alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Juan BECERRA, Jr., Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-41447 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed June 14, 2017

*298Carmen Castillo Mitchell, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Juan Becerra, Jr., Pro Se

Before DAVIS, SOUTHWICK, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Juan Becerra, Jr., 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). Becerra has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Becerra’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claims without prejudice to collateral review. *See United States v. Isgar,*739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014).

We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Becerra’s response. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, the 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. Becerra’s motions to relieve his attorney and withdraw his brief, to proceed pro se on appeal, and to extend the time to file a new brief are DENIED as untimely. *See United States v. Wagner,*158 F.3d 901, 902-03 (5th Cir. 1998).

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
#### Cristobal Moreno OROZCO, Plaintiff-Appellant v. CITY OF ANGLETON; Judge Robert E. May; Von H. Shelton, Attorney; Dale Summa, Prosecutor; Terri Tipton Holder, Prosecutor, Defendants-Appellees

No. 16-20448 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed June 8, 2017

Cristobal Moreno Orozco, Pro Se

Before JONES, WIENER, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Cristobal Moreno Orozco, proceeding pro se, filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint challenging his 2000 Brazoria County, Texas, guilty plea conviction for aggravated kidnapping, for which he was sentenced to 15 years in prison. The district court dismissed Orozcos’s claims as barred by *Heck*
      *264
      *v. Humphrey,*512 U.S. 477, 486-87, 114 S.Ct. 2364, 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994). On appeal, Orozco does not address *Heck.*Although pro se briefs are liberally construed, even pro se litigants must brief arguments in order to preserve them. *Yohey v. Collins,*985 F.2d 222, 225 (5th Cir. 1993). Because Orozco has not identified any error in the district court’s analysis and determinations, he has abandoned them. *See Brinkmann v. Dallas Cty. Deputy Sheriff Abner,*813 F,2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). 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.
**Exhibit 32.2****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 Annual Report of Tween Brands, Inc. (the “Company”), on Form 10-K forthe fiscal year ended February 3, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on thedate hereof (the “Report”), I, Paul C. Carbone, Senior Vice President of Finance (PrincipalFinancial and Accounting Officer) of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, asadopted 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 theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and  (2)The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and result of operations of the Company.        Dated: April 2, 2007          /s/ Paul C. Carbone       Paul C. Carbone
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Alex Christopher WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-11788 Conference Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed October 24, 2017

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

Alex Christopher Williams, Pro Se

Before KING, OWEN, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Alex Christopher Williams *343has 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). Williams 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 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 Cm. 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 *343the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
#### Coburn v. The Omega Lodge A. F. *&*A. M. et al.

1. Promissory Note: signed by makers as trustees: personal liability. A note which reads, “We promise to pay,” etc., was signed, “0. F. Clark, M. Samuels, Trustees Omega Lodge.” *Held*that Clark and Samuels were personally liable as makers. *(Heffner v. Brownell,*70 Iowa, 591, followed.) ■

*Appeal from Fremont Circuit Court.*

Monday, March 21.

Action at law. The facts are stated in the opinion.

*Anderson ds*Eaton, for appellants.

*Stockton <&*Keman, for appellee.

Seevers, J.

This is an action on a promissory note in these words:

> “$166.66. Riverton, Iowa, November 10, 1880.

> “Four years after date we promise to pay to the order of E. Coburn one hundred and sixty-six 66-100 dollars, value received, with ten per cent interest per annum.

> “ O. F. Clark,

> “ M. Samuels,'

> “ Trustees Omega Lodge.”

In the second count in the petition the plaintiff sought to recover a personal judgment against Clark *et al.*To such count there was a demurrer, which was overruled, and Clark *et al.*appeal, and the question we are called on to determine is whether the court erred in so holding. We are unable to see any distinction between this case and *Heffner v.*Brownell, 70 Iowa, *591,*and,.following that case, the result is that-the judgment of the circuit court must be ‘ Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                       1,572,174
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         625,247
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                             1,112,970
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                  1,852,775
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                       7,028,303
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                         7,192,836
<LOANS>                                     89,580,180
<ALLOWANCE>                                    555,417
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             104,772,505
<DEPOSITS>                                  66,720,932
<SHORT-TERM>                                 5,050,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          2,022,713
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    20,610,883
<OTHER-SE>                                  10,367,977
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             104,772,505
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              5,420,121
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              398,783
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               441,141
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                             6,260,045
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           2,506,917
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,557,117
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        3,702,928
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   45,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              1,879,049
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,881,582
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   1,881,582
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,170,415
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .63
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .63
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.69
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                   241,546
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               511,489
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    1,072
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              555,417
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                        555,417
        


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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The  following  Financial  Data  Schedule contains standard reports for the nine
months ended  October 5, 1998.  Diluted Earnings per share have been restated to
conform with the implementation of  SFAS  128  in  the  fourth quarter of fiscal
1997.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       JAN-05-1999
<PERIOD-START>                          JAN-06-1998
<PERIOD-END>                            OCT-05-1998
<CASH>                                        1519
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                               138816
<ALLOWANCES>                                   739
<INVENTORY>                                  40218
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            181886
<PP&E>                                       22208
<DEPRECIATION>                                9477
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              221250
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       110674
<BONDS>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       115
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<OTHER-SE>                                  104937
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                221250
<SALES>                                     457831
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            457831
<CGS>                                       377814
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               377814
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            2011
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              23298
<INCOME-TAX>                                  8620
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          14678
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                 14678
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                 1.28
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 1.25
        

</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of the Estate of Charles H. Campbell, Deceased. Johnsie B. Burnham, as Administratrix de Bonis Non of the Estate of Charles H. Campbell, Deceased, Appellant. Dudley Dupignac et al., Respondents.

Submitted February 23, 1943;

decided March 4, 1943.

Motion to amend the remittitur or in the alternative for reargument denied with ten dollars costs and necessary printing disbursements. (See 289 N. Y. 509.)
**Exhibit 24****POWER OF ATTORNEY**          Each of the undersigned officers and/or directors of Tween Brands, Inc., a Delawarecorporation (the “Company”), hereby appoints Michael W. Rayden and Paul C. Carbone as his or hertrue and lawful attorneys-in-fact, or either of them individually with power to act without theother, as his or her true and lawful attorney-in-fact, in his or her name and on his or her behalf,and in any and all capacities stated below, to sign and to cause to be filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended February3, 2007, and any and all amendments thereto, hereby granting unto said attorneys, and to each ofthem, full power and authority to do and perform in the name and on behalf of the undersigned, inany and all such capacities, every act and thing whatsoever necessary to be done in and about thepremises as fully as each of the undersigned could or might do in person, hereby granting to eachsuch attorney full power of substitution and revocation, and hereby ratifying all that any suchattorney or his substitute may do by virtue hereof.          IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Power of Attorney in counterpartsif necessary, effective as of March 23, 2007.                 *Signature*                               *Title*   /s/ Michael W. Rayden Chairman of the Board of Directors and     Michael W. Rayden Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)       /s/ Paul C. Carbone Senior Vice President of Finance     Paul C. Carbone (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)       /s/ Kenneth T. Stevens Director, President, Chief Operating Officer, Secretary and     Kenneth T. Stevens Treasurer       /s/ Elizabeth M. Eveillard  Director     Elizabeth M. Eveillard         /s/ Nancy J. Kramer Director     Nancy J. Kramer         /s/ David A. Krinsky Director     David A. Krinsky         /s/ Philip E. Mallott Director     Philip E. Mallott         /s/ Fredric M. Roberts Director     Fredric M. Roberts         /s/ Kenneth J. Strottman Director     Kenneth J. Strottman  
80
#### In the Matter of the City of New York Relative to Acquiring Title to Real Property Required for the Extension of Ward’s Island Sewage Treatment Works in the Borough of Manhattan. Almerindo Portfolio, as Treasurer of the City of New York, Appellant. Charles H. Jokes et al., as Executors of Mary E. Jones, Deceased, Respondents.

Submitted February 23, 1943;

decided March 4, 1943.

*William C. Chanler, Corporation Counsel (Julius Isaacs, Leo Brown*and *William A. Marks*of counsel), for motion.

*Harry B. Chambers*and *Harry H. Chambers*opposed.

Motion dismissed with ten dollars costs and necessary printing disbursements on the ground that the order does not finally determine the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution.
EXHIBIT 23.2

NOTICE REGARDING CONSENT OF ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP

Section 11(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "Securities Act"), provides that if any part of a registration statement (at the time such
part becomes effective) contains an untrue statement of a material fact or omits a material fact required to be stated therein or necessary to make the statements therein not misleading, any person
acquiring a security pursuant to that registration statement (unless it is proved that at the time of such acquisition such person knew of such untruth or omission) may sue, among others, every
accountant who has consented to be named as having prepared or certified any part of the registration statement, or as having prepared or certified any report or valuation that is used in connection
with the registration statement, with respect to the statement in such registration statement, report or valuation which purports to have been prepared or certified by the accountant.

