alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Az Európai Unió C 182A/2014

| | ISSN 1977-0979 |
| --- | --- |
| Az Európai Unió
  Hivatalos Lapja | C 182A |
| | |
| Magyar nyelvű kiadás | Tájékoztatások és közlemények | 57. évfolyam2014. június 14. |

ISSN 1977-0979

Az Európai Unió

Hivatalos Lapja

C 182A

Magyar nyelvű kiadás

Tájékoztatások és közlemények

57. évfolyam2014. június 14.

---

| Közleményszám | Tartalom | Oldal |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | V   Hirdetmények |
| | KÖZIGAZGATÁSI ELJÁRÁSOK |
| | Európai személyzeti felvételi hivatal (EPSO) |
| 2014/C 182A/01 | Értesítés törlésről | 1 |

Közleményszám

Tartalom

Oldal

V   Hirdetmények

KÖZIGAZGATÁSI ELJÁRÁSOK

Európai személyzeti felvételi hivatal (EPSO)

2014/C 182A/01

Értesítés törlésről

1

| | |
| --- | --- |
| 2014/C 182A/02 | A HL C A Versenyvizsga áttekintése | 2 |

2014/C 182A/02

A HL C A Versenyvizsga áttekintése

2

| HU | |
| --- | --- |

HU

---

V Hirdetmények

KÖZIGAZGATÁSI ELJÁRÁSOK

Európai személyzeti felvételi hivatal (EPSO)

| 14.6.2014 | HU | Az Európai Unió Hivatalos Lapja | CA 182/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.6.2014

HU

Az Európai Unió Hivatalos Lapja

CA 182/1

---

ÉRTESÍTÉS TÖRLÉSRŐL

2014/C 182 A/01

Az EPSO törli a következő versenyvizsgákat:

| — | EPSO/AST/127/13 – Görög nyelvű (EL) nyomdai korrektor (AST 3)

  és |
| --- | --- |

—

EPSO/AST/127/13 – Görög nyelvű (EL) nyomdai korrektor (AST 3)

és

| — | EPSO/AST/128/13 – Portugál nyelvű (PT) nyomdai korrektor (AST 3). |
| --- | --- |

—

EPSO/AST/128/13 – Portugál nyelvű (PT) nyomdai korrektor (AST 3).

A szóban forgó versenyvizsgákra vonatkozó felhívás az Európai Unió Hivatalos Lapjában
   (1) jelent meg.

---

(1)  HL C 131A.,2013.5.8., 1. o.

---

14.6.2014

| 14.6.2014 | HU | Az Európai Unió Hivatalos Lapja | CA 182/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

HU

Az Európai Unió Hivatalos Lapja

CA 182/2

---

A HL C A „Versenyvizsga” áttekintése

2014/C 182 A/02

Itt találja a Hivatalos Lap C A sorozata idei publikációinak listáját.

Ellenkező jelzés híján, a HL-számok valamennyi nyelvi változatban elérhetők.

| 5 | |
| --- | --- |
| 6 | |
| 11 | |
| 19 | |
| 21 | |
| 26 | |
| 27 | |
| 30 | (PL) |
| 35 | |
| 41 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 42 | |
| 43 | |
| 46 | |
| 47 | |
| 48 | |
| 55 | |
| 56 | |
| 60 | |
| 62 | |
| 65 | |
| 73 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 74 | |
| 81 | |
| 88 | |
| 92 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 97 | |
| 98 | |
| 99 | |
| 108 | |
| 109 | |
| 116 | |
| 119 | |
| 133 | |
| 134 | |
| 136 | |
| 137 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 140 | |
| 145 | |
| 152 | |
| 160 | |
| 163 | |
| 164 | |
| 176 | |
| 178 | |
| 180 | |
| 182 | |

5

6

11

19

21

26

27

30

(PL)

35

41

(DE/EN/FR)

42

43

46

47

48

55

56

60

62

65

73

(DE/EN/FR)

74

81

88

92

(DE/EN/FR)

97

98

99

108

109

116

119

133

134

136

137

(DE/EN/FR)

