alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16

- 20555 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
JOSE WILLIAM QUINTANILLA, also known as Pablo, also known as Ronko , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:14

- CR

- 497

- 2

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Jose William Quintanilla appeals following his guilty

- plea conviction for conspiring in the sex trafficking of children by force and coercion in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1594(c). He argues that the district court’s refusal to hear hi s testimony at the sentencing hearing violate d the Due Process Clause, Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32, U.S.S.G. § 6A1.3(a), and this court’s precedents.

* 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 R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR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. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED October 25, 2017

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 16-20555 Document: 00514209720 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/25/2017No. 16

- 20555

2 Quintanilla entered his plea in accordance with a written plea agreement wherein he waived the r ight to appeal his conviction and sentence, except with the respect to his right to appeal a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. The Government seeks to enforce the waiver. Our review w hether
the waiver provision bars the instant appeal is de nov o

. United States v.
Jacobs , 635 F.3d 778, 780

- 81 (5th Cir. 2011). We construe the plea agreement “like a contract, seeking to determine the defendant’s reasonable understanding of the agreement and construing any ambiguity against the Government.” Unite d States v. Farias , 469 F.3d 393, 397 (5th Cir. 2006) (footnote omitted).
W e need not reach whether the waiver encompasses Quintanilla’s challenge to the conduct of the sentencing hearing. Rather, our review of the record satisfies us that the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to hear testimony. See United States v. Jackson , 453 F.3d 302, 305 (5th Cir. 2006); United States v. Henderson , 19 F.3d 917, 927 (5th Cir. 1994).
AFFIRMED. Case: 16-20555 Document: 00514209720 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/25/2017
.. -------l6~E:;::;C~R~E=il1"-

-~~-----......, 

IBIEEOtlme JlC1'1U118<9 , A.IOR CARRIER SHEET HQ ASA. 

MUST REMAIN WITH ATTACHED PAPERS 

NUMBER EACH MEMO OR REPLY IN LEFT BORDER, PLACE) NAME, RANK AND 

TELEPHONE NUMBER BOTTOM OF EACH ACTION ORA W LINE UNDER EACH ACTION 

ENTER FILE CLASSIFICATION ADJUTANT -----

TO FROM DATE ~I SUBJECT 

J., AS ... 24 , AS=SO 13 Oct ~ :Poi;:,m> Suppiy .fer Cr,vptographic Installatiomi (cot\td) 

l..j lt is eccmmended traat the Sigml Corps be represented!. at th.a meetimg 

between the Ar Grou.ud. ~orces p the United States Air Fores am this Agency P 

concerzμ..ng the :l!.scussiop suggested in paragraph 4 of: the inclosed 1st I!lldorsement 

inasmuch as thia Sig:r!al Cf.:i>s is p?"imarily interutsd 1n allJ\Y moditicatiolll of m.li ... tary ·~racter tics lv' re usi.ng arms 0 

l'< 2., j It is also bell.~ed advisable that po'e1er rsqu:ll.riamen"Gs tor pover mits si 

commw:nibation equ:ll.pment,p and cryptographic equipment be standardized... It is 

suggestbd that this be a complishe:d at the earliest possible momet between the 

Signal ~rps and this Ag a, and,p as soon as pcss:lblep should mclme the United 

States f-ir Forci am the lDeparlmeJ:'lt of the ma.VJ"., -

I 

I 

----- - 1 ~-... -- _ _ _ __ __ _ A. SINKOll - - --- - - - - -

' Oliiet, SeOU'it.J Di'ri.ai.c>D .;i . .... l 

I 

--

.~,# .. _,.. a«- -•~11!!. W:_ ·~ _ __d..__.. 

4. AS-80 AS-24 124 Oct ' 

I 

I 

lfaJ Whitehead Ext 216 

-._ -- .... f. 'Reference- is made 'to paragraph 2, Conment 2. 

, ____ _ 

WDGAS 1078 26 Nov 45 47940 

L~~SE ft-r1' ibi OTHER SIDE 

PAGE NO .l __ 

Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 05-29-2014 pursuantto E.O. 1352a 

, - __, 
;; 

t' 

4· AS-30 Afi-24 24 Oct 4? 

l. Reference is made to paragraph 2, Colllft9nt 2. 

