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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR .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. 97-50528 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ALFONSO SAUCEDO-HERNANDEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. A-97-CR-33-1

- - - - - - - - - - December 10, 1997 Before BARKSDALE, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Alfonso Saucedo-Hernandez appeals from his sentence for illegal reentry into the United States after his deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. His motion for a stay of his appeal pending the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Almendarez-Torres , 113 F.3d 515 (5th Cir. 1996), cert. granted , 117 S. Ct. 1333 (1997), is DENIED. Saucedo-Hernandez argues that because the indictment failed to allege that he had a prior aggravated felony conviction, heNo. 97-50528 -2- could only be sentenced under § 1326(a). However, due to his prior aggravated felony conviction, Saucedo-Hernandez was sentenced under § 1326(b)(2). His argument is foreclosed by this court’s opinion in United States v. Vasquez-Olvera , 999 F.2d 943, 946-47 (5th Cir. 1993).
AFFIRMED.
p.1 

OAR Box 1796 

Prepped by Keeia Richards 

Document Number: 

67) VI-B-18 

Docket Number: 

A-90-37 

Printed 10/31/2008 4:20:38 PM Sheet 67 of 107 
P.2 

A-90-37 

VI-B-18 

This document has been moved to IV-D-332 at the request of the project 

officer. It was incorrectly categorize originally. 

1
**EXHIBIT 31.1**
**OFFICERS’ CERTIFICATIONS**
**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**
     I, Richard S. Ziman, certify that:
 1.  I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Arden Realty, Inc.;  2.  Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;  3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded 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 periodspresented in this report;  4.  The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:
 a)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensurethat material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;  b)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and  c)  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscalquarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report)that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
 5.  The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):
 a)  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likelyto adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and  b)  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.
Date: March 10, 2005                                            /s/ Richard S. Ziman   Richard S. Ziman   Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-50148) pertaining to the Equity Incentive Planof SPEEDCOM Wireless Corporation and in the Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-69564) and related Prospectus of SPEEDCOM Wireless Corporation for the registration of 18,013,762 shares of its common stock, of our report dated February 2, 2004,with respect to the financial statements of SPEEDCOM Wireless Corporation for the year ended December 31, 2003 included in the Annual Report (Form 10-KSB) for the year ended December 31, 2004. 

 

/s/ Aidman, Piser & Company, P.A. 

Tampa, Florida 

April 14, 2005
Exhibit 21.1

                           SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

1.   Capital Factors, Inc. (subsidiary of Capital Factors Holding, Inc.),
     incorporated in the State of Florida, doing business under the name of
     Capital Factors, Inc. (Florida) and CB Factors, Inc. (California), and
     Capital Factors Northeast, Inc. (New York).

2.   CF One, Inc. (subsidiary of Capital Factors Holding, Inc.) incorporated in
     the State of Delaware, doing business under the name of Capital Factors
     One, Inc.

3.   CF Funding Corp. (subsidiary of Capital Factors, Inc.) incorporated in the
     State of Delaware, doing business under the name of Capital Factors Funding
     Corp.

4.   Capital TempFunds, Inc. (subsidiary of Capital Factors, Inc.) incorporated
     in the State of North Carolina, doing business under the name of TempFunds
     America.
August 3, 2015

Mr. Christopher Scott Thedford

129 Cleveland Road

Sweetwater, TN 37874

Dear Mr. Thedford:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from 

§§ 45.23(b), 61.113(a) and (b), 61.133(a), 91.7(a), 91.9(b)(2), 91.103(b), 91.109, 91.119, 

91.121, 91.151(a), 91.203(a) and (b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(2), 91.417(a) and (b), 

and part 21 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we cannot

process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Cannot Process Your Request

We entered your May 25, 2015, exemption request into the public docket 

(No. FAA−2015−2064), but we are unable to process your request any further. The 

information you sent does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For 

us to consider the request any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

For more detailed information relating to submitting petitions for exemption, please visit 

http://aes.faa.gov/petition/index.html. This website helps the petitioner to meet Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA) requirements outlines in § 11.81 and helps answer any 

questions you may have.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must submit the requested information 

within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your petition for exemption 

at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption. 
2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not receive the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further. 

If you have any questions you may call the 333 Information Line (202) 267-2999.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
3
# C_2004314EN.01000802.xml

| 18.12.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 314/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.12.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 314/8

---

Action brought on 22 October 2004 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Kingdom of the Netherlands

(Case C-460/04)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

(2004/C 314/16)

An action against the Kingdom of the Netherlands was brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 22 October 2004 by the Commission of the European Communities, represented by C. O'Reilly and R. Troosters, acting as Agents.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| 1. | Declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 2001/51/EC (1) of 28 June 2001 supplementing the provisions of Article 26 of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement of 14 June 1985, or at least by failing to forward those provisions to the Commission, the Kingdom of the Netherlands has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 2001/51/EC (1) of 28 June 2001 supplementing the provisions of Article 26 of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement of 14 June 1985, or at least by failing to forward those provisions to the Commission, the Kingdom of the Netherlands has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

1

| 2. | order the Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

order the Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

The period within which Directive 2001/51/EC had to be transposed expired on 11 February 2003.