140

145

152

160

163

164

176

178

180

182

---
# United States Court of Appeals **for the Fifth Circuit**

____________ No. 22-40703 Summary Calendar

____________ United States of America, Plaintiff—Appellee , versus Fredy Sandoval-Chavez, Defendant—Appellant . ______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 4:21-CR-239-1

______________________________ Before Stewart, Dennis, and Willett, Circuit Judges . Per Curiam: * The Federal Public Defender appoin ted to represent Fredy SandovalChavez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Sandoval-Cha vez has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the releva nt portions of the record reflected

_____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED May 3, 2023 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 22-40703 Document: 00516736548 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/03/2023No. 22-40703

2 therein. We concur with counsel’s as sessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review . Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED , counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the appeal is DISMISSED . See 5th Cir. R . 42.2. Case: 22-40703 Document: 00516736548 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/03/2023
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE MARCH
29, 1998 FORM 10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-27-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-29-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-29-1998
<CASH>                                           2,276
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,905
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      5,345
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                17,051
<PP&E>                                          45,057
<DEPRECIATION>                                   7,118
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  81,512
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           17,242
<BONDS>                                         25,837
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            66
<OTHER-SE>                                      31,515
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    81,512
<SALES>                                         47,710
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                47,710
<CGS>                                           16,396
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   38,923
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,636
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 580
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,571
<INCOME-TAX>                                       893
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,678
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,678
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    $0.41
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    $0.39
        

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

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         122,265
<SECURITIES>                                 3,331,290
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   357,853
<INVENTORY>                                     90,456
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,589,258
<PP&E>                                      14,108,220
<DEPRECIATION>                               5,613,755
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              12,556,734
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        7,957,792
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     77,500
<COMMON>                                        92,329
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,429,113
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                12,556,734
<SALES>                                      4,215,002
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,215,002
<CGS>                                        2,772,253
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,772,253
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               958,260
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    50
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             225,117
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                259,322
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   259,322
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .02


</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Christopher Chad GAMMON, Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-50156 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Date Filed: 11/28/2016

Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, Margaret Mary Embry, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Gregory L. Ahlgren, Esq., Ahlgren Law Firm, Laredo, TX, for Defendant-Appellant

Before JOLLY, SMITH, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Christopher Chad Gammon appeals his conviction and sentence for failing to register as a sex offender. Gammon has been released from prison but challenges the three-year term of supervised release that he is still serving.

Gammon first contends that the district court committed plain error by initially advising him that he faced a supervised release term of five years to life, when he actually faced a term of only one to three years. Any error did not affect Gammon’s substantial rights because there is no reasonable probability that the correct and more favorable information would have dissuaded him from pleading guilty. *See United States v. Dominguez*Benitez, 542 U.S. 74, 83, 124 S.Ct. 2333, 159 L.Ed.2d 157 (2004); *United States v. Williams,*120 F.3d 575, 578 (5th Cir. 1997).

Concerning the three-year term of supervised release, Gammon fails to show that the district court committed a procedural error by determining that Gammon was a Tier II sex offender. *See Gall v. United States,*552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). Moreover, the *881sentence was within the properly calculated guideline range and is presumed to be reasonable. *See United States v. Alonzo,*435 F.3d 551, 554 (5th Cir. 2006). Gammon’s argument that we should adopt his assessment of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors is contrary to the deferential appellate review dictated by *Gall*and does not rebut the presumption of reasonableness. *See Gall,*552 U.S. at 51, 128 S.Ct. 586; *United States v. Ruiz,*621 F.3d 390, 398 (5th Cir. 2010).

The judgment is AFFIRMED.

