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

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-50886

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MEDARDO HERNANDEZ-MEJIA,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 1:13-CR-256-1

Before DAVIS, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Medardo Hernandez-Mejia 

raises arguments that are foreclosed by United States v. Teran-Salas, 767 F.3d 

453, 458-62 (5th Cir. 2014), cert. denied, 135 S. Ct. 1892 (2015). In TeranSalas, we determined that the appellant was not entitled to relief based merely 

on the existence of a theoretical possibility that the defendant could be 

convicted under Texas Health & Safety Code § 481.112(a) for conduct that 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 16, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 13-50886 Document: 00513079078 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/16/2015
No. 13-50886

2

would not qualify as a federal drug trafficking offense. See Teran-Salas, 767 

F.3d at 458. Hernandez-Mejia has not demonstrated “a realistic probability 

that Texas would prosecute under an ‘administering’ theory in a way that does 

not also constitute either ‘dispensing’ or ‘distributing’ under the federal 

sentencing guidelines.” Id. at 461-62. Accordingly, the Government’s motion 

for summary affirmance is GRANTED, the alternative motion for an extension 

of time to file a brief is DENIED, and the judgment of the district court is 

AFFIRMED. 

 Case: 13-50886 Document: 00513079078 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/16/2015
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 6059 

To permit a State to impose a sales tax on qualifying purchases at any 

gift shop on Federal property, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 25, 2023 

Ms. NORTON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To permit a State to impose a sales tax on qualifying purchases at any gift shop on Federal property, and for 

other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Federal Gift Shop Tax 

5 Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. SALES TAX IN GIFT SHOPS. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—A State may levy a sales tax on 

8 qualifying purchases made from any gift shop located on 

9 Federal property. 

10 (b) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

2 

•HR 6059 IH

1 (1) FEDERAL PROPERTY.—The term ‘‘Federal 

2 property’’ means any building, land, or other real 

3 property owned, leased, or occupied by a depart4 ment, agency, or instrumentality of the United 

5 States, or any other instrumentality wholly owned by 

6 the United States, including any facility or property 

7 of the Smithsonian Institution, the National Gallery 

8 of Art, the John F. Kennedy Center for the Per9 forming Arts, and the United States Holocaust Me10 morial Museum. 

11 (2) QUALIFYING PURCHASE.—The term ‘‘quali12 fying purchase’’ means any purchase made in the 

13 gift shop or made online through the gift shop. 

14 (3) STATE.—The term ‘‘State’’ means each 

15 State of the United States, the District of Columbia, 

16 American Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of the 

17 Northern Mariana Islands, the Commonwealth of 

18 Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin Islands, any 

19 other territory or possession of the United States, 

20 and any political subdivision of the foregoing. 

Æ
#### IN RE: Vivek SHAH, Petitioner.

No. 17-1797

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: October 19, 2017

Decided: October 23, 2017

Vivek Shah, Petitioner Pro Se.

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

*233PER CURIAM:

Vivek Shah petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging that the district court has unduly delayed ruling on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. The record reflects that the district court issued an opinion and order addressing the merits of Shah’s § 2255 motion, and Shah has therefore received the relief he requests in this petition. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in for-ma pauperis, we deny as moot Shah’s petition and supplemental petitions for a writ of mandamus. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*PETITION DENIED*
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.



## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2008-3343

SUNG K. KIM,

Petitioner,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE,

Respondent.

Kevin L. Owen , Law Offices of Gary M. Gilbert & Associates, of Silver Spring,

Maryland, argued for petitioner. With him on the brief was Gary M. Gilbert

.

Elizabeth M. Hosford , Senior Trial Attorney, Comme rcial Litigation Branch, Civil

Division, United States D epartment of Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for

respondent. On the brief were Michael F. Hertz , Acting Assistant Attorney General,

Jeanne E. Davidson , Director, and Kirk T. Manhardt , Assistant Director. Of counsel on

the brief was Nolan J. Benson, Jr. , Associate General Counsel, Defense Threat

Reduction Agency, United States Department of Defense, of Ft. Belvoir, Virginia.

Appealed from: Merit S ystems Protection BoardNOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.



## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2008-3343

SUNG K. KIM,

Petitioner,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE,

Respondent.



## Judgment

ON APPEAL from the Merit Systems Protection Board

in CASE NO(S). DC0752070892-I-1

This CAUSE having been hear d and considered, it is

ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

Per Curiam (LOURIE, RADER, and PROST, Circuit Judges ).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

DATED July 14, 2009 /s/ Jan Horbaly

Jan Horbaly, Clerk
<PAGE>   1


February 12, 1999

Catalina Marketing Corporation
11300 9th Street North
St. Petersburg, Florida  33716






Catalina Marketing Corporation:

We are aware that Catalina Marketing Corporation has incorporated, by reference
in its Registration Statement File Nos. 33-46793, 33-77100, 33-82456, 333-07525
and 333-13335, its Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 1998, which
includes our report dated January 12, 1999, covering the unaudited interim
financial information contained therein. Pursuant to Regulation C of the
Securities Act of 1933 (the Act), that report is not considered a part of the
registration statement prepared or certified by our firm or a report prepared or
certified by our firm within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of the Act.

Very truly yours,

ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP

/s/  William J. Meurer
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 28 (Thursday, February 10, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 7879]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-02877]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Notice of Permits Issued Under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 
1978

AGENCY: National Science Foundation.

ACTION: Notice of permit issued.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The National Science Foundation (NSF) is required to publish 
notice of permits issued under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978. 
This is the required notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Polly Penhale, ACA Permit Officer, 
Office of Polar Programs, National Science Foundation, 2415 Eisenhower 
Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22314; 703-292-8030; email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#034240427366716e6a7770436d70652d646c75"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="25646664554057484c5156654b56430b424a53">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On December 16, 2021, the National Science 
Foundation published a notice in the Federal Register of a permit 
application received. The permit was issued on January 18, 2022, to:

Permit No. 2022-026

1. Brandon Savory

Erika N. Davis,
Program Specialist, Office of Polar Programs.
[FR Doc. 2022-02877 Filed 2-9-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
EXHIBIT 32.2





CERTIFICATION


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350





In connection with the Annual Report of Terra Energy & Resource Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date therein specified (the “Report”), I, Alexandre Agaian, as Principal Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:





(1)
the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





(2)
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date:  April 15, 2011





/s/ Alexandre AgaianAlexandre AgaianPrincipal Financial Officer
**EXHIBIT      21.1**

**LIST      OF SUBSIDIARIES OF INCA Designs, Inc.**

|   | 1. | International                Purchasing Services, NY, Inc. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |   |   |
|--------|--------|--------|
|   | 2. | Accident                Prevention Plus, LLC |
|--------|----|----------------------------------------------|
|   |   |   |
|--------|--------|--------|

|   | 3. | S2                New York Design Corp. (effect May 21, 2007 as a result of the Security                Exchange Agreement entered into on May 21, 2007 discussed                above) |
|--------|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----
Joshua MOULTRIE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-4264

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 6, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Exhibit



Exhibit 10.63





AMENDMENT NO. 1 
TO
EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT 


           The Employment Agreement made and entered into effective October 8, 2018 by and between Perrigo Management Company (the “Company”) and Murray Kessler (“Executive”), is hereby Amended by this Amendment No. 1, effective as of February 13, 2019 (this “Amendment”).
                 WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive desire to amend the Agreement in order to avoid the unintended forfeiture of equity compensation upon Executive’s expected retirement date.  
NOW, THEREFORE for good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is acknowledged, Executive and the Company agree as follows:
		
	1.
	Paragraph 3(c) of the Agreement (Long-Term Incentive Awards) is amended and restated in its entirety as follows:


“Long-Term Incentive Awards. Beginning in the calendar year 2019, Executive will be eligible to participate in Parent’s 2013 Long-Term Incentive Plan (or successor plan), as amended (the “2013 LTIP”), on terms and conditions as determined in the sole and absolute discretion of the Committee; provided, that annual grants shall (i) be on the same terms and conditions (including the form and mix of grant types) as, and granted to Executive at the same time as such awards are granted to, other members of the Company’s executive committee, and (ii) have a grant date fair value of not less than $7,750,000; provided, further, that, the term “Retirement” as used in the applicable annual grant award agreement shall mean the Executive attaining age 62 and not as defined in the 2013 LTIP. During the Employment Period, Executive shall also be eligible to participate in other long-term cash and equity incentive plans, practices, policies, and programs applicable generally to other senior executives of the Company, as determined by the Committee in its sole and absolute discretion.”
		
	2.
	This Amendment may be executed in counterparts and each counterpart will be deemed an original.




		
	3.
	Except as expressly provided herein, the rest of the Agreement shall remain unaltered and in full force and effect. 








[Signature Page Follows]









IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment has been duly executed by the Parties as of the date written above.


	
		
	EXECUTIVE





	/s/ Murray S. Kessler

	Name: Murray S. Kessler
Title: President and Chief Executive Officer 

	 

	 

	



PERRIGO MANAGEMENT COMPANY 

	 

	 

	By:
	/s/ Todd W. Kingma

	Name:
	Todd W. Kingma

	Title:
	Executive Vice President, General Counsel, and 

	Secretary
Exhibit 10.28

 

SUMMARY OF DIRECTOR COMPENSATION

 

We pay our non-employee directors, who consist of all our directors other than our chief executive officer, an annual fee of $75,000 for their services as directors. We pay an annual fee of $25,000 to the chair of our audit committee, $20,000 to the chair of our compensation committee, $10,000 to the chairs of our executive committee and our nominating and corporate governance committee, and $5,000 to each non-employee director who serves as a member, but not the chair, of any committee for service on each committee above one. Our chairman also receives an annual fee of $150,000, as well as office space, support services and healthcare benefits, for his services as chairman of our board of directors. Commencing on January 1, 2019, each independent director serving on a committee will receive an additional amount equal to $1,500 for each committee meeting attended by such director after the eighth meeting of such committee in a calendar year.  Directors who are employees do not receive separate fees for their services as directors. All of the payments described in this paragraph are made in cash.

 

Under the terms of our 2006 equity incentive plan, each director who is not employed by, and does not provide independent contractor services as a consultant or advisor to, us or our subsidiaries receives automatic restricted stock awards. We refer to these directors as our “outside directors.” Currently, our outside directors are Dr. Rowland Moriarty, Prof. Robert Holthausen, Messrs. William Concannon, Thomas Avery and Robert Whitman and Mme. Nancy Hawthorne. Each outside director who is re-elected as one of our directors at, or whose term continues after, our annual meeting of shareholders will, on the date of the meeting, receive a restricted stock award, vesting in four equal annual installments beginning on the first anniversary of the date of grant, valued at $75,000, based on the closing price of our common stock as of that date. Each person who is first elected an outside director at our annual meeting of shareholders will receive, on the date of his or her election, a restricted stock award, vesting in four equal annual installments beginning on the first anniversary of the date of grant, valued at $75,000, based on the closing price of our common stock as of that date.
#### Stanley Rogovin, Appellant, v Mindy B. Rogovin, Respondent.

[770 NYS2d 342]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Jacqueline Silber*353mann, J.), entered on or about September 12, 2003, granting defendant’s motion for a protective order pursuant to CPLR 3103 (a) directing that her deposition be conducted by live video conferencing, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Defendant showed that requiring her to travel from her home in Kansas to New York City to be deposed would result in hardship, since she is the sole caregiver for her ailing nonagenarian grandmother, who is afflicted with dementia and requires around-the-clock care. She also has sole responsibility for a 10-year-old daughter with special needs. These factors are sufficient to warrant an exception from the rule that a nonresident defendant’s deposition should take place in the county where the action is pending (see *Hoffman v Kraus,*260 AD2d 435, 437 [1999]). Thus, it was proper to permit defendant to be deposed by means of live video conferencing, a substitute for live testimony we find reasonable under the circumstances.

We have considered plaintiffs remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur—Buckley, P.J., Tom, Ellerin and Marlow, JJ.
#### Patricia Louise HYDE; Robert F. Batsch, Petitioners, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.

No. 16-4183

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: August 2, 2017

Filed: August 10, 2017

Patricia Louise Hyde, Pro Se

Robert F. Batsch, Pro Se

Bruce R. Ellisen, Kathleen E. Lyon, Gilbert Steven Rothenberg, Senior Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice, Tax Division, Appellate Section, Washington, DC, William Wilkins, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, DC, for Respondent

Before COLLOTON, MURPHY, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.

*167PER CURIAM.

Patricia Hyde and Robert Batsch appeal the tax court’s1 decision, after a bench trial, upholding the Commissioner of Internal Revenue’s determination that they were liable for income tax deficiencies and penalties for tax years 2007-2012.

Following a careful review, see *Campbell v. Comm’r,*164 F.3d 1140, 1142 (8th Cir. 1999) (standard of review for tax court decisions), we conclude that the Commissioner’s determination was correct, for the reasons explained by the tax court. Accordingly, we affirm. *See*8th Cir. R. 47B.

1

. The Honorable Maty Ann Cohen, United States Tax Court Judge.
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

The Board of Trustees 

Universal Health Realty Income Trust: 

We consent to the incorporation byreference in the registration statements (Nos. 033-56843, 333-57815 and 333-143944) on Form S-8 and in the registration statements (Nos. 333-81763 and 333-60638) on Form S-3 of Universal Health Realty Income Trust of our reports dated March 13,2008, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Universal Health Realty Income Trust as of December 31, 2007 and 2006, and the related consolidated statements of income, shareholders’ equity and cash flows for each of the years inthe three-year period ended December 31, 2007, and the related financial statement schedule, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2007, which reports appear in the December 31, 2007annual report on Form 10-K of Universal Health Realty Income Trust. 

/s/ KPMG LLP 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

March 13, 2008
Exhibit 3

""" 'ii' ""

STATE OF CONNECTICUT

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

STATE OF CONNECTICUT

AND

WISVEST-CONNECTICUT, UC

TRADING AGREEMENT AND

ORDER 0.8177

MODIFICATION NO. 1

TRADING AGREEMENT AND ORDER MODIFICATION

In the matter of a Trading Agreement and Order between the Commissioner of Environmental

Protection eCommissioner") and Wisvesl-Connecticut, LLC ("Wisvest").

WHEREAS, the Commissioner and Wisvest. having agreed to the terms and conditions set

forth in Trading Agreement and Order No. 8177 issued on May 31,2000, do now, by mutual

agreement, modify said Trading Agreement and Order as follows:

I. Delete paragraph C.l.e. and substitute the following therefor:

,

,/

Ozone Season Restrictions. The boiler is subject to Section 22a-174-22a of the

Regulations ("NOx Budget Program") in 1999 and every year thereafter. The boiler may

generate ozone season BERes to comply with Section 22a-174-22 of me Regulations in

accordance wim paragraph C.I.a. and me following conditions and restrictions: 1)

BERCs shall only be generated by the boiler from May 1 through September 30 of a

given year, 2) BERCs shall only be used by other NOx Budget Program sources located

in Connecticut, 3) BERCs shall only be used to offset ozone season excess emissions, and

shall not be used for compliance during the non-ozone season; and 4) BERes generated

during a given year shall only be used during the following ozone season, with the

exception of BERCs generated during 1999, which may be used in the 2001 ozone

season. For example, BERCs generated during the 1999 ozone season may be used

during the 2001 ozone season. However, BERCs generated during the 2000 ozone season

may only be used during the 2001 ozone season. BERCs may be generated until May 1,

2003. BERCs are subject to all ERC requirements set forth in this Trading Agreement

and Order except for those requirements pertaining solely to non-ozone season ERCs and

as otherwise may be provided.

All other tenns and conditions of Trading Agreement and Order no. 8177 issued by the

Commissioner acting under Chapter 446c, Sections 22a-6, 22a-I71, 22a-174, 22a-176, and 22a177 of the Connecticut General Stamtes shall remain in effect.

Initials: 'E1t Date:

(Prinled on Recycled Paper)

79 Elm Slrecl • Hanford. CT 06106· S127

hnp:J/dcp.st:lle.CI.U$

A" c',/waf Oppurfwn;'J Empl''Jf!T

eld;ra/inl COfllltC/iCIl/ Coas/al RtSOllrct Managtmt'nt: 1980 ·1000
WISVEST-CONNECfICUT, llC 2 TRADING AGREEMENT AND ORDER

NO. 8177 MODIFICATION NO. I

WisveSl-Connecticut, LLC hereby consents to the entry of this modification to the Trading

Agreement and Order without further notice.

Wisvest·Connecticut, lie

Signature: --,0Z'-'.~::::- =",--"d;;:z.....L:/L1<"",==,,=o>'__

Type Name: Thomas D. Kirk

Type Title: ----i;-.=WlaAas<.--7"-,-

Entered as a modification o~.er'der of the COJp~ssiojJer of E iro"p(i1~~;f~~

. numbered 8177 this 12 day of ~/ 2 I. I

CITY OF BRIDGEPORT

LAND RECORDS

MAilED CERTIFIED MAIL,

RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

Certified Document No. 1625 0394
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

May 18, 2015

No. 04-15-00107-CV

Justin V. HAYNES,

Appellant

v.

Alicia Bryan HAYNES,

Appellee

From the 166th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012-CI-14023

Honorable David A. Canales, Judge Presiding

ORDER

The reporter’s record for this appeal was due to be filed on April 2, 2015. On April 28, 

2015, this Court issued an order requiring that the reporter’s record be filed on or before May 28, 

2015. On May 13, 2015 court reporter Luis Duran filed a notice of late record seeking another 

45-day extension to July 13, 2015. This Court may not grant an extension of time for more than 

30 days. TEX. R. APP. P. 35.3(c). The remaining reporter’s record to be filed is not extensive.

It is therefore ORDERED that Luis Duran file the reporter’s record in this court no later 

than June 15, 2015. FURTHER REQUESTS FOR EXTENSIONS OF TIME TO FILE 

THE RECORD ARE DISFAVORED.

_________________________________

Jason Pulliam, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 18th day of May, 2015.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court