alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

JAIME VICENTE CABALLERO, a.k.a.

Jaime Vicente Caballe Aguilar,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 13-10555

D.C. No. 3:13-cr-00318-RS

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

Richard Seeborg, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted August 13, 2014** 

Before: SCHROEDER, THOMAS, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

Jaime Vicente Caballero appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges the 24-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for

reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction

FILED

AUG 18 2014

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Caballero contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to

address his argument that the illegal reentry guideline, U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2, lacks a

sound empirical or policy basis, and by failing to appreciate its discretion under

Kimbrough v. United States, 552 U.S. 85 (2007), to vary downward from the

applicable Guidelines range on policy grounds. Contrary to Caballero’s

contention, we review for plain error because he did not raise these objections in

the district court. See United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 &

n.3 (9th Cir. 2010). We find none. The record reflects that the district court

considered Caballero’s sentencing memorandum, which contained his Kimbroughbased challenges to the Guideline. Caballero has not shown a reasonable

probability that he would have received a different sentence had the district court

explicitly addressed his Kimbrough arguments. See United States v. Dallman, 533

F.3d 755, 762 (9th Cir. 2008). 

Caballero also maintains that, although the district court credited his

mitigating arguments regarding his cultural assimilation and rehabilitation, his

sentence is nevertheless substantively unreasonable. The district court did not

abuse its discretion in imposing Caballero’s sentence. See Gall v. United States,

552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). Caballero’s sentence 17 months below the bottom of the

2 13-10555
Guidelines range is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)

sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including the need to deter

and to reflect the seriousness of the offense. See id.

The court has not relied on the Statement of Reasons, and we deny the

motion to strike.

AFFIRMED.

3 13-10555
#### Sivatharan NATKUNANATHAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT; Redmond K. Barnes, individually and as clerk, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 15-56769

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 11, 2017 *

Filed April 24, 2017

Sivatharan Natkunanathan, Pro Se

Before: GOULD, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Accordingly, appellant’s request for oral argument, set forth in his opening brief, is denied.

MEMORANDUM **

Sivatharan Natkunanathan appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing his petition for a writ of mandamus to compel the Clerk of the United States Supreme Court to file his petitions. We have jurisdiction of this appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. *Brady v. United States,*211 F.3d 499, 502 (9th Cir. 2000). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed the petition because Natkunanathan has failed to set forth any basis for subject matter jurisdiction over this petition. *See Leite v. Crane Co.,*749 F.3d 1117, 1121 (9th Cir. 2014) (to invoke a federal court’s subject matter jurisdiction, a plaintiff needs to provide a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court’s jurisdiction); *Poulos v. Caesars World, Inc.,*379 F.3d 654, 662 (9th Cir. 2004) (there is no jurisdiction where a claim “appear[s] to be immaterial and made solely for the purpose of obtaining jurisdiction” or is “wholly insubstantial and frivolous” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).

The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Natkunanathan’s complaint without leave to amend because amendment would be futile. *See Chodos v. West Publ’g Co.,*292 F.3d 992, 1003 (9th Cir. 2001) (standard of review); *Chappel v. Lab. Corp. of Am.,*232 F.3d 719, 725-26 (9th Cir. 2000) (“A district court acts within its discretion to deny leave to amend when amendment would be futile[.]”).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Natkunanathan’s motion for reconsideration because Nat-kunanathan faded to establish any of the requirements for reconsideration. *See Sch. Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah Cnty., Or. v. ACandS, Inc.,*5 F.3d 1255, 1262-63 (9th Cir. 1993) 1263 (standard of review and grounds for reconsideration under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e)).

Natkunanathan’s motion for an alternative claim for relief (Docket Entry No. 13) and motion for reconsideration (Docket Entry No. 21) are denied.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
#### In the Matter of the Estate of Eleanor S. Conolly, Deceased. Gladys Hart, as General Guardian of Eleanor S. Hart, an Infant, et al., Appellants; Glenn L. Buck, as Special Guardian of Eleanor S. Hart, Respondent.

