alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

The Honorable Richard H. Battey, United States District Judge for the District

of South Dakota.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 04-3766

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

*

v. * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

Ricardo Escatel-Chavez, also known * District of South Dakota.

as Miguel Rodriguez, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: September 23, 2005

Filed: September 30, 2005

___________

Before MELLOY, MAGILL, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Ricardo Escatel-Chavez (Escatel) pleaded guilty to illegally reentering the

United States after having been deported, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). The

district court1

 explicitly stated that the Sentencing Guidelines were advisory only,

found Escatel was subject to a 16-level enhancement based on a prior conviction, and

determined a Guidelines imprisonment range of 57-71 months. The court sentenced
-2-

Escatel to 60 months in prison and 3 years supervised release, after considering the

factors listed in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) and concluding that his criminal history and the

facts in this case warranted such a sentence.

On appeal, counsel initially moved to withdraw and filed a brief under Anders

v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); counsel now moves to withdraw that motion, and

asks to continue this appeal as a non-Anders appeal or, alternatively, for remand in

light of United States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005).

We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw her initial motion to withdraw, but

otherwise deny her motion because any possible Booker argument fails. The record

reveals that the district court properly calculated a sentencing range under advisory

Guidelines and considered the sentencing factors in section 3553(a), and we conclude

the sentence is not unreasonable. See Booker, 125 S. Ct. at 756-57 (Guidelines are

only advisory); United States v. Pirani, 406 F.3d 543, 551 (8th Cir. 2005) (en banc)

(holding Booker error is avoided when district court calculates proper Guidelines

sentencing range, treats Guidelines as advisory, and imposes reasonable sentence),

petition for cert. filed, (U.S. July 27, 2005) (No. 05-5547).

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment.

______________________________
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2093 

To provide for an alternative body to transmit a written declaration that 

the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office 

in accordance with the provisions of the 25th Amendment of the Constitution. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 14, 2017 

Mr. BLUMENAUER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To provide for an alternative body to transmit a written 

declaration that the President is unable to discharge 

the powers and duties of his office in accordance with 

the provisions of the 25th Amendment of the Constitution. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE . 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Strengthening and 

5 Clarifying the 25th Amendment Act of 2017’’. 


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2093 IH

1 SEC. 2. PURPOSE. 

2 The purpose of this Act is to provide for an alter3 native body to transmit a written declaration that the 

4 President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of 

5 his office in accordance with section 4 of the 25th Amend6 ment of the Constitution. 

7 SEC. 3. PRESIDENTIAL INCAPACITY. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in subsections 

9 (b) and (c), the following individuals shall constitute an 

10 alternative body to transmit a written declaration that the 

11 President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of 

12 his office in accordance with section 4 of the 25th Amend13 ment of the Constitution: 

14 (1) Each former living President. 

15 (2) Each former living Vice President. 

16 (b) DISQUALIFICATION FROM BODY.—The following 

17 individuals shall not be part of the body established under 

18 subsection (a): 

19 (1) Any individual impeached by the House of 

20 Representatives and convicted by the Senate. 

21 (2) Any individual serving as President or Vice 

22 President at the time the declaration of incapacity is 

23 made. 

24 (c) REMOVAL FROM BODY.—A member of the body 

25 identified in subsection (a) may be removed from such 

26 body by a majority vote of all members of such body. 


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 2093 IH

1 (d) TERMINATION AND REESTABLISHMENT OF

2 BODY.—The body described in subsection (a) shall termi3 nate whenever less than 2 individuals described in para4 graphs (1) and (2) of such subsection and not disqualified 

5 under subsection (b) are living. Such body shall be rees6 tablished whenever 2 or more such individuals are living. 

7 (e) DEFINITION.—The term ‘‘State’’ means each of 

8 the several States and each territory or possession of the 

9 United States. 

Æ 


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
MINDRAMDUM POI DR. HALL, ASD(I)

SUBJECT: Battlefield =NT Study

Subsequent to w first memorandum to you on this subject

41111,12842-73, May 29, 1973), the MID Staff has had further

discussion with your staff. Based on this, I propose that

the study be administrativelysmnaged as outlined herein.