*

 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.
Autumn Dawn BRETON, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY, FSB, as Trustee, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-0540

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

February 23, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
**Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record**

**Plant ID 09761**  **Removed from Public**  **(Non-CBI) Docket**  **1 Copyright** 

**Flag 2**  **File Name Description**  09761\09761_HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted x 09761\09761_PartA.xls Plant submitted survey file x 09761\09761_PartB.xls Plant submitted survey file x 09761\09761_PartC.xls Plant submitted survey file x 09761\09761_PartD.xls Plant submitted survey file x 09761\09761_PartE.xls Plant submitted survey file x 09761\09761_PartH.xls Plant submitted survey file

09761\Certification Statement_09761.pdf Plant certification statement 09761\Supporting Documentation\09761_MAP-1 9761 Maalaea.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 09761\Supporting Documentation\09761_MAP-2 9761 Maalaea.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey x 09761\Supporting Documentation\09761_WB1 9761 Maalaea.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey x 09761\Supporting Documentation\09761_WB2 9761 Maalaea.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey x 09761\09761_Checklist.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

09761\09761_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist

1Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database

. 2Copyright documents are available from the docket.
Sydria K. SCHAFFER, Appellant, v. Alyssabeth KLEIN, Russell Klein and Travis Klein, Appellees.

No. 4D17-1728

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[May 10, 2018]

Kristen M. Fiore of Akerman LLP, Tallahassee and Christine M. Robbins and Erin M. Maddocks of Akerman LLP, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Brian M. O'Connell, Ashley Crispin Ackal, Joielle A. Foglietta and Clara C. Ciadella of Ciklin Lubitz & O'Connell, West Palm Beach, for appellees.

Per Curiam.

*Affirmed* .

Gross, Taylor and Kuntz, JJ., concur.
EX-99.2

WRITTEN STATEMENT OF THE CFO

		Written Statement of the Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, I, the undersigned Senior Vice President andChief Financial Officer of Elevon, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certify, basedon my knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for thequarter ended June 30, 2002 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirementsof Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.

/s/ Stanley V. Volger

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

Stanley V. Volger

August 5, 2002
EXHIBIT 32.1


                   STATEMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
          CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. {section} 1350

      In  connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended
June 30, 2006 (the "Form 10-Q") of Grayson Bankshares, Inc. (the "Company"), we,
Jacky K. Anderson, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Blake M. Edwards,
Chief Financial  Officer  of  the  Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
{section} 1350, as adopted pursuant  to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to our knowledge:

      (a)   the Form 10-Q fully complies  with the requirements of Section 13(a)
      of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

      (b)   the information contained in the  Form  10-Q fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and  results  of  operations of
      the Company as of and for the periods presented in the Form 10-Q.



      By:  /s/ Jacky K. Anderson                 Date: August 14, 2006
           ---------------------
            Jacky K. Anderson
            Chief Executive Officer



      By:   /s/ Blake M. Edwards                 Date: August 14, 2006
            --------------------
            Blake M. Edwards
            Chief Financial Officer
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-15-0000474 10-MAR-2016 09:10 AM
Owen D. DENSON, Jr., a/k/a Hikim Shabazz, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-4262

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed April 4, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Derrick HOLDEN, also known as D-Lo, also known as Terrance T. Holden, Defendant-Appellant

No. 17-30101 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed October 20, 2017

Camille Ann Domingue, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Louisiana, Lafayette, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Betty Lee Marak, Esq., Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Middle *&*Western Districts of Louisiana, Shreveport, LA, for Defendant-Appellant

Before STEWART, Chief Judge, and ELROD and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Derrick Holden, federal prisoner # 14428-035, was convicted of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine and was sentenced to 135 months of imprisonment and five years of supervised release. He appeals the denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for a sentence reduction pursuant to Sentencing Guidelines ■Amendments 782 and 788. He contends that the district court relied on a clearly erroneous assessment of the evidence when it found that he posed a continued threat to public safety and, therefore, abused its discretion in denying his § 3582(c)(2) motion.

. Holden had prior convictions for drug possession, domestic abuse battery, burglary of a habitation, and simple assault. He participated in an attempted robbery of a drug stash house in the instant offense. He was resentenced for the instant offense after it was discovered that he had used his brother’s name at the time of his arrest, prosecution, and original sentencing. At this resentencing, he received a *333significant downward departure from the original guidelines range on account of his substantial assistance to the Government. All his prison disciplinary violations, except for failing to stand count, occurred after he was resentenced. The district court’s finding that Holden posed a continued threat to public safety was plausible in light of his criminal history and his prison disciplinary record and, therefore, the district court’s determination that a sentence reduction was not warranted was not based on a clearly erroneous assessment of the evidence and was not an abuse of discretion. *See United States v. Henderson,*636 F.3d 713, 717 (5th Cir. 2011).

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

*

 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.
ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT TO THE

                         ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION OF

                        CITADEL ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP, INC.

                             CHANGING ITS NAME TO

                              SAN HOLDINGS, INC.


     Pursuant to the provisions of the Colorado Business Corporation Act, the
undersigned Corporation adopts the following Articles of Amendment to its
Articles of Incorporation:

     FIRST:  The name of the Corporation is CITADEL ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP, INC.

     SECOND:  The following amendment was adopted on February 1, 2000, by the
Board of Directors, and on March 1, 2000, by a vote of the Shareholders of the
Corporation, in the manner prescribed by the Colorado Business Corporation
Act.  The number of shares voted for the amendment was sufficient for
approval.

     The FIRST Article shall be amended to read as follows:

     The name of the Corporation shall be SAN HOLDINGS, INC.

     THIRD:  The manner, if not set forth in such amendments, in which any
exchange, reclassification, or cancellation of issued shares provided for in
the amendments shall be effected, is as follows:  Not applicable.

     DATED:  March 1, 2000.


                              CITADEL ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP, INC.
                                (Changing its name to
                                  SAN HOLDINGS, INC.)


                              By:/s/ L. W. Buxton
                                 L. W. Buxton, President
Exhibit 32.1



Certification Pursuant to

18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

as Adopted Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Catalina Marketing Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, L. Dick Buell, Chief Executive Officer and Director of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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 result of operations of the Company.
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                                  
|------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ L. Dick Buell                                                 
|L. Dick Buell                                                     
|Chief Executive Officer and Director (Principal
Executive Officer)
|                                                                  
|February 7, 2006
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lorenzo VALDEZ-GARATE, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 15-50447

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted January 18, 2017 *

Filed January 25, 2017

Ryan A. Sausedo, Daniel Earl Zipp, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Helen H. Hong, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the US Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Ap-pellee

Andrea Renee St. Julian, Esquire, Attorney, Andrea St. Julian, San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant

Before: TROTT, TASHIMA, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Lorenzo Valdez-Garate appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 72-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for importation of *774methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we vacate and remand.

Valdez-Garate contends that the district court erred in denying a minor role reduction to his base offense level under U.S.S.C. § 3B1.2(b). After Valdez-Garate was sentenced, the United States Sentencing Commission issued Amendment 794 (“the Amendment”), which amended the commentary to the minor role Guideline. The Amendment is retroactive to cases pending on direct appeal. *See United States v. Quintero-Leyva,*823 F.3d 519, 523 (9th Cir. 2016).

.The Amendment clarified that, in assessing whether a defendant should receive a minor role adjustment, the court should compare him to the other participants in the crime, rather than to a hypothetical average participant. *See*U.S.S.G. App. C Amend. 794; *Quintero-Leyva,*823 F.3d at 523. In addition, the Amendment clarified that “[t]he fact that a defendant performs an essential or indispensable role in the criminal activity is not determinative.” U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 cmt. n.3(C) (2015). Finally, the Amendment added a non-exhaustive list of factors that a court “should consider” in determining whether to apply a minor role reduction. *See id.*Because we cannot determine from the record whether the district court followed the guidance of the Amendment’s clarifying language and considered all of the now-relevant factors, we vacate Valdez-Garate’s sentence and remand for resentencing under the Amendment. *See Quintero-Leyva,*823 F.3d at 523-24.

Valdez-Garate’s request for remand to a different district judge is denied. Contrary to his contention, the record does not re-fleet that the judge has a “deep-seated antipathy” to properly applying the minor role Guideline, nor are there other “unusual circumstances” warranting reassignment in this case. *See United States v. Waknine,*543 F.3d 546, 559-60 (9th Cir. 2008).

VACATED and REMANDED for re-sentencing.

**

**This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.