alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jose De Jesus ROBLEDO-ARECHAR, Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-41245 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed April 10, 2017

Carmen Castillo Mitchell, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Jose De Jesus Robledo-Arechar, Pro Se

Before REAVLEY, OWEN, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jose de Jesus Robledo-Arec-har has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and *United States v. Flores,*632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Robledo-Arechar has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivo-lous 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.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R, 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
Danny L. SMITH v. STATE

CR-16-0417

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

April 21, 2017 Reh. denied May 12, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
The LAKE HAMILTON LAKESHORE, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Wayne L. NEIDLINGER, d/b/a Owners Association, Inc. Captain Fred's Airboat Nature Tours, et al., Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-0091

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 14, 2018

BY ORDER OF THE COURT:

Pursuant to the notice of voluntary dismissal filed herein, this appeal is dismissed.
6/20/12
Document Management Facility U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S. E. West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140 Washington, D. 

### C. 20590

Re: AOPA/EAA Medical Exemption request Strongly recommend approval of referenced request.
I hold an FAA issued private pilot license with over 6000 hours ofrnilitary single seat and two place experimental aircraft time. Presently I fly experimental aircraft around 80 hours annuallyfor recreational and personal travel purposes. It is my opinion there is a significant number ofreasons to approve the medical exemption request. A couple are discussed below. Selfassessment ofmyfitness to flywas established early in myflying career with systematic guidance from militarytraining and Navyflight surgeons. No like system exists for recreational general aviation pilots that I am aware of. Therefore I see significantvalue in an online educational program that teaches selfmedical assessment offitness to fly. Locally I have observed several W.W.II and Korea era general aviation pilots give up flying long before necessary because ofthe "hassle" and expense of maintaining FAA dictated medicals. Cost savings to individuals/government and the increase in aviation activity from approval ofthe request should be significant.
Recommend approval this exemption request at the earliest opportunity; "time is money" in this case. Aviation and our economy needs the help.
Sin ely,

# red~ t/;h J?G--0 , --- fnes M.**~** 

### e "
Exhibit






[NAME]
MARCH 15, 2018
RESTRICTED UNITS  
AWARD LETTER
Protective Life Corporation has awarded you:
______ Restricted Units 
Date of Grant: March 15, 2018
These Restricted Units were awarded pursuant to the Protective Life Corporation Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “Plan”), and are subject to the terms and conditions contained in the 2018 Restricted Units Award Provisions (“Provisions”), as set forth in Appendix A to this Award Letter, and the Plan. The Plan and the Provisions contain terms and conditions regarding the vesting of these Restricted Units, termination of employment, tax withholding, non-solicitation of Company employees and customers, regulatory compliance and other matters, and I encourage you to read the Provisions carefully.
Please retain these documents in your personal records.
                        
Richard J. Bielen
President and Chief Executive Officer of Protective Life Corporation
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1516 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1516

    To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to prohibit 
  contributions and donations by foreign nationals in connection with 
            State or local ballot initiatives or referenda.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 2, 2021

  Ms. Porter introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                   Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to prohibit 
  contributions and donations by foreign nationals in connection with 
            State or local ballot initiatives or referenda.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Stop Foreign Interference in Ballot 
Measures Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON CONTRIBUTIONS AND DONATIONS BY FOREIGN NATIONALS 
              IN CONNECTION WITH BALLOT INITIATIVES AND REFERENDA.

