alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion *

should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited

circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-11055

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

EMILIO ARNOLDO ORTIZ-COCA,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:07-CR-385-ALL

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Emilio Arnoldo Ortiz-Coca

presents arguments that he concedes are foreclosed by United States v. Brown,

920 F.2d 1212, 1216-17 (5th Cir. 1991), abrogated on other grounds by United

States v. Candia, 454 F.3d 468, 472-73 (5th Cir. 2006), which held that a district

court may order a term of imprisonment to run consecutively with an unimposed

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

August 18, 2009

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 08-11055

2

state sentence. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is

GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
I, Richard Hiron, the President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Bow Valley Ventures,  Inc. (the Registrant), certify that; (1)I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Registrant;(2)Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;(3)Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;(4)I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) for the Registrant and have:a)Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under my supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the Registrant is made known to me by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;b)Evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report my conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; andc)Disclosed in this report any change in the Registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the Registrant's most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and(5)I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of the internal control over financial reporting, to the Registrants auditors and the audit committee of Registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):a)All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the Registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; andb)Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the Registrants internal control over financial reporting.  April 20, 2009/s/Richard HironBy:Richard HironPresident, Chief Executive Officerand Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT
31.1





CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


PURSUANT
TO SECTION 302 OF


THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




I, Ira P.
Kerker, certify that:




1. I have
reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Vitacost.com, Inc.;




2. Based
on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material
fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading
with respect to the period covered by this report;




3. Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and
for, the periods presented in this report;




4. The
registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing
and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:




a)
Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its condensed
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;




b)
Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and




c)
Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal
quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report)
that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and




5. The
registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):




a) All
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; and




b) Any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial
reporting.




/s/ Ira P. KerkerIra
      P. KerkerChief
      Executive OfficerDate:
      August 16, 2010
#### COLE v. STATE.

No. 18005.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 12, 1936.

J. E. Edmondson, of Bellville, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

LATTIMORE, Judge.

Conviction for assault to murder; punishment, two years in the penitentiary.

The record is here without any statement of facts or bills of exception. All matters of procedure appear regular.

The judgment will be affirmed.
II

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2893

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at

757 Warren Road in Ithaca, New York, as the ‘‘Matthew F. McHugh

Post Office’’.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 19, 2000

Mr. SCHUMER (for himself and Mr. MOYNIHAN) introduced the following bill;

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs

A BILL

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service

located at 757 Warren Road in Ithaca, New York, as

the ‘‘Matthew F. McHugh Post Office’’.

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF MATTHEW F. MCHUGH POST

4 OFFICE.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—The facility of the United States

6 Postal Service located at 757 Warren Road in Ithaca, New

7 York, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Matthew F.

8 McHugh Post Office’’.
2

•S 2893 IS

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg2 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United

3 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall

4 be deemed to be a reference to the Matthew F. McHugh

5 Post Office.

Æ
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ACCOMPANYING PERIODIC REPORT
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350)


I, Patricia Costante, the Chief Executive Officer of The MIIX Group,
Incorporated, hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that the Annual Form 10-K of The MIIX Group, Incorporated for the year
ended December 31, 2002 (the "MIIX Group Annual Form 10-K"), which this
certification accompanies, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and
information contained in the MIIX Group Annual Form 10-K fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of The MIIX
Group, Incorporated.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to The MIIX Group, Incorporated and will be retained by The MIIX Group,
Incorporated and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.



                                                      /s/ Patricia A. Costante
                                                      ------------------------
                                                      Patricia A. Costante
                                                      Chief Executive Officer


Dated:   April 25, 2003








                                       11
# C_2012308EN.01000501.xml

| 12.10.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 308/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.10.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 308/5

---

COUNCIL DECISION

of 24 September 2012

renewing the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training

2012/C 308/04

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 337/75 of 10 February 1975 establishing the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training, and in particular Article 4 thereof (1),

1

Having regard to the nomination submitted by the Greek Government,

Whereas:

| (1) | By its Decision of 16 July 2012 (2), the Council appointed the members of the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training for the period from 18 September 2012 to 17 September 2015. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

By its Decision of 16 July 2012 (2), the Council appointed the members of the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training for the period from 18 September 2012 to 17 September 2015.

2

| (2) | The members of the Governing Board of that Centre should be appointed for a period of three years, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The members of the Governing Board of that Centre should be appointed for a period of three years,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Sole Article

The following person is hereby appointed member of the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training for the remainder of its term of office, which runs until 17 September 2015:

GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVE:

GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVE

| Greece | Mr Dimitrios V. SKIADAS |
| --- | --- |

Greece

Mr Dimitrios V. SKIADAS

Done at Brussels, 24 September 2012.

For the Council

The President

S. ALETRARIS

---

(1)  OJ L 39, 13.2.1975, p. 1.

1

(2)  OJ C 228, 31.7.2012, p. 3.

2

---
<PAGE>

Board of Managers and Members
Alliance Laundry Holdings LLC


We are providing this letter to you for inclusion as an exhibit to your Form 10-
K filing pursuant to Item 601 of Regulation S-K.

We have audited the consolidated financial statements included in the Company's
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1999 and issued our
report thereon dated February 25, 2000, except as to Note 19 which is as of
March 6, 2000.  Note 2 to the financial statements describes a change in
accounting principle from a combination of accelerated and straight-line
depreciation methods to the straight-line depreciation method.  It should be
understood that the preferability of one acceptable method of accounting over
another for depreciation has not been addressed in any authoritative accounting
literature, and in expressing our concurrence below we have relied on
management's determination that this change in accounting principle is
preferable.  Based on our reading of management's stated reasons and
justification for this change in accounting principle in the Form 10-K, and our
discussions with management as to their judgement about the relevant business
planning factors relating to the change, we concur with management that such
change represents, in the Company's circumstances, the adoption of a preferable
accounting principle in conformity with Accounting Principles Board Opinion No.
20.


Very truly yours,



PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
February 25, 2000

                                      80
**Exhibit
      32.2**




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 Power3 Medical Products, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the year ending December 31, 2006 as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
      John P. Burton, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, 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 results of operations of the Company.




Date:July
                18, 2007
            By:/s/
                John P. Burton
              Name:John
                P. Burton Chief Financial Officer
              (Principal
                Financial and Accounting Officer)
#### Will of Kramer: Budge, Appellant, vs. Hawley and others, Respondents.

*January 17*

February *15, 1949.*

*205For the appellant there was a brief by *Ronald F. North*of Chippewa Falls, attorney, and *Ramsdell & King*of Eau Claire of counsel, and oral argument by *Mr. George Y. King*and *Mr. North.*

For the respondents there was a brief by *Stafford & Staf*ford, attorneys, and *I. E.*Rasmus, guardian *ad*litem, and oral argument by *Mr. Harold E. Stafford*and *Mr. Henry Christ-off er sen,*all of Chippewa Falls.

Broadfoot, J.

After the hearing in this matter the court made the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:

> “Findings of Fact.

> “1. That said instrument was duly executed by the said Henry F. Kramer, deceased as his last will and testament in the manner provided by law.

> “2. That at the time of the execution of said instrument, the said Henry F. Kramer was of sound mind and had sufficient mental capacity to make a will.

> “3. That the instrument here propounded as the last will and testament of Henry F. Kramer was executed by him while he was subject to, and as the result of, undue influence exercised upon the said Henry F. Kramer by Elizabeth Budge.

> “4. That said instrument does not express the desires of Henry F. Kramer as to the disposition of his property.

> “And I find as

> “Conclusions of Law.

> “1. That Elizabeth Budge, the proponent of said will is entitled to judgment dismissing objections Nos. 1 and 2 pursuant to the foregoing findings of fact; and

> *206“2. That Esther Hawley, the contestant herein, is entitled to judgment sustaining her objection No. 3 pursuant to the foregoing findings of fact.”