This
Form 10-K is incorporated by reference into our Registration Statements on Form S-8 with file numbers 333-84411,
333-39904, 333-59282, 333-71470, and 333-91794 (collectively, the "Registration Statements"). For purposes of determining any liability under the
Securities Act with respect to the Registration Statements, the filing of our Form 10-K is deemed to be a new registration statement for each Registration Statement.

On
May 3, 2002, we dismissed Arthur Andersen LLP ("Andersen") as our independent auditor and appointed PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP to replace Andersen. In response to our attempts
to obtain Andersen's consent to the incorporation by reference of Andersen's audit report in our registration statements, Andersen has informed us that its policy is not to provide such consent when
Andersen no longer employs the engagement partner or manager for the requesting company. Both the engagement partner and manager for the Liberate audit are no longer with Andersen. As a result, we
have been unable to obtain Andersen's written consent to the incorporation by reference into the Registration Statements of its audit report with respect to our financial statements as of
May 31, 2001 and 2000 and for the years then ended. Under these circumstances, Rule 437a under the Securities Act permits us to file this Form 10-K without a written
consent from Andersen. As a result, however, Andersen will not have any liability under Section 11(a) of the Securities Act for any untrue statements of a material fact contained in the
financial statements audited by Andersen or any omissions of a material fact required to be stated therein. Accordingly, you would be unable to assert a claim against Andersen under
Section 11(a) of the Securities Act for any purchases of securities under (a) the Registration Statements (except for our Form S-8 with file number
333-91794) made on or after the date of this Form 10-K, or (b) under our Form S-8 with file number 333-91794, as of its effective
date, July 2, 2002.

---

QuickLinks
#### Dexter PALMER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Cecelia REYNOLDS, Warden at Lee Correctional Institution, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 16-7471

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 18, 2017

Decided: June 5, 2017

Dexter Palmer, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Deputy Attorney General, Alphonso Simon, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. . . .

*126PER CURIAM:

Dexter Palmer seeks, to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2258(c)(1)(A) (2012). A certificate of ap-pealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120. S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Palmer has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.

*DISMISSED*
#### In the Matter of Celia Nires, as General Guardian of Eugene Nires et al., Infants, Appellant. Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States et al., Respondent.

Submitted April 5, 1943;

decided April 15, 1943.

Motion for reargument denied, with ten dollars costs and necessary printing disbursements. (See 290 N. Y. 78.)
**Exhibit 32.B**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 

OF QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-QSB 

OF PINNACLE DATA SYSTEMS, INC. 

FOR THE QUARTERENDED JUNE 26, 2004 

 

The undersigned is the Chief Financial Officer of PinnacleData Systems, Inc. (the “Issuer”). This Certification is made pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. This Certification accompanies the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Issuer for the quarterly period ended June26, 2004. 

 

I, Michael R. Sayre, certify that the Quarterly Report on Form10-QSB for the period ended June 26, 2004 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that information contained in the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer. 

 

This certification is executed as of August 13, 2004.
EXHIBIT 10.49
 MOVE, INC.
 Amendment to the Executive Retention and Severance Agreement
with Errol Samuelson
 Errol Samuelson
       Diminution of Responsibilities




---



##### 



Code Section 409A
  vesting
  (i)
    
    if the payment or distribution is payable in a lump sum,
your right to receive payment or distribution of such non-exempt deferred
compensation will be
 - 2 -




---



##### 



delayed until the earlier of your death or the first day of the seventh
month following your separation from service; and
 (ii)
    
    if the payment or distribution is payable over time, the
amount of such non-exempt deferred compensation that would otherwise be
payable during the six-month period immediately following your separation
from service will be accumulated and your right to receive payment or
distribution of such accumulated amount will be delayed until the earlier of
your death or the first day of the seventh month following your separation
from service, whereupon the accumulated amount will be paid or distributed
to you on such date and the normal payment or distribution schedule for any
remaining payments or distributions will resume.
    MOVE, INC.By:
    
    /s/ W. Michael LongEXECUTIVE/s/ Errol SamuelsonErrol Samuelson
 - 3 -