    (a) In General.--Section 319(a)(1)(A) of the Federal Election 
Campaign Act of 1971 (52 U.S.C. 30121(a)(1)(A)) is amended by striking 
``election;'' and inserting the following: ``election, including a 
State or local ballot initiative or referendum;''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this Act shall apply 
with respect to elections held in 2022 or any succeeding year.
                                 <all>
```
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

**____________** No. 23
- 10417 Summary Calendar

**____________ United States of America,**  Plaintiff

— Appellee **,** versus **Victor Juarez Rodriguez,** Defendant

— Appellant **.**

**______________________________** Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:22
- CR
- 184 - 1

**_____________ _________________**  Before **Smith, Higginson,** and **Engelhardt,** Circuit Judges **. Per Curiam**  **:** ***** The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Victor Rodri
guez has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief per Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Rodriguez has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and relevant portions of the rec ord.

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

### FILED October 6, 2023

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 23-10417 Document: 00516923220 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/06/2023No. 23
- 10417

2 We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no non
frivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, the motion to withdraw is **GRANTED** , counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the appeal is **DISMISSED** . See **5th Cir. R.** 42.2 . Case: 23-10417 Document: 00516923220 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/06/2023
Order entered November 15, 2018

In The



## Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 18

- 00183

- CV

AZTEC SYSTEMS, INC. AND GLENDON TODD CAP ITAL, LLC, Appellant s

V.

NICK PREVETT, Appelle e

On Appeal from the 44th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC

- 15

- 13630



### O RDER

On the Court’s own motion, we REMOVE this appeal from submission on December 5,

2018. The appeal will be resubmitted in the first quarter of 2019.

/s/ MOLLY FRANCIS

PRESIDING JUSTICE
HeinOnline -- 51 Fed. Reg. 10162 1986
Richard B. ROEDERER, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. Joanne J. ROEDERER, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D16-2214

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

NOVEMBER 30, 2017

Following review of appellant's response, it is ordered that appellee's renewed motion to dismiss appeal is granted, and this appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Florida is hereby dismissed.

SALTER, FERNANDEZ and SCALES, JJ., concur.
J.D.A. v. The matter of A.C., a minor child

2160672

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

June 15, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

June 24, 2015

No. 04-15-00325-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF T.C.D., A.P.D. and P.S.D., Children

From the 225th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2007-CI-06301

Honorable Karen H. Pozza, Judge Presiding

ORDER

In accordance with the court’s opinion of this date, the appellant’s motion for extension of 

time to file a late notice of appeal and the notice of appeal are DISMISSED FOR LACK OF 

JURISDICTION.

It is so ORDERED on June 24, 2015.

_____________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

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

court on this 24th day of June, 2015.

_____________________________

Keith E. Hottle, Clerk
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### Food and Drug Administration

          - [Docket No. FDA-2021-N-0002]

# AGENCY:

Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

# ACTION:

Notification of withdrawal.

# SUMMARY:

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is withdrawing approval of a new animal drug application (NADA) at the sponsor's request because the product is no longer manufactured or marketed.

# DATES:

The approval is withdrawn as of February 28, 2022.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Sujaya Dessai, Center for Veterinary Medicine (HFV-212), Food and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855, 240-402-5761,                         *sujaya.dessai@fda.hhs.gov*.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Elanco US Inc., 2500 Innovation Way, Greenfield, IN 46140, has requested that FDA withdraw approval of NADA 093-329 for use of a prolonged-release bolus containing sulfamethazine in cattle because the product is no longer manufactured or marketed.

                    Therefore, under authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs and in accordance with § 514.116                     *Notice of withdrawal of approval of application*                     (21 CFR 514.116), notice is given that approval of NADA 093-329, and all supplements and amendments thereto, is hereby withdrawn February 28, 2022.                

                    Elsewhere in this issue of the                     **Federal Register**                    , FDA is amending the animal drug regulations to reflect the voluntary withdrawal of approval of this application.                

Dated: February 14, 2022.

Lauren K. Roth,

Associate Commissioner for Policy.

[FR Doc. 2022-03539 Filed 2-25-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 6261 

To direct the Comptroller General to conduct a review on the impact of 

crime on public building usage, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 7, 2023 

Mrs. CHAVEZ-DEREMER introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to 

the Committees on Oversight and Accountability, and the Judiciary, for 

a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 

consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To direct the Comptroller General to conduct a review on 

the impact of crime on public building usage, 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 ‘‘Impact of Crime on 

5 Public Building Usage Act of 2023’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 6261 IH

1 SEC. 2. REPORT ON IMPACT OF CRIME ON PUBLIC BUILD2 ING USAGE. 

3 Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment 

4 of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United States 

5 shall conduct a review and submit to Congress a report 

6 outlining— 

7 (1) the effects of increased crime rates and 

8 safety concerns, including use of fentanyl and other 

9 drugs and homelessness, in urban areas on building 

10 usage for in-person work at Federal buildings; 

11 (2) how usage of different commuting modes of 

12 transportation to Federal buildings are affected by 

13 increased crime rates; 

14 (3) the effects of low office utilization rates on 

15 safety around Federal buildings; 

16 (4) any agency exceptions given to the policy 

17 set forth in the memorandum of the Office of Man18 agement and Budget titled ‘‘Measuring, Monitoring, 

19 and Improving Organizational Health and Organiza20 tional Performance in the Context of Evolving Agen21 cy Work Environments’’ and issued on April 13, 

22 2023, due to unsafe commuting conditions; and 

23 (5) any costs associated with safety issues im24 pacting Federal building. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•HR 6261 IH

1 SEC. 3. REPORT ON COSTS OF CRIME AROUND PUBLIC 

2 BUILDINGS. 

3 Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment 

4 of this Act, the inspector general of the General Services 

