alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

MARQUEE MUNERLYN,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 14-10270

D.C. No. 2:13-cr-00328-HDM

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Nevada

Howard D. McKibben, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted August 25, 2015** 

Before: McKEOWN, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges. 

Marquee Munerlyn appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges the 240-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction

for bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a). We dismiss. 

Munerlyn contends that the district court erred by denying an adjustment for

FILED

SEP 02 2015

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
acceptance of responsibility under U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1. The government argues that

this appeal should be dismissed based on an appeal waiver contained in the plea

agreement. Munerlyn responds that the appeal waiver cannot be enforced because

the government breached the plea agreement by refusing to recommend an

adjustment for acceptance of responsibility. We review de novo whether to

enforce an appeal waiver. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 981 (9th Cir.

2009). The plea agreement obligated the government to recommend an adjustment

for acceptance of responsibility only if Munerlyn refrained from making false

statements concerning conduct relevant to the offense. Because Munerlyn made

false statements concerning the relevant conduct of his coschemers, the

government did not breach the plea agreement. See United States v. Rutledge, 28

F.3d 998, 1002 (9th Cir. 1994) (denial of adjustment for acceptance of

responsibility is appropriate if defendant falsely denies relevant conduct); see

also U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3(a)(1)(B) & cmt. n.2 (relevant conduct includes reasonably

foreseeable acts of coschemers). Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal in light of

the valid appeal waiver. See Watson, 582 F.3d at 988. 

DISMISSED.

2 14-10270
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-08-00146-CR

Carla Deann Rolla, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF HAYS COUNTY, 22ND JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. CR-02-052, HONORABLE GARY L. STEEL, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Carla Deann Rolla appeals an order revoking community supervision. The record

does not contain the trial court’s certification of the right of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2).

The district clerk has notified this Court that the trial court refuses to prepare a certification because

“the certification is not required in [revocation] cases.”

Rule 25.2(a)(2) states: “The trial court shall enter a certification of the defendant’s

right of appeal each time it enters a judgment of guilt or other appealable order.” (Emphasis added.)

An order revoking community supervision is an appealable order.

The appeal is abated. The trial court is ordered to prepare and file the certification

of Rolla’s right of appeal as required by rule 25.2(a)(2). A supplemental clerk’s record containing

the court’s certification shall be tendered for filing no later than fifteen days from the date of this

opinion. See Tex. R. App. P. 34.5(c)(2), 37.1.
2

__________________________________________

Jan P. Patterson, Justice

Before Justices Patterson, Puryear and Henson

 Concurring and Dissenting Opinion by Justice Puryear;

 Concurring Opinion by Justice Henson;

 Supplemental Opinion by Justice Patterson

Abated

Filed: July 15, 2008

Do Not Publish
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Contractors

# Review Guidelines on Software Languages for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Safety Systems – Final Report (NUREG/CR-6463)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-6463 (PDF - 7.38 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:**June 1996**Date Published:**June 1996

**Prepared by:** H. Hecht, M. Hecht, S. Graff, W. Green, D. Lin, S. Koch, A. 'Thi, D. Wendelboe

SoHar Incorporated 8421 Wilshire Boulevard Beverly Hills, CA 90211

R. Brill, NRC Project Manager

**Prepared for:** Division of Systems Technology Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 NRC Job Code W6208

Availability Notice

## Abstract

Guidelines for the programming and auditing of software written in high level languages for safety systems are presented. The guidelines are derived from a framework of issues significant to software safety which was gathered from relevant standards and research literature. Language-specific adaptations of these guidelines are provided for the following high level languages: Ada, C/C++, Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) Ladder Logic, International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) Standard 1131-3 Sequential Function Charts, Pascal, and PL/M. Appendices to the report include a tabular summary of the guidelines and additional information on selected languages.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
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 on Form 10-K of UnitedGlobalCom, Inc. (the "Company") for the year ended December 31, 2004,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael T. Fries, Chief Executive 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 to the best of my knowledge:



|Date: March 14, 2005 |  | /s/MICHAEL T. FRIESMichael T. Fries
Chief Executive Officer
|-------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------

---



QuickLinks
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Wayland WHITE, Jr., Appellant.

No. 9698.

United States Court of Appeals Fourth Circuit.

Argued March 1, 1965.

Decided April 5, 1965.

Gerald F. White, Elizabeth City, N. C. (Russell E. Twiford and Aydlett & White, Elizabeth City, N. C., on the brief) for appellant.

William H. Murdock, U. S. Atty. (H. Marshall Simpson, Asst. U. S. Atty., on the brief) for appellee.

Before SOBELOFF and BOREMAN, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, District Judge.

*93PER CURIAM:

Wayland White, Jr. was convicted of conspiracy to violate Internal Revenue laws pertaining to distilled spirits. He was first tried in April 1961. The trial court set aside the judgment and ordered a new trial. White was again tried and convicted in September 1961. The judgment was affirmed. United States v. White, 304 F.2d 158 (4th Cir. 1962). The sentence imposed was vacated upon a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. This appeal is from White’s third trial.

We find no merit in White’s assertion that the trial court failed to comply with 18 U.S.C. § 3500 (Jencks act) The Government produced for inspection the statement made by its witness. No other notes or memorandum made by the witness were available to the United States Attorney. Inquiry made by him to the witness’ supervisors at the direction of the District Court proved fruitless.

The record of the September 1961 trial showed that the notes used by the witness in preparing his statement were delivered to White’s attorney who used them for cross-examination. White was furnished the transcript of the previous trial in which his attorney used the notes. No intention to suppress evidence was shown. Under these circumstances the Court was not required to strike the witness’ testimony or grant a mistrial. Cf. Killian v. United States, 368 U.S. 231, 82 S.Ct. 302, *7*L.Ed.2d 256 (1961); United States v. Greco, 298 F.2d 247 (2nd Cir. 1962); cert. denied 369 U.S. 820, 82 S.Ct. 831, 7 L.Ed.2d 785 (1962).

At the Court’s direction the Government furnished White the address of a paid informer. We find no error in the Court’s refusal to require the Government to produce and offer the informer as a witness. The evidence does not disclose that the defendant was entrapped or that the informer participated in any undertaking to entrap the defendant. The basis is lacking for the application of the principles expressed in United States V. Ramsey, 220 F.Supp. 86 (E.D.Tenn. 1963), upon which the defendant relies.

White sought the appointment of counsel to represent him. The District Judge after hearing testimony found that White had adequate resources to provide his own counsel. White then sought leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal to this Court from the refusal of the District Judge to appoint counsel for him. Upon consideration of his petition and the Memorandum Opinion of the District Judge, this Court concluded that White has not shown himself to be a pauper or in need of the assistance of appointed counsel. White has shown no additional facts warranting a change in the conclusion previously reached by the District Court and by this Court.

The judgment is

Affirmed.
Exhibit 32.2




MUNICIPAL MORTGAGE & EQUITY, LLC


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 Municipal Mortgage & Equity, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the “Company”), on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, David Kay, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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; 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: May 13, 2011




/s/ David KayDavid KayChief Financial Officer




A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Municipal Mortgage & Equity, LLC and will be retained by Municipal Mortgage & Equity, LLC and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


E-5
Exhibit 13.2

Certification by the Acting Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 20-F of Chunghwa Telecom Co., Ltd. (the Company) for the year ended December 31,
2013 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Mu-Piao Shih, Acting 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 to my 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 results of operations of the Company.

Date: April 28, 2014



By:

/s/ MU-PIAO SHIH


Name:

Mu-Piao ShihTitle:

President and Acting Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32.2
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                                 18 U.S.C. 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection  with the annual Report of CABLE NET, INC. (the "Company") on Form
10-KSB for the period ended  December 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, Kevin  Ericksteen,
Chief Financail Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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


                                                   /s/ Kevin Ericksteen
                                                   --------------------------
Date: March 15, 2004                                   Kevin Ericksteen
                                                       Chief Financail Officer
exv10w1







Exhibit 10.1




AMENDMENT TO THE NOBLE ENERGY, INC.


CHANGE OF CONTROL SEVERANCE PLAN FOR EXECUTIVES




     Pursuant to the provisions of Section 4.5(a) thereof, the Noble Energy, Inc. Change of Control
Severance Plan for Executives (the “Plan”) is hereby amended in the following respect only:



     Section 2.4 of the Plan is hereby amended by restatement in its entirety to read as follows:




     2.4 Parachute Payment Limitation. Any provision of the Plan to the contrary
notwithstanding, if a Covered Employee is a “disqualified individual” (as defined in Section 280G
of the Code), and the severance benefits provided in Section 2.1, together with any other
payments which the Covered Employee has the right to receive, would constitute a “parachute
payment” (as defined in Section 280G of the Code), the severance benefits provided hereunder that
constitute a parachute payment and are exempt from the requirements of Section 409A of the Code
shall be either (a) reduced (but not below zero) so that the aggregate present value of such
payments received by the Covered Employee from the Employer will be one dollar ($1.00) less than
three times the Covered Employee’s “base amount” (as defined in Section 280G of the Code) and so
that no portion of such payments received by the Covered Employee shall be subject to the excise
tax imposed by Section 4999 of the Code, or (b) paid in full, whichever produces the better net
after-tax result for the Covered Employee (taking into account any applicable excise tax under
Section 4999 of the Code and any applicable income tax). The determinations as to the benefit to
be reduced and the amount of reduction shall be made by the Employer in good faith, and such
determinations shall be conclusive and binding on the Covered Employee. If a reduced payment is
made and through error or otherwise that payment, when aggregated with other payments from the
Employer (or its affiliates) used in determining if a “parachute payment” exists, exceeds one
dollar ($1.00) less than three (3) times the Covered Employee’s base amount, the Covered Employee
shall immediately repay such excess to the Employer upon notification that an overpayment has
been made.



     Subject to the provisions of Section 4.5(a)(1) of the Plan, this Amendment shall be effective
as of February 1, 2011, for each Employer participating in the Plan.



     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment has been executed on this _____ day of January, 2011.



	 	 	 	 	 
	 	NOBLE ENERGY, INC.

 	 
	 	By:  	/s/ Charles D. Davidson
 	 
	 	 	Charles D. Davidson 	 
	 	 	Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Staff

# Office of Investigations Annual Report (NUREG-1830)

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Friday, February 23, 2024
---

|M E D I C U R E   I N T E R N A T I O N A
      L   I N C .
|-----------------------------------------------------------

July 4, 2006

MEDICURE INTERNATIONAL INC., a corporation
incorporated under the laws of Barbados, (hereinafter referred to as
"Medicure"),

- and -

Clinical Development Research Institute Inc.a
corporation incorporated under the laws of Canada, (hereinafter referred to
as "Development Co").

Re: Amendment to the Development Agreement (the
Agreement)

This letter, once executed, will constitute an amendment to the
Agreement dated July 5, 2004. The wording of Section 3.1 (b) of the Agreement,
dated July 5, 2004 is hereby replaced with the following:

The aggregate of all Expenditure Limits under all Research
Schedules entered into pursuant to this Agreement shall not exceed thirty
million dollars ($30,000,000) (the Aggregate Expenditures).

In addition the Expenditure Limit as defined in Schedule B of
the Agreement is increased to $30,000,000.

All other terms, covenants and conditions remain in force in
accordance with the original agreement as dated July 5, 2004.

Upon execution of the agreement, please return one original to
our office and retain the other for your files.

MEDICURE INTERNATIONAL INC.
      
      CDRI INC.Per:
      /s/ Trevor Hassell
      
      Per:
      /s/ Jim CharltonName: Trevor Hassell
      
      
      Name: Jim CharltonPosition: Director
      
      
      Position: PresidentMEDICURE INTERNATIONAL INC.Per:
      /s/ Kirk CyrusName: Kirk CyrusPosition: Treasurer


---
1

Sutton, Lisa

From: Maietta, Anthony

Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 4:33 PM

To: Brachtl, Megan; Sutton, Lisa

Cc: Portanova, Mary; Blakley, Pamela

Subject: FW: Michigan: Final SIP Call: Startup, Shutdown, Malfunction 

Attachments: McCabe letter to air directors final SSM SIP call 05-22-15.pdf

Anthony Maietta

EPA Region 5

maietta.anthony@epa.gov

(312) 353‐8777

From: Czerniak, George  

Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 3:31 PM

To: Portanova, Mary; Maietta, Anthony

Subject: FW: Michigan: Final SIP Call: Startup, Shutdown, Malfunction  

From: Czerniak, George  

Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 1:22 PM

To: 'Fiedler, Lynn (DEQ)'

Subject: Michigan: Final SIP Call: Startup, Shutdown, Malfunction  

Lynn:

This message is a follow‐up to my recent phone call notifying you about the final action the EPA Administrator signed

today to ensure States have in place air pollution rules that apply to sources at all times, including when the source is

operating during periods of startup, shutdown, or malfunction (SSM).  

This action responds to a Petition for Rulemaking filed by the Sierra Club and WildEarth Guardians concerning the

treatment of excess emissions at industrial facilities during SSM operations, specifically how those emissions are

treated in State Implementation Plan (SIP) provisions that the EPA previously approved. Also, as part of this action,

EPA has revised and clarified its policy concerning SSM provisions consistent with the Clean Air Act.

The EPA is calling for 36 States, including Michigan, to make changes to their SIPs, to protect public health and ensure

consistency with the Clean Air Act and the EPA’s current SSM Policy.  You will have 18 months to submit revisions of

your State plan to EPA. Your revised SIP is due to EPA by November 22, 2016.  

As part of our notification to your State about this final SIP call, I have attached to this email a letter from the EPA’s

Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, Janet McCabe. To inform you of the details on the final action,

including the specific SIP provisions your State needs to address, we have posted a pre‐publication version of the

action on our website at:  http://www.epa.gov/airquality/urbanair/sipstatus/emissions.html.  

The EPA will continue to work closely with you to ensure the SIP revision process is as efficient as possible.  If you or

your staff have questions, please contact Mary Portanova, portanova.mary@epa.gov, (312) 353‐5954.
2

George  

Attachment
EX - 10.22


July 9, 1998



Tony Lima
1281 Oak Knoll Drive
San Jose, California  95129

Dear Tony:

To confirm  our  conversation,  I am pleased to offer you the  position  of Vice
President  Worldwide Sales and Service for Molecular  Devices.  In this position
you will report directly to me.

Your  base  salary  will be  $14,585  per month  ($175,000  per  annum)  payable
semi-monthly on the 15th and last day of each month. In addition, as a member of
the  management  staff,  you will be  eligible  to  participate  in the 1998 MDC
Executive  Bonus Plan (bonus at Plan 40%  prorated  for time in  position).  The
Company will  guarantee  you a minimum  bonus of $30,000  under the plan for the
1998 plan year,  which will be paid in the first quarter of 1999.  You will also
receive all the employment  benefits available to regular full-time employees of
Molecular Devices.

You will be eligible to receive 50,000  Incentive  Stock Options  subject to the
approval of the Board of Directors.  These options will vest in accordance  with
the Company's  vesting schedule over a period of 5 years, and will be subject to
the provisions of the Company's 1995 Stock Option Plan as amended.

Upon your start date, as a condition of employment, you will be required to sign
an  Employee   Confidentiality  and  Inventions  Agreement  (copy  of  agreement
attached).  Please review this  agreement  carefully;  if you have any questions
regarding this agreement, please feel free to call me.

This  offer  is  made   contingent   upon  your  ability  to  provide  proof  of
identification  and authorization to work in the United States.  Upon employment
at  Molecular  Devices,  you will be required to furnish such  documentation  as
described in the enclosed materials.
<PAGE>

July 9, 1998
Page two


Additionally,  this written offer  constitutes  all conditions and agreements of
Molecular Devices Corporation. Upon acceptance of this offer, please sign, date,
indicate your start date, and return this letter and the Application Form to the
Human  Resources  Department.  However,  if you have not responded to this offer
within five (5) days of receipt the offer will be withdrawn.

Tony,  Molecular  Devices  Corporation is facing many exciting  challenges as we
grow.  Your experience and talents will be strong  additions to our company.  We
are looking forward to having you join our team.

         Sincerely,

         MOLECULAR DEVICES CORPORATION

         Joseph D. Keegan//


         Joseph D. Keegan
         President and Chief Executive Officer

Attachments
Accepted:           Tony Lima//            
          ------------------------------
Date:               July 9, 1998           
     -----------------------------------
Start Date:                                
           -----------------------------
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Staff

# Resolution of Generic Safety Issue 29: Bolting Degradation or Failure in Nuclear Power Plants (NUREG-1339)

On this page:
        - Publication Information 
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG-1339 (PDF - 1.62 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:**March 1990**Date Published:**June 1990

Richard E. Johnson

Division of Safety Issues ResolutionOffice of Nuclear Regulatory ResearchU.S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionWashington, DC 20555

Availability Notice

## Abstract

This report describes the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC's) Generic Safety Issue 29, "Bolting Degradation or Failure in Nuclear Power Plants," including the bases for establishing the issue and its historical highlights. The report also desribes the activities of the Atomic Industrial Forum (AlF) relevant to this issue, including its cooperation with the Materials Properties Council (MPC) to organize a task group to help resolve the issue. The Electric Power Research Institute, supported by the AIF/MPC task group, prepared and issued a two-volume document that provides, in part, the technical basis for resolving Generic Safety Issue 29. This report presents the NRC's review and evaluation of the two-volume document and NRC's conclusion that this document, in conjunction with other information from both industry and NRC, provides the bases for resolving this issue.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Thursday, August 31, 2023