The law relating to undue influence in will cases is well settled in Wisconsin, both as to the elements necessary to establish it and as to the burden of proof. *Will of Faulks*(1945), 246 Wis. 319, 17 N. W. (2d) 423; *Will of Sowka*(1945), 247 Wis. 498, 19 N. W. (2d) 898; *Will of Lee*(1946), 249 Wis. 59, 23 N. W. (2d) 405; *Will of Hickey*(1948), 252 Wis. 542, 32 N. W. (2d) 232.

The findings of the trial court as to the existence of the elements necessary to establish undue influence in procuring a will are not ordinarily disturbed upon appeal unless against the great weight and clear preponderance of the evidence. *Will of Sowka, supra; Will of Lee, supra.*

The decision of the case therefore involves only questions of fact. Many of the details are not given in the statement of facts herein. We feel no useful purpose would be served by further detail. However, we have carefully examined the record and the briefs, and listened to the arguments of counsel, and it is our conclusion that the findings of the trial court are amply sustained.

*Ry the Court.*— Judgment affirmed.
# RE: INGAA Comments to EPA Methane White Papers - Rev ision

Please replace the previous version that retained t he Draft Watermark with these final copies (same ex act document without a watermark). Lisa S. Beal INGAA (O) 202­216­5935 (M) 202­256­9134 From: Lisa Beal Sent: Monday, June 16, 2014 6:43 PM To: oilandgas.whitepapers@epa.gov Cc: Bruce Moore (moore.bruce@epa.gov); James M. McCarth y; Tom Bach Subject: INGAA Comments to EPA Methane White Papers 

### Attached, please find INGAA’s comments on the follo wing methane white papers: 1. Oil and Natural Gas Sector Compressors 2. Oil and Natural Gas Sector Leaks 3. Oil and Natural Gas Sector Pneumatic Devices INGAA is submitting separate comments on the three papers (Compressors, Leaks and Pneumatics) that address sources applicable to the interstate n atural gas transmission and storage (T&S) sector. If you have any comments or concerns, please contac t me. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Lisa S. Beal VP, Environment & Construction Policy INGAA 20 F Street NW Suite 450 Washington, DC 20001 (O) 202­216­5935 

### Beal <lbeal@ingaa.org> Lisa Mon 6/16/2014 6:53 PM To: OilandGas.Whitepapers <OilandGas.Whitepapers@epa.go v>; Cc: Moore, Bruce <Moore.Bruce@epa.gov>; James M. McCart hy <jamesmccarthy@comcast.net>; Tom Bach <Thomas_Bach@kindermorgan.com>; 

###  4 attachments removed.txt; INGAA Comments EPA Pneumatics White Pa per_Final 061614.pdf; INGAA Comments_EPA CompressorWhite Paper_Final 061514.pdf; INGAA Comments_EPA Leaks Wh ite Paper_Final 061514.pdf; 

### Page **1 of**  **2 RE: INGAA Comments to EPA Methane White Papers**  **- Re...**  **- OilandGas.Whitepapers** 

**8/ 26/** **2014 https://pod51045.outlook.com/owa/OilandGas.Whitepapers@epa.gov/** (M) 202 ­ 256 ­ 9134 

### Page **2 of**  **2**

**RE: INGAA Comments to EPA Methane White Papers -**  **Re... -**  **OilandGas.Whitepapers**

**8/ 26/** **2014 https://pod51045.outlook.com/owa/OilandGas.Whitepapers@epa.gov/**
NO. 07-07-0266-CR

	IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

	FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	AT AMARILLO

	PANEL D

	DECEMBER 21, 2009

	______________________________

	JAIME TREVINO, JR., APPELLANT

	V.

	THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

	_________________________________

	FROM THE 379TH DISTRICT COURT OF BEXAR COUNTY;

	NO. 2004CR6365; HONORABLE BERT RICHARDSON, JUDGE

	_______________________________

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

	CONCURRING AND DISSENTING OPINION

	I agree with the majority’s disposition of Appellant’s points of error three through six; however, I write separately to express my opinion that the trial court erred by failing to permit Appellant to withdraw his plea of guilty.  See art. 26.13(2), Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. (Vernon Supp. 2009).  As stated in the majority opinion, the trial court implicitly found that it had “accepted” the plea agreement, making it a binding agreement between the State and Appellant.  State v. Moore, 240 S.W.3d 248 (Tex.Crim.App. 2007).  However, rather than follow that agreement as to punishment, the trial court found Appellant violated a non-existent condition that he be a “viable” witness.  In doing so, the trial court implicitly rejected the negotiated plea bargain agreement and was, therefore, statutorily obligated to permit Appellant to withdraw his plea of guilty.  Having failed to do so, the trial court erred.  I would sustain Appellant’s second issue and reverse and remand.

							Patrick A. Pirtle

							      Justice
# L_2011313DE.01004801.xml

| 26.11.2011 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 313/48 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.11.2011

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 313/48

---

Berichtigung der Durchführungsverordnung (EU) Nr. 961/2011 der Kommission vom 27. September 2011 zum Erlass von Sondervorschriften für die Einfuhr von Lebens- und Futtermitteln, deren Ursprung oder Herkunft Japan ist, nach dem Unfall im Kernkraftwerk Fukushima und zur Aufhebung der Verordnung (EU) Nr. 297/2011

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 252 vom 28. September 2011
  )

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 252 vom 28. September 2011

Seite 12, Artikel 10 Absatz 1:

anstatt:

„Diese Verordnung tritt am Tag nach ihrer Veröffentlichung im Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union in Kraft.“

muss es heißen:

„Diese Verordnung tritt am dritten Tag nach ihrer Veröffentlichung im Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union in Kraft.“.

Seite 14, Anhang I:

anstatt:

„Die Sendung wurde zur Überführung in den zollrechtlich freien Verkehr in der Europäischen Union durch die Zollbehörden angenommen.“

muss es heißen:

„Die Sendung ist zulässig zur Anmeldung bei den Zollbehörden in der Europäischen Union zur Überführung in den zollrechtlich freien Verkehr.“.

Seite 14, Anhang I:

anstatt:

„Die Sendung wurde NICHT zur Überführung in den zollrechtlich freien Verkehr in der Europäischen Union durch die Zollbehörden angenommen.“

muss es heißen:

„Die Sendung ist NICHT zulässig zur Anmeldung bei den Zollbehörden in der Europäischen Union zur Überführung in den zollrechtlich freien Verkehr.“.

---
J. 

### / H ardesty 

# P
C0.4.0$1 Parraguirre timeframe for the offenses, the district court impermissibly modified the murder charge, and the judgment of conviction did not contain statutory subsections for the offenses. To the extent that appellant claimed that his sentence should be modified, he failed to demonstrate that the district court relied on mistaken assumptions regarding his criminal record that worked to his extreme detriment. 

### See Edwards v. State, 112 Nev. 704, 708, 918 P.2d 321, 324 (1996). Appellant also failed to demonstrate that his sentence was facially illegal or that the district court lacked jurisdiction. 

### See id. Appellant's claims regarding the validity of his judgment of conviction fell outside the narrow scope of claims permissible in a motion to modify or correct a sentence. 

### See id. We therefore conclude that the district court did not err in denying appellant's motions. Accordingly, we

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 2

2 We have reviewed all documents that appellant has submitted in proper person to the clerk of this court in this matter, and we conclude that no relief based upon those submissions is warranted. To the extent that appellant has attempted to present claims or facts in those submissions which were not previously presented in the proceedings below, we have declined to consider them in the first instance.

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(0) 1947A 2

mrf-wir,t 5e,...vA

-

### cc: Hon. Jerome Polaha, District Judge Steven Floyd Voss Attorney General/Carson City Washoe County District Attorney Washoe District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(0) 1947A 

### 3