5 Administration shall submit to Congress a report on the 

6 impacts on and costs associated with building operations 

7 related to crime and public safety in and around Federal 

8 buildings. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Israel PEREZ-JIMENEZ, Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-10135 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Date Filed: 12/21/2016

Gail A. Hayworth, James Wesley Hendrix, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Christopher Allen Curtis, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth, TX, for Defendant-Appellant

Before JOLLY, SMITH, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Israel Perez-Jimenez pleaded guilty to illegal reentry and was sentenced to 30 months of imprisonment. The advisory guidelines calculations included an eight-level enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(C) for a prior, aggravated felony conviction based on Perez-Jimenez’s Texas convictions for burglary of a building and burglary of a vehicle. Perez-Jimenez now argues that the district court erred by characterizing his offenses as aggravated felonies under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(F) for the purposes of convicting and sentencing him under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2). Relying on *Johnson v. United States,*— U.S. -, 135 S.Ct. 2551, 192 L.Ed.2d 569 (2015), Perez-Jimenez argues that the definition of a crime of violence in 18 U.S.C. § 16(b), which is incorporated by reference into § 1101(a)(43)(F)’s definition of an aggravated felony, is unconstitutionally vague on its face. Perez-Jimenez’s arguments are foreclosed by our recent decision in *United States v. Gonzalez-Longoria,*831 F.3d 670 (5th Cir. 2016) (en banc), *petition for cert. filed*(Sept. 29, 2016) (No. 16-6259).

Additionally, Perez-Jimenez challenges his enhanced sentence under § 1326(b), arguing that because the indictment did not allege a prior conviction, his sentence exceeds the statutory maximum penalty for a conviction under § 1326(a). He challenges the validity of *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*523 U.S. 224, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), in light of *Apprendi v.*
      *939
      *New Jersey,*530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), and *Alleyne v. United States,*— U.S. -, 133 S.Ct. 2151, 186 L.Ed.2d 314 (2013). Perez-Jimenez correctly concedes that his argument is foreclosed.

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.
Kimberly HONAKER, Appellant, v. ORANGE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-2264

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed April 24, 2018 Rehearing Denied May 7, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
PHILIP MORRIS USA INC., Appellant, v. Elaine JORDAN, Appellee.

No. 1D15-5871

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 3, 2018 Rehearing Denied May 29, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
<Page>

Exhibit 31.2

                                 CERTIFICATION

I, Glenn Schlosser, certify that:

1.    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Atlantic Syndication
Network, Inc.;

2.    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement
of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were
made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business
issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.    The small business issuer's other certifying officers and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures
(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small
business issuer and have:

a)    designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer,
including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within
those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;

b)    evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c)    disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small
business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth
fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report)that has materially affected, or
is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal
control financial reporting;

5.    The small business issuer's other certifying officers and I have
disclosed, ased on our most recent evaluation of internal control over fiancial
reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of
small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):

a)    all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and

b)    any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting.


/s/ Glenn Schlosser

Glenn Schlosser
Chief Financial Officer
Date: June 6, 2007
#### WON YONG KIM, Debtor-Appellant, v. Thomas Patrick GORMAN, Trustee-Appellee, and Judy A. Robbins, II, Trustee.

No. 16-2227

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 25, 2017

Decided: April 27, 2017

Won Yong Kim, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Patrick Gorman, OFFICE OF THE CHAPTER 13 TRUSTEE, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Won Yong Bam appeals from the district court’s order dismissing her appeal from the bankruptcy court’s dismissal of her Chapter 13 bankruptcy proceeding. The district court dismissed Kim’s appeal after she failed to timely file a designation of the record. *See*Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8009(a)(1). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s order and find no reversible error and no abuse of discretion. *See*Fed. *244R. Bankr. P. 8001(a); *In re SPR Corp.,*45 F.3d 70, 74 (4th Cir. 1995); *In re Serra Builders, Inc.,*970 F.2d 1309, 1311 (4th Cir. 1992). Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm the district court’s order. 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.

*AFFIRMED.*
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-4608

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

GEORGE SAMUEL ESTEP,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CR99-556)

Submitted: October 9, 2002 Decided: October 21, 2002

Before WILLIAMS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James Wyda, Federal Public Defender, Beth M. Farber, Assistant

Federal Public Defender, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellant. Thomas

M. DiBiagio, United States Attorney, Mythili Raman, Assistant

United States Attorney, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

George Samuel Estep appeals the ten year term of imprisonment

imposed by the district court following his guilty plea to a single

count of conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to

distribute cocaine and cocaine base in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§

841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A) & 846 (2000). The Government has moved to

dismiss the appeal based upon Estep’s waiver of his right to

appeal. Our review of the record discloses that Estep knowingly and

voluntarily waived his statutory right to appeal by the terms of

his plea agreement. See United States v. Marin, 961 F.2d 493, 496

(4th Cir. 1992). This waiver precludes our review of his claim that

the district court erred in finding that he was responsible for in

excess of fifty grams of crack cocaine and sentencing him under

§ 841(b)(1)(A). See United States v. Brown, 232 F.3d 399, 402-03

(4th Cir. 2000). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. We dispense

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are

adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument

would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED