alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR .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. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-10986 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus RICARDO ABARCA-VENEGAS, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 6:00-CR-22-1-C
- - - - - - - - - - December 14, 2000 Before DAVIS, STEWART, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Ricardo Abarca-Venegas (Abarca) appeals his conviction and 96-month sentence following his plea of guilty to illegal re-entry into the United States after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Abarca argues that the felony conviction that resulted in his increased sentence under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) was an element of the offense that should have been charged in the indictment. He acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224 (1998), but he seeks to preserve the issue for Supreme Court review in lightNo. 00-10986 -2- of Apprendi v. New Jersey , 120 S. Ct. 2348 (2000). Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres
. See Apprendi , 120 S. Ct. at 2361-62 & n.15. Abarca’s argument is foreclosed. See Almendarez-Torres , 523 U.S. at 235. Accordingly, Abarca’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.
Case 2:22-cv-00045-Z-BR Document 6 Filed 08/04/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 56
EXHIBIT 21.1

SUBSIDIARIES OF OUTSOURCING SERVICES GROUP, INC.

|Name                                   |  | Jurisdiction of Organization
|-------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------------
|Aerosol Services Company, Inc.         |  | California                  
|Kolmar Laboratories, Inc.              |  | Delaware                    
|Piedmont Laboratories, Inc.            |  | Georgia                     
|Acupac Packaging, Inc.                 |  | New Jersey                  
|Precision Packaging and Services, Inc. |  | Ohio                        
|OSG Ivers-Lee Inc.                     |  | Ontario                     
|OSG Norwich Pharmaceutical, Inc.       |  | Delaware                    

---

QuickLinks
Case 7:22-cr-00009-O Document 85 Filed 03/10/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 70
Case 7:22-cr-00009-O Document 85 Filed 03/10/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 71
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 259 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 259

 Expressing the sense of the United States Congress that the Citizen's 
  Stamp Advisory Committee of the United States Postal Service should 
  recommend to the Postmaster General that a postage stamp be issued 
                  honoring coach Paul ``Bear'' Bryant.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 23, 1994

   Mr. Hilliard (for himself, Mr. Bachus of Alabama, Mr. Bevill, Mr. 
   Browder, Mr. Callahan, Mr. Cramer, and Mr. Everett) submitted the 
following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on 
                     Post Office and Civil Service

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
 Expressing the sense of the United States Congress that the Citizen's 
  Stamp Advisory Committee of the United States Postal Service should 
  recommend to the Postmaster General that a postage stamp be issued 
                  honoring coach Paul ``Bear'' Bryant.

Whereas the Citizen's Stamp Advisory Committee decides which individuals may be 
        honored by having a stamp issued in their honor;
Whereas many sports heroes of the past have been honored in this manner;
Whereas Coach Paul William ``Bear'' Bryant is the most successful coach in 
        college Division One football history;
Whereas Coach Bryant led his teams to 6 national championships, and holds the 
        record for the most post season bowl appearances, and the most bowl 
        wins;
Whereas Coach Bryant's winning history was a source of great pride to the 
        University of Alabama and the Nation;
Whereas Paul ``Bear'' Bryant is a modern hero and legend in the South; and
Whereas the Postal Service's 10-year waiting period for such an honor has 
        expired since ``Bear'' Bryant died on January 18, 1982: Now, therefore, 
        be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of the United States Congress that the Citizen's 
Stamp Advisory Committee of the United States Postal Service should 
recommend to the Postmaster General that a postage stamp be issued 
honoring Coach Paul ``Bear'' Bryant.

                                 <all>
```
IV

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 195

Expressing the sense of Congress that the Government should require that

all tax benefits or other subsidies afforded to businesses operating in

the United States as part of health care reform should be used for

investment and job creation within the borders of the United States.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

NOVEMBER 23, 1993

Ms. KAPTUR (for herself, Mrs. BENTLEY, Mr. KLINK, and Mr. HUNTER) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on Ways and Means

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of Congress that the Government

should require that all tax benefits or other subsidies

afforded to businesses operating in the United States

as part of health care reform should be used for investment and job creation within the borders of the United

States.

Whereas two million seven hundred thousand United States

manufacturing jobs have been lost due to imports since

1979;

Whereas manufacturing as a percentage of gross domestic

product in the United States has decreased to 19 percent

while manufacturing as a percentage of gross domestic

product of our trading partners has been increasing or
2

HCON 195 IH

remaining constant (for example, 28 percent for Japan

and 30 percent for Germany);

Whereas United States firms now own and operate over seven

thousand five hundred foreign affiliates operating overseas;

Whereas these foreign affiliates now account for 23 percent

of all manufacturing by United States companies;

Whereas the One Hundred Third Congress is considering reforming the health care delivery system;

Whereas many of the proposals being considered involve

granting tax relief or government subsidies to certain

businesses and individuals;

Whereas caps on employer contributions for health care coverage could translate into a windfall tax benefit or government subsidy for businesses of billions of dollars;

Whereas government assumption of liability for early retiree

health coverage could translate into a government subsidy

of up to $11,000,000,000;

Whereas business would be free to use these government subsidies for whatever purposes it deems appropriate, including spending the subsidies outside the United States, regardless of the consequences for American workers; and

Whereas government programs to promote investment and

job creation in the United States, such as the investment

tax credit, have proven to be successful in the past: Now,

therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that all gov3 ernment health care tax benefits or subsidies provided in
3

HCON 195 IH

1 the context of health care reform to businesses operating

2 in the United States be in a form, such as an investment

3 tax credit, that will ensure that the benefits or subsidies

4 are directed toward investment in the United States to

5 promote job creation and the competitiveness of United

6 States industry and agriculture.

Æ
#### HENSON et al. v. WEBB et al.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

May 29, 1953.

Roy W. House, Manchester, for appellants.

John D. White and John M. Lyttle, Manchester, for appellees.

CAMMACK, Justice.

This action was instituted by the appellants, Homer Henson and Walter Harris, to condemn a 151⁄2 foot passway through the land of the appellees, Jule and Edith Webb. The action was instituted under KRS 381.580 and KRS 381.630. The first section sets forth the conditions under which such an action may be maintained: The latter section provides that the right granted shall not be exclusive. The appellants had been using a 12 foot passway which ran around a hill and which was very difficult to- maintain. The new passway sought by the appellants was shorter and much more convenient for them. It ran along a line fence.

The action was instituted in the county court. Commissioners were appointed and they recommended that the way be granted. In this connection it may be well to point out that we have held that a passway condemned, under KRS 381.580 is not one of absolute nee’essity, but rather of practical necessity. Coyle v. Elliott, 189 Ky. 569, 225 S.W. 489. The appellees excepted to the commissioners’ report. On the trial of exceptions the. county court • overruled them and awarded the appellees $80 as damages. The appellees prosecuted ári appeal to the Clay Circuit Court where a de novo trial was had. • TRe- Circuit Court appointed commissioners who recommended that the way be granted the appellants and that the ap-pellees be awarded $60 for the land taken and $40 for fencing. The appellees filed exceptions to the commissioners’ report in the Circuit Court.

Several witnesses- were heard on each side. In general,-the witnesses for the appellants testified that the way sought by them was one of practical necessity, while the witnesses for the appellees testified to the contrary. .'At'the conclusion of the trial a directed verdict was given in'favor of the appellees.- Clearly, this was error., The case should .have been submitted to the jury.

The judgment is reversed for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
#### Mrs. E. H. PORTER et vir, Appellants, v. Mrs. Elsie McCLENDON et vir, Appellees.

No. 15560.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Fort Worth.

Nov. 12, 1954.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 10, 1954.

J. T. Barfield and W. H. Hall, Dallas, for appellants.

Jones, Phillips & Watkins and Marvin Jones, Dallas, for appellees.

RENFRO, Justice.

Appellees, Mr. and Mrs. L. B. McClen-don, brought suit for damages suffered by Mrs. McClendon when attacked and bitten by dogs of appellants, Mr. and Mrs. E. H. Porter, on May 26, 1953; the cause being predicated upon appellants’ wilfully, wrongfully and negligently allowing vicious and dangerous dogs to run at large.

Trial was to the court without a jury and judgment awarded appellees in the sum of $250. Ample findings of fact and conclusions of law, sufficiently supported by the record, were filed by the trial judge.

We have carefully considered the entire record and briefs, and oral arguments in behalf of both parties, and have reached the conclusion that no reversible error is shown, and that the judgment is in accord with both substantial and legal justice. We therefore affirm the trial court’s judgment without written opinion under authority of Associated Indemnity Corporation v. Gatling, Tex.Civ.App., 75 S.W.2d 294; Hartsfield v. A. O. Reece & Son, Tex.Civ.App., 144 S.W.2d 959; Hammonds v. Riley, Tex. Civ.App., 151 S.W.2d 602, writ dismissed; Western Life Ins. Co. v. Alcorn, Tex.Civ. App., 153 S.W.2d 868; Wilkerson v. Angel, Tex.Civ.App., 213 S.W.2d 104; Ware v. Farmer, Tex.Civ.App., 219 S.W.2d 158.

Judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markm an Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_________________________________________ Clerk July 17, 2012 

# Order

July 17, 2012

143342(91)

CHARTER TOWNSHIP OF LYON,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

SC: 143342

v COA: 294074

Oakland CC: 2007

- 083871

- CC

McDONALD’S USA, L.L.C.,

Defendant,

and

MILFORD ROAD EAST DEVELOPMENT

ASSOCIATES, L.L.C.,

Intervening Defendant

- Appellant.

_____________________________________

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion b y Michigan Chamber Litigation Center

for leave to file a brief amicus curiae in this case is considered and it is granted.
`[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 178 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.Con.Res.178
                                       Agreed to November 10, 1993      
                       One Hundred Third Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America


                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
  the fifth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-three


                          Concurrent Resolution

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That when the House adjourns on Wednesday, November 10, 1993, it stand 
adjourned until noon on Monday, November 15, 1993, or until noon on the 
second day after Members are notified to reassemble pursuant to section 
2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first; and that when 
the Senate recesses or adjourns at the close of business on Wednesday, 
November 10, 1993, pursuant to a motion made by the majority leader or 
his designee, in accordance with this resolution, it stand recessed or 
adjourned until noon on Tuesday, November 16, 1993, or at such time as 
may be specified by the majority leader or his designee in the motion to 
recess or adjourn, or until noon on the second day after Members are 
notified to reassemble pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent 
resolution, whichever occurs first.
    Sec. 2. The Speaker of the House and the majority leader of the 
Senate, acting jointly after consultation with the minority leader of 
the House and the minority leader of the Senate, shall notify the 
Members of the House and the Senate, respectively, to reassemble 
whenever, in their opinion, the public interest shall warrant it.
Attest:







                                  Clerk of the House of Representatives.

Attest:







                                                Secretary of the Senate.`
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 19

- 1114 V

UNPUBLISHED

NICOLE HARDER, as Parent an d

Legal Representative of Her Minor

Son, J.A. H.

,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Chief Special Master Corcoran

Filed: January 16, 2020

Special Processing Unit (SPU) ;

Rul ing on Entitlement; Concession;

Table Injury; Rotavirus Vaccine;

Intussusception

Glen S turtevant, Jr.

, Rawls Law Group, Richmond, VA , for petitioner.

Mark Hellie , U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

On July 31, 2019

, Nicole Harder, as parent and legal representative of her minor

son, J.A. H., filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury

Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa

- 10, et seq

. , 2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner

alleges that J.A.H. rece ived the rotavirus vaccination on September 19, 2018 and

developed intussusception as a result requ ir ing surgical intervention . Petit ion at 1 . The

case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am

required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in accordance with the E

Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Managemen t and Promotion of

Electronic Government Services). This means the ruling will be available to anyone with access to

the internet. In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), Petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to

redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of

privacy. If, upon review, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such

material from public access.

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 19 86, Pub. L. No. 99

- 660, 100 Stat. 3755

. Hereinafter, for

ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subpara graph of 42 U.S.C. §

300aa (2012 ).2 On January 3, 2020

, R espondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes

that P etitioner is entitled to compensa tion in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report

at 1. Specifically, R espondent concluded that J.A.H. ’ s intussusception manifested