' 2. Attached hereto 1s a cop7 or 2nd Indoraement 

as rorwarded to the Chief Signal Officer. 

3. It 1s desired that Cmr.ment 3,; from AS-801 be retained until such time 

as preliminary ini'onnation .has been secured troa tte Signal Corps to enable the 

Arey ~ ty Agency to arranao a diacusa1on w1 th the Al'IDT Gro'Ulld .forces and the 

Unite~~Force. At that tbie action should be taken through AS-24 to request 

the Siznal Corps to attend any .meetiQg ot the Aftl\T Ground Forces and the United 

Statea -"ir 'Force on subject devices. 

2 Incl.8' 

l· w/a 

Added l Incl 

2. ay 2d Ind to cso~ dtd 

24 Oct 4? 

I 

I"\ PAOL E. REW · Lt. Colonel, Signal Corps 

Acting Depu,7 Chie.t 

Antr Secur1 ty Agenc,y 

Bxt 498 

3
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, November 04, 2016.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, November 04, 2016

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A17D0120. MARVIS MCDANIEL-IVEY v. IRVIN JOHNSON et al. .

Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby DENIED.

LC NUMBERS:

16PA0322
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-1998
<CASH>                                              71
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,806
<ALLOWANCES>                                       220
<INVENTORY>                                     13,203
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                18,074
<PP&E>                                           3,236
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,364
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  19,948
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           14,131
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            1,057
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            42
<OTHER-SE>                                       (901)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    19,948
<SALES>                                          6,461
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 6,461
<CGS>                                            4,691
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    6,217
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 468
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (220)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (255)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.06)
        

</TABLE>
*Hon. Eugene E. Siler, Jr., United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, sitting by 

designation 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

August 9, 2019

Nos. 18-2336 & 18-2426

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD,

 Cross Petitioner/Respondent 

v. 

800 RIVER ROAD OPERATING COMPANY, L.L.C., dba Woodcrest Health Care 

Center,

 Cross-Petitioner/Respondent

(NLRB-1: 22-CA-083628)

Present: CHAGARES, HARDIMAN and *SILER, Jr., Circuit Judges

1. Letter Motion by Petitioner to Amend Opinion. 

Respectfully,

Clerk/pdb

_________________________________ORDER________________________________

The foregoing motion is hereby granted. Page three of our opinion filed August 6, 2019 

shall be amended to replace “the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) or the “Act”).”

With “the National Labor Relations Act (the “Act”)”. 

By the Court,

s/Michael A. Chagares

Circuit Judge

Dated: August 22, 2019

cc: All Counsel of Record
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>         9
<MULTIPLIER>                                1,000

<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                               3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                            3,113
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                                0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                  3,179
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                      0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                      49,295
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                                0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                  0
<LOANS>                                         266,975
<ALLOWANCE>                                       2,831
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  338,790
<DEPOSITS>                                      204,858
<SHORT-TERM>                                     33,353
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                               2,017
<LONG-TERM>                                      56,913
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<COMMON>                                             26
<OTHER-SE>                                       41,773
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                  338,790
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                   5,599
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                   850
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    162
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                  6,611
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                2,469
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                4,189
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                             2,422
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        84
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                    0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                   2,006
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     631
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                          631
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                        405
<EPS-BASIC>                                      0.22
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      0.22
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                     2.96
<LOANS-NON>                                       2,486
<LOANS-PAST>                                      2,486
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                      0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                   2,571
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                  2,781
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                         0
<RECOVERIES>                                         24
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                 2,831
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                              2,831
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                   0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                               0


</TABLE>
# C_2014095EN.01000801.xml

| 1.4.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 95/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.4.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 95/8

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.7158 — GlencoreXstrata/Sumitomo/Clermont JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2014/C 95/02)

On 11 March 2014, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32014M7158. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32014M7158. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements of
SystemSoft Corporation on Form S-8 (File Nos. 33-85968, 33-80843, 333-13019 and
333-18657) and on Form S-3 (File Nos. 33-96116 and 333-19211) of our reports
dated March 4, 1998, except as to the information presented in Note 15 for which
the date is April 29, 1998, on our audits of the consolidated financial
statements and financial statement schedule of SystemSoft Corporation as of
January 31, 1998 and 1997, and for each of the three years in the period ended
January 31, 1998, which reports are included or incorporated by reference into
this Annual Report on Form 10-K.



                                           /S/ Coopers & Lybrand L.L.P.

                                           COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.

Boston, Massachusetts
May 1, 1998


                                       24
**                                                                                                           Exhibit 10.30**
**CONFIDENTIAL**

 

**IOMEGA CORPORATION**

**10955 Vista Sorrento Parkway, Suite 300**

**San Diego, CA 92130**

 

 

February 24, 2006

 

Jonathan Huberman

 

Dear Jonathan:

 

On behalf of the Iomega Board of Directors, I write to offer you the position of Chief Executive Officer of Iomega reporting to the Board of Directors. As CEO, you will be Iomega’s strategic and operational leader. We expect you to devote your entire business time, attention and energies to the business and interests of Iomega. We would like you to start immediately.

 

 

Following are the terms and conditions of your employment.

 

Base Salary

 

Your Base Salary for the balance of 2006 and for calendar year 2007 will be at the rate of $500,000 per year, payable in monthly installments, subject to withholding taxes and other normal deductions and Iomega’s standard payroll policies.

 

Bonus for 2006

 

For 2006, you will receive a bonus equal to 100 percent of your Base Salary for 2006 and payable 50 percent when you undertake your duties as CEO and 50 percent at yearend.

 

Bonus for 2007 and Future Years

 

For 2007 and future years, your bonus will be determined by the Board of Directors based on goals and criteria determined by mutual agreement of you and the Board and may vary from zero percent to 200 percent of your then annual Base Salary.

 

Stock Options

 

When you undertake your duties as CEO, you will be granted an option to purchase 400,000 shares of Iomega common stock at an exercise price equal to the Fair Market Value per share on the date of grant. Fair Market Value is the closing price of Iomega stock on the New York Stock Exchange on the day preceding the date of grant. Each such option shall be exercisable and shares subject thereto shall vest as follows: 12.5 percent on the date of grant and 

 

 

Doc. #1628961 v.1-5/11/06 12:02 PM
FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTH CI RCUI T J UNE 26, 2009 THOMAS K. KAH

N CL ERK [ D O N O T P U B L I S H ]

I N T H E U N I T E D S T A T E S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S

F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C I R C U I T

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
N o

. 0 8

- 1 6 6 5 3 N o n
- A r g u m e n t C a l e n d a r

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
D

. C

. D o c k e t N o

. 0 4

- 0 0 1 1 8

- C R

- W T M

- 4

U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A ,

P l a i n t i f f

- A p p e l l e e ,

v e r s u s

H A R R Y L E E T E L F A I R ,

D e f e n d a n t

- A p p e l l a n t

.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
A p p e a l f r o m t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s D i s t r i c t C o u r t f o r t h e S o u t h e r n D i s t r i c t o f G e o r g i a

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ( J u n e 2 6 , 2 0 0 9 )

B e f o r e D U B I N A , C h i e f J u d g e , B L A C K a n d B A R K E T T , C i r c u i t J u d g e s

.

P E R C U R I A M :

G r a n t B

. S m i t h , a p p o i n t e d c o u n s e l f o r H a r r y L e e T e l f

a i r i n t h i s d i r e c tc r i m i n a l a p p e a l , h a s m o v e d t o w i t h d r a w f r o m f u r t h e r r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e

a p p e l l a n t a n d f

i l e d a b r i e f p u r s u a n t t o A n d e r s v

. C a l i f o r n i a , 3 8 6 U

. S

. 7 3 8 , 8 7 S

. C t

.