---

(1)  
  OJ L 187 of 10.7.2001, pp. 45-46.

1

---
#### Bassett (Geraldine), by guardian *ad litem,*Respondent, vs. Weikel, Appellant. Bassett (J. V.), Respondent, vs. Weikel, Appellant.

For the appellant: *D. J. Regan*of Milwaukee, attorney, and *Durfee & Breihan*of Antigo of counsel.

For the respondent: *Earl J. Plants*and *George J. Bowler,*both of Antigo.

*By the Court.*

Judgment in each case affirmed.
EXHIBIT 32
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERAND CHIEF FINANCIALOFFICERPURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
In connection with the Report of STARMED GROUP, INC. (the "Company") on Form10-KSB for the for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, HermanRappaport, President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of theCompany, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant tosection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
       (1) The Report fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and
       (2) The information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresult of operations of the Company.
/s/ Herman RappaportHerman RappaportPresident, CEO andCFOJune 24, 2004****
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2117 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2117

To amend the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 to permit 
multiemployer plans in critical status to modify plan rules relating to 
             withdrawal liability, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 25, 2017

 Mr. Sessions (for himself and Mr. Pascrell) introduced the following 
    bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the 
                               Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 to permit 
multiemployer plans in critical status to modify plan rules relating to 
             withdrawal liability, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Multi-Employer Pension Plan 
Partnership Act of 2017''.

SEC. 2. ALTERNATIVE METHOD OF WITHDRAWAL LIABILITY PAYMENTS.