Submitted October 4, 1943;

decided October 14, 1943.

*660
      *Arthur VD. Chamberlain*for motion for leave to appeal; for motion for certificate that constitutional question is involved and in opposition to motion to dismiss appeal.

*Glenn L. Buck*for motion to dismiss appeal and in opposition to motion for leave to appeal and motion for certificate of constitutional question.

Motion for leave to appeal and for a stay denied, with ten dollars costs.

Motion to dismiss appeal taken as of right granted and appeal dismissed.

Motion for certificate that a constitutional question is involved denied.
#### Longino *v.*Equitable Life Assurance Society.

Jenkins, Justice.

A policy of health and accident insurance contained these stipulations: '“This policy is issued for the term of 6 months to commence on the 8th day of November, 1921, beginning and ending at 12 o’clock noon, standard time, of the place where the insured resides. This policy may be renewed by payment of the aforesaid premium in *254advance from term to term of 6 months each, provided the insured shall not have attained the age of 60.” “A grace of 31 days, subject to an interest charge at the rate of 5 per cent, per annum, will be granted for the payment of every premium after the first. If the premium and interest thereon is tendered during such period, it will be accepted without evidence of insurability, and the policy shall thereupon be in as full force and effect as if the premium had been paid when due. Except as herein expressly provided, the payment of any premium shall not maintain this policy in force beyond the date when the succeeding premium becomes payable.” A premium plus interest was tendered two days after the expiration of the grace period provided by the policy, and was refused by the insurer. Some months thereafter, all unpaid premiums with interest were tendered to the insurer, together with certain proof offered by the insured named in the policy as to his then insurability. This also was refused. The insured brought this his bill for specific performance, praying that, the insurer be required to accept the prejmiums tendered, that the policy be declared renewed, and that the insured be reinstated in good standing. *Held,*that under the terms of the insurance contract the punctual payment of the required premiums was of the essence of the agreement, constituting a condition precedent to the continuance 'in force of the policy. Since the petition showed a lapse in the payment of premiums, with a consequent forfeiture of the policy, the court did not err in dismissing the action on demurrer. *Newman*v. *Benefit Association of Railway Employees,*173 *Ga.*881, 883 (2) (162 S. E. 122); *The Prætorians*v. *Cowart, 50 Ga. App.*124 (177 S. E. 89). *Rome Industrial Insurance Co.*v. *Eidson,*142 *Ga.*253 (82 S. E. 641), was a case where the insured proceeded to revive the policy, not in derogation of the terms of the agreement, but in strict accordance with the rights and privileges expressly conferred by the policy itself;

No. 13310.

May 15, 1940.

*Thomas D. McLemore,*for plaintiff.

*Dudley Coolc, MacDougald, Trouiman <S¡ Arlciurighl,*and *W. II. Schroder Jr.,*for defendant.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concu/r.*
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6730 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 6730

   To rescind amounts made available for the Department of Commerce 
 Nonrecurring Expenses Fund by the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023, 
                        and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           December 12, 2023

   Mr. Roy (for himself, Mr. Schweikert, Mr. Duncan, Mr. Perry, Mr. 
   Norman, Mr. Bishop of North Carolina, Mr. Ogles, Mr. Donalds, Mr. 
Emmer, and Mr. Reschenthaler) introduced the following bill; which was 
 referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to 
 the Committees on the Budget, Financial Services, Transportation and 
  Infrastructure, Science, Space, and Technology, Natural Resources, 
Oversight and Accountability, Foreign Affairs, 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 rescind amounts made available for the Department of Commerce 
 Nonrecurring Expenses Fund by the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023, 
                        and for other purposes.

    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 ``Eliminate Congressional Slush Funds 
Act''.

SEC. 2. RESCISSION OF AMOUNTS APPROPRIATED FOR DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 
              NONRECURRING EXPENSES FUND.