between one and t wenty

- one d ays after his receipt of t he rotavirus vaccine and there is

not preponderant evidence that his condition was due to a factor unrelated to the

vaccine. Id. at 3 . Respondent further agrees that J .A.H. ’ s intussusception resulted in

inpatient hospitalization and surgical intervention

. Id.

In view of R espondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that

P etitioner is entitle d to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran

Chief Special Master
#### HOLCOMB v. STATE.

No. 25411.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 24, 1951.

No attorney on appeal for appellant.

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

MORRISON, Judge.

The offense is robbery; the penalty is five years.

*888The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception, in the absence of which nothing is presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7445

ADI SUPREME GOD ALLAH, Plaintiff - Appellant, versusHUGHES, Captain at Lee Correctional Institution; YVONNE BLANDSAW, Grievance Coordinatorat Lee Correctional Institution, in his individual and official capacity, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Falcon B. Hawkins, Chief District Judge. (CA-97-2921-2-11AJ) Submitted: February 25, 1999 Decided: March 9, 1999 Before HAMILTON, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Adi Supreme God Allah, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Stephen Pauley, LIDE, MONTGOMERY, POTTS, P.C., Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court’s order denying relief onhis 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1998) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation, and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Allah v. Hughes , No. CA-97-2921-2-11AJ (D.S.C. Sept. 22, 1998). We deny Appellant’s motion for appointment of counsel. 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
**Exhibit 23.1****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Forms S-8 Nos.333-52814, 333-71228 and 333-101115) pertaining to the 1995 Stock Plan (as amended) and the 2000Employee Stock Purchase Plan of Catalytica Energy Systems, Inc. of our report dated March 14, 2007,with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Catalytica Energy Systems, Inc., includedin its Annual Report (Form 10-KSB) for the year ended December 31, 2006./s/ Ernst & Young LLPPhoenix, Arizona
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

LUBBOCK DIVISION 2n"'· J"L 2 .., LL ,) 6 p M ~: 0 8 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA § 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

v. CASE NO. 5:22-CR-031-H-BQ-1 

JASON MATTHEW SANTIAGO 

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON PLEA 

BEFORE THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

This case has been referred by the United States district judge to the undersigned 

for the taking of a guilty plea. The parties have consented to appear before a United States 

magistrate judge for these purposes. This Report and Recommendation on Plea is submitted 

to the court under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(3). 

The defendant appeared with counsel before the undersigned United States 

magistrate judge, who addressed the defendant personally in open court and informed the 

defendant of, and determined that the defendant understood, the admonitions contained in 

Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. 

The defendant pleaded guilty (under a written plea bargain agreement with the 

government) to Count Three of the Indictment, charging defendant with a violation of 

21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a){J), 84J(b)(l){A){viii), that is, Possession with Intent to Distribute 50 

Grams or More of Methamphetamine {Actual). After examining Defendant under oath the 

undersigned magistrate judge finds the following: 

I. Defendant, upon advice of counsel, has consented orally and in writing 

to enter this guilty plea before a magistrate judge, subject to final 

approval and sentencing by the presiding district judge; 

Case 5:22-cr-00031-H-BQ Document 25 Filed 07/26/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 47
2. Defendant fully understands the nature of the charges (including each 

essential element of the offense(s) charged) and penalties; 

3. Defendant fully understands the tenns of the plea agreement and plea 

agreement supplement; 

4. Defendant understands all constitutional and statutory rights and wishes 

to waive these rights, including the right to a trial by jury and the right 

to appear before a United States district judge; 

5. Defendant's plea is made freely and voluntarily; 

6. Defendant is competent to enter this plea of guilty; 

7. There is a factual basis for this plea; and 

8. The ends of justice are served by acceptance of the defendant's plea of 

guilty. 

Although I have conducted these proceedings and recommend acceptance of 

Defendant's plea of guilty, the United States district judge has the power to review my 

actions and possesses final decision-making authority in this proceeding. Thus, if 

Defendant has any objections to these findings or any other action of the undersigned, he 

is required to make those known to the United States district judge within fourteen (14) 

days of today. 

Based on the above, I recommend that Defendant's plea of guilty be accepted, that 

Defendant be adjudged guilty, and that sentence be imposed accordingly. 

Signed July 26, 2022. 

..J::ct. 

JOHN R. PARKER 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 5:22-cr-00031-H-BQ Document 25 Filed 07/26/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 48