alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**UN PUBLISHED**  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15**  **- 6107** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. AHMAD RASHAD HOBBS, a/k/a Sean Hicks , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Newport News . Rebecca Beach Smith , Chief District Judge. ( 4:08

- cr - 00024

- RBS

- FBS

- 1 )

Submitted : November 19, 2015 Decided: November 23, 2015

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and HARRIS , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
. Ahmad Rashad Hobbs, Appellant Pro Se. Howard Jacob Zlotnick, Assistant United States Attorney, Newport News, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Ahmad Rashad Hobbs appeals the district court’s orders denying Hobbs’ 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for a sentence reduction based on Amendment 782 to the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual (2014), and denying reconsideration of that order. A district court’s decision on whether to reduce a sentence under § 3582(c)(2) is reviewed for abuse of discretion, while its conclusion on the scope of its legal authority under that provision is reviewed de novo. United States v. Munn , 595 F.3d 183, 186 (4th Cir. 2010). Our review of the record reveals that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Hobbs’ § 3582(c)(2) motion. The court plainly understood its authority to reduce Hobbs’ sentence pursuant t o Amendment 782, see United States v.
Stewart , 595 F.3d 197, 203 (4th Cir. 2010); USSG § 1B1.10(b)(2)(B), p.s., but declined to do so based on the facts and circumstances of Hobbs’ case, with which it was abundantly familiar. See United States v. Smalls , 720 F.3d 193, 196

- 97 (4th Cir. 2013). Moreover, despite Hobbs’ claim to the contrary, it is well settled that the district court is not required to provide individualized reasoning when deciding a § 3582(c)(2) motion, see United States v. Legree , 205 F.3d 724, 728

- 29 (4th Cir. 2000), and the record does not support Hobbs’ argument that the court failed to consider the relevant 183 U.S.C. § 3553(a) (2012) factors. See Smalls , 720 F.3d at 195

- 97. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of Hobbs’ § 3582(c)(2) moti on for the reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. Hobbs , No. 4 :0 8

– cr – 00 024

– RBS

- FBS

- 1 ( E. D. Va. filed Nov. 21, 2014; entered Nov. 25, 2014 ). We also conclude that the district court lacked authority to entertain Hobbs’ motion for reconsideration. See United States v. Goodwyn , 596 F.3d 233, 235

– 36 (4th Cir. 2010). Accordingl y, we affirm the district court’ s order denying that

mo tion
. Finally, we deny Hobbs’ motion for the appointment of counsel. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.

AFFIRMED
IIA

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 303

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 4 (legislative day, MAY 2), 1994

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

MAY 11 (legislative day, MAY 2), 1994

Committee discharged

JOINT RESOLUTION

To designate June 6, 1994, as ‘‘D-Day National

Remembrance Day’’.

Whereas June 6, 1994, marks the fiftieth anniversary of DDay, the day of the beginning of the Allied assault at

Normandy, France, during World War II;

Whereas the D-Day assault, known as Operation Overlord,

was the most extensive amphibious operation ever to

occur, involving on the first day of the operation five

thousand ships, over eleven thousand sorties of Allied aircraft, and one hundred and fifty-three thousand American, British, and Canadian troops;
2

HJ 303 CDS

Whereas five separate beaches were assaulted, with American

forces commanded by Lieutenant General Omar Bradley

attacking Omaha and Utah beaches and British and Canadian forces commanded by General Miles Dempsey attacking Gold, Juno, and Sword beaches;

Whereas American troops suffered significant losses during

the assault, including over six thousand five hundred casualties;

Whereas the D-Day assault was among the most critical

events of World War II, with the success of the Allied

landings in Normandy providing the foothold for the liberation of France and the eventual Allied breakthrough

into Germany and leading ultimately to the Allied victory

in Europe; and

Whereas June 6, 1944, is one of the most significant dates

in the history of the United States: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That June 6, 1994, is designated as ‘‘D-Day National Re4 membrance Day’’, and the President is authorized and re5 quested to issue a proclamation calling upon the people

6 of the United States to observe such day with appropriate

7 programs, ceremonies, and activities.

Passed the House of Representatives May 3, 1994.

Attest: DONNALD K. ANDERSON,

Clerk.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

In the Matter of JAMIE LYN SNOW PETITION FOR REINSTATEMENT FROM ADMINISTRATIVE SUSPENSION

PER CURIAM : : : : : : : No. 70 DB 2014 (No.51 RST 2014) Attorney Registration No. 92339 (Out of State) O R D E R

AND NOW, this 30th day of July, 2014, the Report and Recommendation of Disciplinary Board Member dated July 21, 2014, is approved and it is ORDERED that Jamie Lyn Snow,who has been on Administrative Suspension,has never been suspended ordisbarred,and has demonstrated thatshe has the moral qualifications,competencyand learning in law required for admission to practice in the Commonwealth,shall be and is, hereby reinstated to active status as a member of the Bar of this Commonwealth. The expenses incurred by the Board in the investigation and processing ofthis matter shall be paid by the Petitioner.
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Annual Report of Venture Lending & Leasing VIII, Inc. (the “Fund”) on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2021 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, David R. Wanek, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Fund, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:


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


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





/S/ David R. Wanek


David R. Wanek


President and Chief Executive Officer


(Principal Executive Officer)


March 14, 2022
EXHIBIT
32.1





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF
THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Ever-Glory International Group, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q, for the fiscal quarter ended June 30,
2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), I, Edward Yihua Kang, Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my
knowledge:





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





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





Date:    August
      12, 2010
                  /s/
             Edward Yihua
  KangEdward Yihua KangChief Executive Officer
                    (Principal
      Executive
Officer)
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-2009 

GARY KEVIN MATTIS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; FEDERAL

BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION; KIMBERLY J. DELGRECO;

TONIA L. LEWIS,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern

District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. W. Craig Broadwater,

District Judge. (CA-03-10-3)

Submitted: November 18, 2004 Decided: November 23, 2004

Before LUTTIG and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gary Kevin Mattis, Appellant Pro Se. Daniel W. Dickinson, Jr.,

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West Virginia, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:
- 2 -

Gary Kevin Mattis appeals the district court’s orders

dismissing his civil action for lack of jurisdiction and denying

his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons

stated by the district court. See Mattis v. United States Dep’t of

Justice, No. CA-03-10-3 (N.D.W. Va. Oct. 9, 2003; Apr. 9, 2004).

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
# Official Journal L 279/2014

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 279 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 5723 September 2014 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 279

English edition

Legislation

Volume 5723 September 2014

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Commission Regulation (EU) No 991/2014 of 19 September 2014 amending Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards maximum residue levels for fosetyl in or on certain products (
  1
  ) | 1 |
| | * | Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 992/2014 of 22 September 2014 repealing Delegated Regulation (EU) No 950/2014 | 17 |
| | | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 993/2014 of 22 September 2014 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables | 19 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Commission Regulation (EU) No 991/2014 of 19 September 2014 amending Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards maximum residue levels for fosetyl in or on certain products (
  1
  )

1

1

*

Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 992/2014 of 22 September 2014 repealing Delegated Regulation (EU) No 950/2014

17

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 993/2014 of 22 September 2014 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

19

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 224 (Monday, November 20, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69758-69759]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-29591]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER01-362-000]


Southern Energy Delta, L.L.C., Southern Energy Potrero, L.L.C.; 
Notice of Filing

November 13, 2000.

    Take notice that on November 3, 2000, Southern Energy Delta, L.L.C. 
(SE Delta), and Southern Energy Potrero, L.L.C. (SE Potrero), tendered 
for filing revised tariff sheets to the Must-Run Service Agreements 
between SE Delta, SE Potrero, and the California Independent System 
Operator Corporation. The revisions include changes to the: (i) 
Contract Service Limits, (ii) Hourly Availability Charges and Penalty 
Rates, and (iii) projected outage information for the generating units 
owned by SE Delta and SE Potrero, for the year beginning January 1, 
2001, as well as corrections to certain typographical errors.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest such filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice 
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). All such motions and 
protests should be filed on or before November 24, 2000. Protests will 
be considered by the Commission to determine the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection. This filing may also be viewed on 
the Internet at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-
2222 for assistance). Comments and protests may be filed electronically 
via the internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and 
the instructions

[[Page 69759]]

on the Commission's web site at http://www.ferc.fed.us/efi/doorbell.htm.

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-29591 Filed 11-17-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 14

- 00244

- CR

Andrew Adrian Lee Graham

v.

The State of Texas §

§

§

§

§ From the 43rd District Court

o f Parker County (CR13

- 0433 )

August 25, 2014

P er C uriam

(nfp)



### JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that

the appeal should be dism issed. It is order ed that the appeal is dismissed

.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

PER CURIAM
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

JAKE TAYLER JACOBS, §

 Plaintiff, §

§

v. § No. 3:22-cv-00313-K (BT) 

§

TRANSUNION LLC,

 Defendant.

§

§

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

After making an independent review of the pleadings, files and records in this 

case, and the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States 

Magistrate Judge dated February 16, 2023, the Court finds that the Findings and 

Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge are correct, and they are accepted as the 

Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the Court. IT IS, THEREFORE, 

ORDERED that the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States 

Magistrate Judge are accepted. The Court DENIES Jacobs’s Rule 60(b) motion (ECF 

No. 8).

The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 

SO ORDERED.

Signed March 15th, 2023.

 _____________________________________ 

ED KINKEADE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:22-cv-00313-K-BT Document 10 Filed 03/15/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 44
5S:]^oi;i!{j083®Oiia^ 

/ 2023663675 Uno OSIWaS 310 OR 56 If) a m un^r,..^.^ofc:gaaix.^^p<>juapa 

/ 

^ JIM MATH£50N ENEROV AND COMMERCe 

ZxoOanacT.UtM COMMITTEE 

fUSCDUUlTTCO: 

hnQ:tfm«ho«OB.hQUW.gov _ _ ^^^ ^ 

Consres(s( of %t tlBniteb S>tate]B( EMMW MIB A M auuiTV 

?afltffi(nBton.3BC 20513-4402 '*"'""C5!SL1^E'"'*^'' 

August 27,2010 

TTie Honorable Ray LeHood ^ ' ' < 

Secretary ^_^ i.i'--i^'f^ , 

U.S. Department of TiansportatioD iV^ nn:^^^' 

1200 New Jersey Ave., SB ~- o^ ^ 

Waflhington^D.C. 20590 f^ ^S ^ 

-.^ .•bo^:^ : • 

>* ^^— I 

Dear Secretary LaHood, ^IJ^ -D Ol ^ Q 

I am writing in support of the grant application filed by Pcovo City for the Sm^ 

Conuuunity Air Service Development (SCASD) grant program. -^' 

GO 

Prove City, in concert with local business and other economic development groups in 

Utah County, supports the location of business enterprises near or on the grounds of the 

Prove Municipal Airport proper. Piovo City, other government entities, and major local 

busmesses are working to improve economic conditions and business opportunities in 

Utah County, and participation in the air service development program would jEurtfaer that 

goal. 

To assist with this development, Provo City is seeking $800,000 under the SCASD grant 

program. It is my understanding that this funding, if successful, will help bring regularly 

schedided commercial passenger aur service to Provo Municipal Airport Provo City has 

indicated that a local match will be provided for this giant 

As you review the applications for SCASD funding, I hope you will give Provo City's 

application every appropriate consideration. 

Thank you for your consideration of this request Please do not hesitate to contact 

Kristen Lin^ey of my staff at 202-225-3011 with any questions you have regarding this 

matter. 

Smoerety, 

9VM«*N^ 

JIMMATHESON 

Member of Congress 

2494 lUTtUM Horn OmattniMS 240 GAIT MnmAviiMlM9DGaim4«23B 92llMsm MWLISCVC f E101B 

• WwGnnKOC2091M402 6outNSu.TUa,UTB41lS QMirCigMt.ur 04700 

Aocdoaaauoii ivtM:(aoi)4es-iaa6 noc (438)627-0880 

F«:C2aa)228483S F«c(B01)4a8.1417 fV«t436I627.1473 

Maffis ox atcrcua rtmrt
Case 6:22-cr-00021-H-BU Document 31 Filed 11/14/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 51
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary information extracted from the Form 10-Q and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000941547
<NAME> HF BANCORP, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-30-1997
<CASH>                                          16,733
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                             187
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                15,230
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    249,588
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         184,240
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           179,496
<LOANS>                                        468,237
<ALLOWANCE>                                      6,003
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 984,455
<DEPOSITS>                                     840,477
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             13,141
<LONG-TERM>                                     50,000
<COMMON>                                            66
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                      80,771
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 984,455
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 23,104
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               26,273
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                49,377
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              28,021
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              32,849
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           16,528
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      309
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                               1,030
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 19,157
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (2,068)
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      (1,280)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (1,280)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.22)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.22)
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    2.45
<LOANS-NON>                                      6,860
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                 5,524
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  9,846
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 3,068
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    1,155
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                5,185
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             5,185
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          3,552
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 264 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 264

   Designating the month of March 1994 as ``Chronic Fatigue Syndrome 
                           Awareness Month''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 22, 1993

   Mr. Ackerman introduced the following joint resolution; which was 
       referred to the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
   Designating the month of March 1994 as ``Chronic Fatigue Syndrome 
                           Awareness Month''.

Whereas Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) causes debilitating fatigue for between 
        2,000,000 and 5,000,000 Americans;
Whereas Chronic Fatigue Syndrome often follows an illness such as the flu, 
        bronchitis, hepatitis, gastrointestinal illness or mononucleosis, and 
        sometimes develops gradually with no apparent cause;
Whereas Chronic Fatigue Syndrome often seems to begin during a time when the 
        individual is experiencing severe stress;
Whereas Chronic Fatigue Syndrome combines symptoms of depression such as 
        fatigue, malaise, sleep disorders, low-grade fever and memory and 
        concentration problems with other symptoms such as persistent sore 
        throat and lymph glands, muscle and joint aches;
Whereas Chronic Fatigue Syndrome is not caused by any single agent and 
        immunological findings in people with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome are 
        inconsistent and not highly reproducible;
Whereas Chronic Fatigue Syndrome remains an enigma to the international medical 
        community and no proven effective treatment exists;
Whereas Chronic Fatigue Syndrome does not go away with a few good nights sleep 
        but slyly steals a person's vigor over months and years; and
Whereas Chronic Fatigue Syndrome appears in people of all ages, races, and 
        socioeconomic classes: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That the month of March 1994 
is designated as ``Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Awareness Month''. The 
President is authorized and requested to issue a proclamation calling 
upon the people of the United States to observe such a month with 
appropriate programs, ceremonies, and activities.

                                 <all>
```