    (a) Rescission.--The total amount of unobligated funds made 
available by section 101(e) of the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 
(Public Law 118-5) for the Department of Commerce Nonrecurring Expenses 
Fund are hereby permanently rescinded.
    (b) Classification of Budgetary Effects.--The budgetary effects of 
subsection (a) shall not count for purposes of section 251 of the 
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 or allocation 
pursuant to section 302(a) or 302(b) of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974.
                                 <all>
```
ex10.1

  
 Exhibit 10.1
 

 REGEN BIO PHARMA INC.
 A wholly owned subsidiary of Bio matrix Scientific Group, Inc.
 

 

 May 16, 2012
 

 Dr. David James Graham White
 The Schulic School of Medicine
 University of Western Ontario
 The Siebens Drake Centre 
 1400 Western Road
 London Ontario
 Canada N6G 2V4
 

 Dear Dr. White
 

 This letter is a follow up to our previous discussion about the Scientific Advisory Board for Regen BioPharma, Inc (a wholly owned subsidiary of Bio Matrix Scientific Group, Inc.).
 

 The function of the Scientific Advisory Board is to review research directions that Regen BioPharma, Inc.  may undertake, determining those projects which may lead to future developments/advancements in the field of stem cell therapy. Other areas may be pursued as well, with advice from this advisory board.
 

 You will receive 200,000 shares of Bio Matrix Common Stock as consideration for participating in telephonic calls/conference calls and serving on Regen BioPharma, Inc.’s Scientific Advisory Board. The frequency and timing of such calls will be established on a mutually agreeable basis. 
 

 It is anticipated that members of the Scientific Advisory Board will potentially serve as primary research consultants to the Company as such projects are undertaken. Compensation for such projects will be either at the rate of $500 per hour or negotiated separately on a case-by-case basis between the Company and the researcher.
 

 Thank You for your consideration
 

 /s/ David R. Koos
 David R. Koos
 Chairman and CEO
  
 
 
 P.S.: Please sign this letter in your acceptance and fax back to me at 619-330-2328. Any usage of your name in any press releases will be submitted to you for review and comment before being released to the public.
 

 /s/ Dr. David James Graham White
 Dr. David James Graham White
 (date: 5/20/2012)
II 

Calendar No. 572 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 6750 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 4, 2024 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

NOVEMBER 20, 2024 

Reported by Mr. PETERS, without amendment 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 501 Mercer Street Southwest in Wilson, North 

Carolina, as the ‘‘Milton F. Fitch, Sr. Post Office Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. MILTON F. FITCH, SR. POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

4 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

5 Postal Service located at 501 Mercer Street Southwest in 

6 Wilson, North Carolina, shall be known and designated 

7 as the ‘‘Milton F. Fitch, Sr. Post Office Building’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 6750 RS

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg2 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

3 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

4 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Milton F. Fitch, Sr. 

5 Post Office Building’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB

kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
Calendar No. 572 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 6750 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostF. Fitch, Sr. Post Office Building’’. west in Wilson, North Carolina, as the ‘‘Milton al Service located at 501 Mercer Street SouthNOVEMBER 20, 2024 

Reported without amendment 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
#### WATKINS et al v. THE STATE.

Appeal from Gaudalupe county.

*Bail Bond*— Oftense *Named.*— The appellant was committed by the examining court upon a charge of “theft of property of value over twenty dollars” — the condition in the bail bond named the offense simply as “theft.” Held; there is no variance and the bond is valid.

*Judgment Nisi*— A judgment *nisi*must state that the same will be made final unless good cause be shown at the next term of the court why the defendant did not appear.

Reversed and remanded.

White, P. J.
# EUR-Lex - 32001D0201 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 32001D0201

**2001/201/EC: Commission Decision of 21 February 2001 on amending the list of areas in the United Kingdom eligible for Objective 2 of the Structural Funds in the period 2000 to 2006 (notified under document number C(2001) 415) **

*
Official Journal L 078 , 16/03/2001 P. 0001 - 0041 *

Commission Decision

of 21 February 2001

on amending the list of areas in the United Kingdom eligible for Objective 2 of the Structural Funds in the period 2000 to 2006

(notified under document number C(2001) 415)