The first part of the contract, which deals with the

PIN*

analysis of a spec battlefield scenario, could best be

handled as a non fort. This mould make the study

most useful for s alternate solutions to the use of

satellite BURT collectors--such as remotely piloted vehicles.

While we would be interested in this first phase effort, the

Mt0 would not need to be involved in the contracting aspects of

the study and I urge that your staff proceed on this basis.

Assuming that the first phase study leads to the conclusion that further analysis specifically oriented toward

1111111

requirements for a satellite ILINT collector is, ed,

we will certainly support your office through study

contract. The MR0 would retain the responsibil ty r this

contract, and technical •snagesent would be accomplished in

consultation with your office. You should informin g when to

begin planning for a second phase contract, and you should

also initiate a Military Interdepartmental Purchase Request

to transfer fiords at the appropriate time.

John L. Mamas
MEMORANDUM OF AGIUMIENT

the understanding that a Phase I, non-compartmented

on the subject of Battlefield Surveillance

-based Emitters) shall be issued t

the undersigned ggree that a Phase

t may be in order and that:

The contract will be supported by funds from the

Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Intelligence)

which will be transferred to the NW.

Technical management will be accomplished by designated technical representatives from the 1150 or a designated

IRO program office. The ASD(I) will provide technical consultants with the NW responsible for this program.

Contract managers shall endeavor to guide the

contract toward the goals specified in the Work Statement

(Attachment "A") if the Phase I study indicates that this is

a prudent coarse of action.

The contracting officer for the Phase II study

will be a ember of, and contract negotiations and services

will be accomplished through, an UFO program office.

- AllRIIIIIImaterial required by the contractor

Phase will be released through normal IRO

haonels.

l'healtrefereuce material specified in the

contractor's p will be provided by the X20.

It is understood that studies which incorporate

satellite reconnaissance technology for. Battlefield Surveillance will be accomplished under the aegis of the DUO.

N20 Representative) ASD(I) Representative)

With

contract
Conservation Practice Overview 

Helping People Help the Land

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender. 

October 2017 

Natural Resources Conservation Service

CPS Waste Treatment Lagoon (Code 359)

A waste treatment lagoon is an impoundment made by 

excavation or earth fill to provide storage for biological 

treatment of animal or other agriculture waste.

Practice Information

The purpose of this practice is to store and biologically 

treat organic waste, reduce pollution, and protect water 

quality.

The three general types of waste treatment lagoons are— 

• Anaerobic.—Require less surface area than naturally aerobic lagoons, but may give off

offensive odors.

• Naturally Aerobic.—Require more surface area, but are relatively odor free.

• Mechanically Aerated.—Comparable in size to anaerobic lagoons, but require energy for

aeration.

Waste treatment lagoons are located as near the source of waste as possible but as far from human 

dwellings as possible. The location should also be where prevailing winds will carry odors away from 

residences and public areas. 

To improve efficiency and reduce sludge buildup, solids should be removed from the waste before it 

enters the lagoon. A solids trap or separator should be installed between the waste source and the 

lagoon. 

Operation and maintenance requirements will include periodic inspections with prompt repair or 

replacement of damaged components. The waste will be removed from the lagoon and utilized at 

locations, times, rates, and volume in accordance with the overall waste management system plan.

Common Associated Practices

Conservation Practice Standard (CPS) Waste Treatment Lagoon (Code 359) is commonly applied 

with CPSs such as Waste Separation Facility (Code 632), Waste Recycling (Code 633), and Nutrient 

Management (Code 590).

For further information, contact your local NRCS field office.
•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

••

•

•

$

•

I-e •

•

•

•

• •

••

I* • •

•

• •

• •

.; •

Cleit liebriever

••••••

•

1/4)

iaraissasaaIniaimi rams

.

▪

 .

• • •

•

..

-. • • •

. 2 5 RD leadi •

... • ...

. . • •

;

•

•

• . . .