    Section 4224 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (29 
U.S.C. 1404) is amended--
            (1) by striking ``A multiemployer plan'' and inserting 
        ``(a) A multiemployer plan''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:
    ``(b) Notwithstanding any contrary provisions of this part, in the 
case of a multiemployer plan that is in critical status within the 
meaning of subsection (b)(2) of section 305 and whose plan sponsor 
determines pursuant to subsection (e)(3)(A)(ii) of such section that 
the plan cannot be reasonably expected to emerge from critical status 
by the end of the rehabilitation period, such plan may adopt rules for 
the purpose of forestalling or avoiding insolvency that provide for 
other terms and conditions for the computation of the amount of an 
employer's withdrawal liability (not to exceed the amount that would 
otherwise be determined without regard to this subsection). Any such 
rule shall become effective at the end of a 90-day period that begins 
on the date of adoption of the rule unless the corporation disapproves 
the rule before the end of the 90-day period (except that such 90-day 
period shall be tolled during any period in which a request by the 
corporation for additional information is pending). The corporation may 
disapprove a rule under this subsection only if it reasonably 
determines that the rule creates an unreasonable risk of loss to plan 
participants and beneficiaries or to the corporation.''.
                                 <all>
```
# C_2005057EN.01000802.xml

| 5.3.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 57/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.3.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 57/8

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(First Chamber)

of 13 January 2005

in Case C-254/03 P Eduardo Vieira SA v Commission of the European Communities (1)

1

(Appeal - Fisheries - Fisheries agreement with Argentina - Community financial aid - Reduction)

(2005/C 57/15)

Language of the case: Spanish

In Case C-254/03 P: appeal under Article 56 of the Statute of the Court of Justice brought on 13 June 2003 by Eduardo Vieira SA (lawyers: J.-R. García-Gallardo Gil-Fournier and D. Domínguez Pérez), the other party to the proceedings being: Commission of the European Communities (Agents: S. Pardo Quintillán, and J. Rivas-Andres and J. Gutiérrez Gisbert) – the Court (First Chamber), composed of P. Jann, President of the Chamber, N. Colneric (Rapporteur), J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, M. Ilešič and E. Levits, Judges; A. Tizzano, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on 13 January 2005, in which it:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders Eduardo Vieira SA to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Eduardo Vieira SA to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 184, 2.8.2003.

1

---
EXHIBIT 32.b



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 BCTC IV Assignor Corp. (the "registrant") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Marc N. Teal, Principal Financial Officer of the registrant, 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, after due inquiry:



|(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 registrant.



|               |  |                            
|-------------- |  | ---------------------------
|Date:          |  |                            
|March 10, 2005 |  | /s/ Marc N. Teal           
|               |  |                            
|               |  | Marc N. Teal               
|               |  | Principal Financial Officer
|               |  |                            
|               |  |                            
|               |  |                            

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other

document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the registrant and will be retained by the registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Regular Totals (Operators)

Airport = EWR

Operator = 0001(Exclude)

Status Date = 01/01/2009 (Current & Future)

12/21/2010 07:52:46

Query Parameters:
12/21/2010 07:52:46

Carrier

Regular Totals (Operators)

Slots Held less than 5 days are Excluded Excludes FAA Held PF7 Status Date = 01/01/2009 (Current & Future)

EWR

AAL AMERICAN AIRLINES 50 

ABX ABX AIR 2

ACA AIR CANADA 24

AFR AIR FRANCE 2

AIC AIR INDIA 4

ASA ALASKA AIRLINES 4 

AVI L'AVION/OPENSKIES 6

AZA ALITALIA 2

BAW BRITISH AIRWAYS 6

COA CONTINENTAL AIRLINES 882

CSQ CARGOJET 2

DAL DELTA AIR LINES 32 

DLH DEUTSCHE LUFTHANSA 8

EGF AMR EAGLE HOLDING COPR. (FORMERLY 2

ELY EL AL ISRAEL AIRLINES 1

EVA EVA AIRLINES 2

FDX FED EX 9

JAI JET AIRWAYS 2

JBU JETBLUE AIRWAYS CORP. 27

MEP MIDWEST AIRLINES (MIDWEST EXPRESS 10

NWA NORTHWEST AIRLINES 32

POE PORTER AIRLINES 16

QTR QATAR AIRWAYS 2

SAS SCANDINAVIAN AIRLINES 4 

SIA SINGAPORE AIRLINES LIMITED 2

SWR SWISS INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES (SWISSAIR 2

TAP TAP-AIR PORTUGAL 3

TRS AIRTRAN AIRWAYS (new 3ltr eff 03/22/03) 13

UAL UNITED AIRLINES 33

UPS UNITED PARCEL SERVICE 10

USA US AIRWAYS 31

VIR VIRGIN ATLANTIC AIR 3

WJA WESTJET 2

Page 2
# C_2005006EN.01004302.xml

| 8.1.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 6/43 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.1.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 6/43

---

Action brought on 26 October 2004 by Carlos Sánchez Ferriz against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-436/04)

(2005/C 6/85)

Language of the case: French

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 26 October 2004, by Carlos Sánchez Ferriz, residing in Brussels, represented by G. Bounéou and F. Frabetti, lawyers.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | Annul the list of officials promoted under the 2003 procedure, in so far as that list does not include the applicant's name, and, incidentally, the formal measures leading to that decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the list of officials promoted under the 2003 procedure, in so far as that list does not include the applicant's name, and, incidentally, the formal measures leading to that decision;

| — | Alternatively, annul the allocation of promotion points under the 2003 procedure in relation to the applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

Alternatively, annul the allocation of promotion points under the 2003 procedure in relation to the applicant;

| — | Order the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of his action, the applicant relies on pleas in law and main arguments identical to those pleaded by the applicants in Case T-434/04.

---
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 3.3


                            CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
                             BY SHAREHOLDERS TO THE
                              AMENDED AND RESTATED
                          ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION OF

                          METROPOLITAN FINANCIAL CORP.

                               Charter No. 419682


         I, David G. Slezak, Assistant Secretary of Metropolitan Financial
Corp., an Ohio corporation organized for profit (the "Corporation"), do hereby
certify that, at a special meeting of shareholders, duly called and held on
September 25, 2001, at which meeting a quorum of shareholders was present in
person or by proxy, that by the affirmative vote of the holders of shares
entitling them to exercise 96.64% of the voting power of the Corporation, the
following resolution to amend the Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation
of the Corporation was duly adopted:

         RESOLVED, that the Corporation is authorized to increase the number of
         authorized shares of common stock, without par value, from 10,000,000
         shares to 30,000,000 shares and that the first paragraph of Article IV
         of the Corporation's Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation be
         amended to read as follows and the second paragraph of Article IV be
         deleted in its entirety:

                 The authorized number of shares of the Corporation is
                 40,000,000, of which 5,000,000 shall be shares of Class A
                 Serial Preferred Stock, without par value, as described in Part
                 A of this Article IV (hereinafter called "Class A Preferred
                 Stock"), 5,000,000 shall be shares of Class B Serial Preferred
                 Stock, without par value, as described in Part B of this
                 Article IV (hereinafter called "Class B Preferred Stock"), and
                 30,000,000 shall be shares of Common Stock, without par value,
                 as described in Part C of this Article IV (hereinafter called
                 "Common Shares").

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the above named officer, acting for and on behalf of the
Corporation, has hereto subscribed his name as of this 26th day of September,
2001.


                                            METROPOLITAN FINANCIAL CORP.




                                            By:  /s/ David G. Slezak
                                                 ---------------------
                                                     David G. Slezak
                                                     Assistant Secretary