1 3 9 6 , 1 8 L

. E d

. 2 d 4 9 3 ( 1 9 6 7 )

. I n c o n s i d e r i n g c o u n s e l ’ s m o t i o n , w e c o n s i d e r o n l y

t h e p r o p r i e t y o f T e l f

a i r ’ s 2 0 0 6 a m e n d e d s e n t e n c e a t i s s u e i n t h i s o u t

- o f

- t i m e d i r e c t

a p p e a l

. W e d o n o t e x a m i n e t h e p r o p r i e t y o f a n y o t h e r a c t i o n s T e l f a i r h a s t a k e n , o r

m a y t a k e i n t h e f

u t u r e

. O u r i n d e p e n d e n t r e v i e w o f t h e e n t i r e r e c o r d r e v e a l s t h a t

c o u n s e l ’ s a s s e s s m e n t o f t h e r e l a t i v e m e r i t o f t h i s o u t

- o f

- t i m e d i r e c t a p p e a l f

o r

T e l f a i r ’ s 2 0 0 6 a m e n d e d s e n t e n c e i s c o r r e c t

. B e c a u s e i n d e p e n d e n t e x a m i n a t i o n o f

t h e e n t i r e r e c o r d r e v e a l s n o a r g u a b l e i s s u e s o f m e r i t , c o u n s e l ’ s m o t i o n t o w i t h d r a w

i s G R A N T E D , a n d T e l f a i r ’ s a m e n d e d s e n t e n c e i s A F F I R M E D

.

2
BISCAYNE BAY PILOTS, INC.,

Petitioner,

v.

FLORIDA-CARIBBEAN CRUISE 

ASSOCIATION,

Respondent.

___________________________/

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D16-2388

Opinion filed November 9, 2016.

Petition for Writ of Prohibition.

Donna E. Blanton of Radey Law Firm, Tallahassee and Robert Peltz of The Peltz 

Law Firm, Miami, for Petitioner.

Thomas F. Panza of Panza, Maurer, & Maynard, Fort Lauderdale, Pamela Jo 

Bondi, Attorney General and Marlene K. Stern, Assistant Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, for Pilotage Rate Review Committee, for Respondents.

PER CURIAM.

DENIED.

B.L. THOMAS, RAY, and OSTERHAUS, JJ., CONCUR.
REF ID:A66557 

Serial: 

Dear Ceneral Il"Y1q: 

'l'hank JOu. for 1flDr lett.er al 26 M.arcb requesting 

that nr. lfilHu F. i'riedman lecture at the Xillta17 

!cad!llQ' an 28 and 29 '!lfq. 

:Mr. 1riednan bu beaa aut~..sed to tranl t.o 

Weat Point to 4elivv t.be lecture, and ~ indicatocl 

hia pleuure 1n the inV1.tat1on. :te 111.ill .:ommnnicate 

ilrect}T ld.t.h JOU in regard to the subject and content 

ot the lact.UNe 

It is a pleasure to be ot service to ,YOU in this 

mtter. 

Sincere.17, 

liLPH J • C.A.W'l.~ 

M&Jor General. tfS Al"q 

:l1.rectar. Armed ?ones Securit7 ~"'8DC3' 

w.F .Fri.ednan/etv/S Apr 52 

OOf /1923213/Ext. 60493 

RE: BRPet.enoa/AG/t:azl.9/bah/lO Apr 52 

@'pp roved for Release by NSA on 11-22-2013 pursuantto E .0. 1352a
Exhibit 32.1

Hungarian Telephone and Cable Corp.

Certification of Chief Executive Officer

I, Torben V. Holm, President and Chief Executive Officer of Hungarian Telephone and Cable Corp., certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 that:

To the best of my knowledge and belief, based upon a review of this annual
report on Form 10-K of Hungarian Telephone and Cable Corp. for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006, and, except as corrected or supplemented in a subsequent report:



| |  |  | this annual report of Hungarian Telephone and Cable Corp. on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 which this statement accompanies fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | - |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | the information contained in this annual report on Form 10-K of Hungarian Telephone and Cable Corp. for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Hungarian Telephone and Cable Corp.
| | - |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



By:

/s/ Torben V. HolmTorben V. HolmPresident and Chief Executive OfficerMarch 19, 2007