•

• 1111/11011113113Uat rag amentAL WAY, tux,

•

•

- Program IN Ining April IN& A sexidul evaluation haa Mona ••••

• • • that 1* tide area of apses technology, the reaults-sobieved versus

:

• resouveee-mad ereamover point will be readied this summes. :

•

•

•

-. ••

▪

General liehrhwer le Wide( action to insure en orderly trawler et ' -

• Program At assets • penumael, asaupewer spasm, tends, sod . "...* :. -. • : •

0011121101111.

.

• • •

t

• e

i • I believe we all have been iispreseed by the outstanding • • 4

. •• : *sighed eentributions made by Program 1113 to develop's* a better ...

•

• • • •• •

• • • Molded. at the epees environment amid to greet-4 rating the •• •

• • • Did41 TIM. the baprovad Ta0114 ACEINA-A, AGIIIIII•41, the • • .

.,.

. % • . ..

.. -Standard AMU, Ilia Worldwide Satellite Coalzel Netwasta add •

• eatentle renewers tealmiqpies. •

:•r f .

.

•

s S.• I raeommassd, abater prior to programa assipletioas madtabie ' . • ••I • 

• assaseadaSary sialeadtias for Ilia saambara GM* preen= eitiee, • . •

•

e • e•

• . • aarrioi aids at aseraes 'Moat air pabliatty. . . ..

., ...

I • •

. ...

•

• 11112.13BCT: Commdatios of Program UN • •

•

•

• :. ConBradug Ger resent diesuesion, it fa phoned to complete ••• •

: .

IL • ••

, , •

"

I

•

• • ••

•

..tsinadf 

. .

43. 44 % o 8 s.-4.-C-7:11

II • • p• • • • •

14

• •

• •• 4 •

'

• •

•

•

s•

. : .

• • p •

• 

' •

01,1111INIP•1111011111110111101011111 • .

... • •

.

.

I .
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

TIMOTHY JAY ADAMS,

Petitioner

v.

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

HON. MAUREEN T. BEIRNE, AND HON.

EVAN WILLIAMS,

Respondents :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 25 MM 2022

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 10 th day of June , 2022, the Petition for Writ of Mandamus is

DENIED, and the Prothonotary is DIRECTED to strike the names of the jurists from the

caption.
# C_2005045EN.01002001.xml

| 19.2.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 45/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.2.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 45/20

---

Removal from the register of Case C-50/04 (1)

1

(2005/C 45/41)

(Language of the case: Portuguese)

(Language of the case: Portuguese)

By order of 18 November 2004 the President of the Court of Justice of the European Communities has ordered the removal from the register of Case C-50/04: Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Portugal.

---

(1)  OJ C 71 of 20.03.2004.

1

---
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DELANEY E. SMITH, JR., Pharma D

MD,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES; et al.,

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 14-55189

D.C. No. 2:11-cv-04996-PA-FMO

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Percy Anderson, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted June 14, 2016** 

Before: BEA, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.

Delaney E. Smith, Jr. appeals pro se from the district court’s January 3, 2014

order striking documents from the docket. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §

1291. We review for an abuse of discretion. Ready Transp., Inc. v. AAR Mfg.,

FILED

JUN 23 2016

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).
Inc., 627 F.3d 402, 404 (9th Cir. 2010). We affirm. 

The district court did not abuse its discretion in exercising its inherent power

to strike Smith’s filings from the docket because they were filed nearly thirteen

months after the district court closed the case, and the district court had previously

directed the district court clerk to reject any future filings that Smith made in the

case. See id. (explaining that federal district courts have the “inherent power to

control their docket” (internal quotation marks and citations omitted)). 

We lack jurisdiction to consider any of the district court’s prior rulings

because Smith failed to file a timely notice of appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)

(a notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days after the date of entry of the

judgment). 

We do not consider arguments raised for the first time on appeal. See

Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n. 2 (9th Cir. 2009).

All pending motions and requests are denied.

AFFIRMED. 

2 14-55189
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                            9
<MULTIPLIER>                                     1,000

<S>                                        <C>

<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          26,361
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           2,042
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 1,500
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    215,741
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        438,302
<ALLOWANCE>                                      6,399
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 717,285
<DEPOSITS>                                     637,454
<SHORT-TERM>                                     1,282
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              3,831
<LONG-TERM>                                     12,795
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        18,199
<OTHER-SE>                                      43,724
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 717,285
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 18,668
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                6,357
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   311
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                25,336
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              11,338
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              11,716
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           13,620
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    1,102
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  28
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 10,095
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,623
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       5,623
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,176
<EPS-BASIC>                                     1.15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.15
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.37
<LOANS-NON>                                      1,102
<LOANS-PAST>                                     1,061
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  1,261
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 5,835
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      836
<RECOVERIES>                                       298
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                6,399
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             6,399
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                             73




</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                            9
<MULTIPLIER>                                     1,000
       
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997 
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997    
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997    
<CASH>                                          26,012
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           1,225
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 3,900
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    108,334
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          57,841
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            58,543
<LOANS>                                        357,505
<ALLOWANCE>                                      5,208
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 569,661
<DEPOSITS>                                     508,579
<SHORT-TERM>                                     2,940
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              2,800
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        16,973
<OTHER-SE>                                      35,949
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 569,661
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 25,228
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                6,861
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   619
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                32,708
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              15,137
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              15,334
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           17,374
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    1,658
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  19
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 11,334
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  8,165
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       8,165
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,826
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.72
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.72
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                       0
<LOANS-NON>                                        284
<LOANS-PAST>                                     1,306
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 4,475
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    1,039
<RECOVERIES>                                       114
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                5,208
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             4,250
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            958
        


</TABLE>
# C_2005057EN.01000702.xml

| 5.3.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 57/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.3.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 57/7

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Second Chamber)

of 13 January 2005

in Case C-117/03 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato): Società Italiana Dragaggi SpA and Others v Ministero delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti and Regione Autonoma del Friuli Venezia Giulia (1)

1

(Directive 92/43/EEC - Conservation of natural habitats - Wild fauna and flora - National list of sites eligible for identification as sites of Community importance - Conservation measures)

(2005/C 57/13)

Language of the case: Italian

In Case C-117/03: reference for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC from the Consiglio di Stato (Italy), made by order of 17 December 2002, received at the Court on 18 March 2003, in the proceedings between Società Italiana Dragaggi SpA and Others v Ministero delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti and Regione Autonoma del Friuli Venezia Giulia – the Court (Second Chamber) composed of C.W.A. Timmermans, President of the Chamber, C. Gulmann (Rapporteur), J.-P. Puissochet, N. Colneric and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, Judges; J. Kokott, Advocate General; M. Múgica Arzamendi, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 13 January 2005, the operative part of which is as follows:

Società Italiana Dragaggi SpA and Others

Ministero delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti and Regione Autonoma del Friuli Venezia Giulia

On a proper construction of Article 4(5) of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, the protective measures prescribed in Article 6(2), (3) and (4) of that directive are required only as regards sites which, in accordance with the third subparagraph of Article 4(2) of the directive, are on the list of sites selected as sites of Community importance adopted by the Commission of the European Communities in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 21 of the directive.

In the case of sites eligible for identification as sites of Community importance which are included in the national lists transmitted to the Commission and, in particular, sites hosting priority natural habitat types or priority species, the Member States are, by virtue of Directive 92/43, required to take protective measures that are appropriate, from the point of view of the directive's conservation objective, for the purpose of safeguarding the relevant ecological interest which those sites have at national level.

---

(1)  OJ C 146 of 21.06.2003.

1

---
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 23.2


INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements on Form
S-8 (No. 333-47851, 333-47843, 333-47059, 333-46991, and 333-83146) of
FlexiInternational Software, Inc. of our report dated February 27, 2001,
appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of FlexiInternational Software,
Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2001. We also consent to the incorporation
by reference of our report dated February 27, 2001, on the financial Statement
Schedule of this Form 10-K.

Deloitte & Touche LLP
Hartford, Connecticut

April 1, 2002