(Only the English text is authentic)

(2001/201/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds(1), and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 4(4) thereof,

After consulting the Committee on the Development and Conversion of Regions, the Committee on Agricultural Structures and Rural Development and the Committee on Structures for Fisheries and Aquaculture,

Whereas:

(1) A list of areas eligible for Objective 2 was established by Commission Decision 2000/290/EC(2) for the 2000 to 2006 programming period.

(2) A technical error involving the names of the eligible Objective 2 areas in the region of Norfolk appeared in the Decision of 30 March 2000,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The list of areas eligible for Objective 2 in the period 2000 to 2006, as established by Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 is amended for the city of Great Yarmouth belonging to the NUTS III region of Norfolk. The amendment is the following:

For "Magdalen West" read "Gorleston".

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Done at Brussels, 21 February 2001.

For the Commission

Michel Barnier

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999, p. 1.

(2) OJ L 1999, 19.4.2000, p. 27.

ANNEX

AREAS ELIGIBLE UNDER OBJECTIVE 2 OF THE STRUCTURAL FUNDS IN THE UNITED KINGDOM

(2000 to 2006)

>TABLE>
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18
- 7329

METKEL ALANA , Petitioner

- Appellant ,

v. HAROLD W. CLARKE, Dir. of Va. DOC , Respondent

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Norfolk

. Raymond A. Jackson , District Judge. ( 2:18

- cv - 00205

- RAJ

- RJK )

Submitted : December 12, 2019 Decided: December 23, 2019

Before WYNN and RICHARDSON , Circuit Judges , and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. Metkel Alana, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Metkel Alana seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recomme ndation to dismiss Alana’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition as successive and unauthorized

. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012); Jones v. Braxton , 392
F .3d 683, 688 (4th Cir. 2004). A certificate of appealability 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 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (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. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Alana 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 cont entions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
# EUR-Lex - 32001D0087 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 32001D0087

**2001/87/EC: Council Decision of 8 December 2000 on the signing, on behalf of the European Community, of the United Nations Convention against transnational organised crime and its Protocols on combating trafficking in persons, especially women and children, and the smuggling of migrants by land, air and sea **

*
Official Journal L 030 , 01/02/2001 P. 0044 - 0044 *

Council Decision

of 8 December 2000

on the signing, on behalf of the European Community, of the United Nations Convention against transnational organised crime and its Protocols on combating trafficking in persons, especially women and children, and the smuggling of migrants by land, air and sea

(2001/87/EC)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Articles 47, 62(2)(a), 63 first subparagraph (3)(b), and 95 read in conjunction with the first subparagraph of Article 300(2) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,

Whereas:

(1) The elements of the Convention and the two Protocols thereto which are subject to Community competence were negotiated by the Commission, with the approval of the Council, on behalf of the Community.

(2) The Council also instructed the Commission to negotiate the accession of the Community to the international agreements in question.

(3) Negotiations were successfully concluded and the resulting instruments will be open for signing by the States and, within their areas of competence, by regional organisations for economic integration in Palermo from 12 to 15 December 2000 and thereafter at the United Nations headquarters for a period of two years.

(4) The Member States having stated that they will sign the instruments as soon as they are open for signing in Palermo, the European Community should also be able to sign,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Sole Article

1. The President of the Council is authorised to designate the persons who are empowered, on behalf of the Community, to sign the Convention against transnational organised crime and the Protocols thereto on combating trafficking in persons, especially women and children, and the smuggling of migrants by land, air and sea.

2. The text of the Convention and its additional Protocols, which were adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution No 25 of 15 November 2000, will be published in the Official Journal of the European Communities upon the accession of the Community.

Done at Brussels, 8 December 2000.

For the Council

The President

H. Védrine