

Carroll, Douglas, Floyd, and Rockdale counties for debris removal 
(Category A) and emergency protective measures, (Category B), 
including direct Federal assistance.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) 
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 83.537, Community 
Disaster Loans; 83.538, Cora Brown Fund Program; 83.539, Crisis 
Counseling; 83.540, Disaster Legal Services Program; 83.541, 
Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 83.542, Fire Suppression 
Assistance; 83.543, Individual and Family Grant (IFG) Program; 
83.544, Public Assistance Grants; 83.545, Disaster Housing Program; 
83.548, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.)

Lacy E. Suiter,
Executive Associate Director, Response and Recovery Directorate.
[FR Doc. 00-2806 Filed 2-7-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6718-02-P
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3513 

To end the use of body-gripping traps in the National Wildlife Refuge System. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 15, 2013 

Mrs. LOWEY (for herself, Mr. MORAN, Mr. WAXMAN, Mr. PRICE of North 

Carolina, Mr. POCAN, Ms. SHEA-PORTER, and Mr. CARTWRIGHT) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural 

Resources 

A BILL 

To end the use of body-gripping traps in the National 

Wildlife Refuge System. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Refuge from Cruel 

5 Trapping Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. POSSESSION OR USE OF BODY-GRIPPING TRAP PRO7 HIBITED. 

8 The National Wildlife Refuge System Administration 

9 Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd et seq.) is amended by add10 ing at the end the following: 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3513 IH

1 ‘‘SEC. 6. POSSESSION OR USE OF BODY-GRIPPING TRAP 

2 PROHIBITED. 

3 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—No person may possess or use 

4 a body-gripping trap in the System. 

5 ‘‘(b) ENFORCEMENT PROVISIONS.—Notwithstanding 

6 section 4(f), a person who possesses or uses a body-grip7 ping trap in the System shall be subject to the following: 

8 ‘‘(1) In the case of a first offense, a civil fine 

9 of not more than $500 imposed by the Secretary for 

10 each body-gripping trap possessed or used. 

11 ‘‘(2) In the case of a subsequent offense— 

12 ‘‘(A) a civil fine of not more than $1,000 

13 imposed by the Secretary for each body-grip14 ping trap possessed or used; 

15 ‘‘(B) imprisonment for not more than 180 

16 days; or 

17 ‘‘(C) both a civil fine and imprisonment in 

18 accordance with subparagraphs (A) and (B). 

19 ‘‘(c) FORFEITURE OF BODY-GRIPPING TRAP.—Any 

20 body-gripping trap that is possessed or used in violation 

21 of this section, and any wildlife captured by the use of 

22 such trap, including the pelt or raw fur, shall be subject 

23 to forfeiture to the United States in accordance with the 

24 provisions of chapter 46 of title 18, United States Code, 

25 relating to civil forfeitures. 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 3513 IH

1 ‘‘(d) PAYMENT OF COURT COSTS AND OTHER ASSO2 CIATED EXPENSES.—A person found to be in violation of 

3 subsection (a) shall pay all court costs associated there4 with. 

5 ‘‘(e) REGULATIONS.—Not later than 120 days after 

6 the date of the enactment of this section, the Secretary 

7 shall issue any regulations necessary to carry out this sec8 tion. 

9 ‘‘(f) DEFINITION.—As used in this section, the term 

10 ‘body-gripping trap’— 

11 ‘‘(1) means any device that is intended to kill 

12 or capture wildlife by physically restraining any part 

13 of the animal; 

14 ‘‘(2) includes any steel-jaw, padded, or other 

15 modified leghold trap, kill-type trap, snare trap, or 

16 any modified version of any such trap; and 

17 ‘‘(3) does not include any cage or box trap or 

18 suitcase-type live beaver trap.’’. 

Æ 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
In The 

Court of Appeals 

Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07-16-00088-CR 

STACEY EDWARD LEE FROST, APPELLANT 

 

V. 

 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE 

 

On Appeal from the 251st District Court 

Randall County, Texas 

Trial Court No. 25,642-C, Honorable Ana Estevez, Presiding 

 

June 22, 2016 

 

ON MOTION TO DISMISS 

 

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ. 

Appellant, Stacey Edward Lee Frost, appealed his conviction for the offense of 

burglary of a habitation.1 Appellant was sentenced to six years’ incarceration in the 

Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, but the sentence of 

confinement was suspended and appellant was placed on community supervision for a 

period of four years. On June 16, 2016, appellant’s counsel filed a Motion to Dismiss 

Appeal.

 

1

See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 30.02 (West 2011).
2

Because the motion meets the requirements of Texas Rule of Appellate 

Procedure 42.2(a), and this Court has not delivered its decision prior to receiving it, the 

motion is hereby granted and the appeal is dismissed. Having dismissed the appeal at 

appellant’s request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained and our mandate will 

issue forthwith.

Mackey K. Hancock

 Justice

Do not publish.
#### McDonald v. State.

No. 24444.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 26, 1949.

None on appeal.

George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

DAVIDSON, Judge.

The offense is the interfering with a police officer in executing a lawful arrest for a misdemeanor; the punishment, a fine •of $25.

The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception. Nothing is presented for the consideration of this court.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Opinion approved by the Court.