alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Steven Lynn LONG, Petitioner-Appellant v. Lorie DAVIS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, Respondent-Appellee

No. 16-70010

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed December 12, 2017

Thomas Scott Smith, Sherman, TX, for Petitioner-Appellant

Matthew Dennis Ottoway, Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General, Postconviction Litigation Division, Austin, TX, for Respondent-Appellee

Before CLEMENT, ELROD, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

PER CURIAM: *

This court denied Steven Long’s application for a certificate of appealability in which he claimed that he is intellectually disabled and thus could not be executed. *Long v. Davis,*663 Fed.Appx. 361 (5th Cir. 2016). The Supreme Court granted certio-rari, vacated that judgment, and remanded this case to us for further consideration in light of *Moore v. Texas,*— U.S. -, 137 S.Ct. 1039, 197 L.Ed.2d 416 (2017). *Long v. Davis,*— U.S. -, 138 S.Ct. 72, 199 L.Ed.2d 2 (2017). We conclude that a review of the effect of the *Moore*decision on Long’s conviction and sentence should first be addressed by the district court.

Accordingly, we VACATE the judgment of the district court and REMAND this case to the district court for further proceedings in light of *Moore.*

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir, R. 47.5.4.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
 SECTION 906 OF THE
 SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 I, Patrick J. Goodman, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of CE Casecnan Water and Energy Company, Inc. (the Company), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of my knowledge:
 
 (1)
the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2004 (the Report) 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(2)
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company. 
 
 
 
 Date: August 3, 2004
 
 
 /s/ Patrick J. Goodman
 Patrick J. Goodman
 Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
 (chief financial officer)
III

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. CON. RES. 21

Directing that the ‘‘Portrait Monument’’ carved in the likeness of Lucretia

Mott, Susan B. Anthony, and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, now in the Crypt

of the Capitol, be restored to its original state and be placed in the

Capitol Rotunda.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 14 (legislative day, JULY 10), 1995

Mr. STEVENS (for himself, Mr. FORD, Mr. DOLE, Mr. DASCHLE, Mr. HATFIELD, Mr. PELL, Mr. HELMS, Mr. MOYNIHAN, Mrs. KASSEBAUM, Mrs.

HUTCHISON, Ms. MIKULSKI, and Mr. D’AMATO) submitted the following

concurrent resolution; which was ordered held at the desk until the close

of business July 17, 1995

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Directing that the ‘‘Portrait Monument’’ carved in the likeness of Lucretia Mott, Susan B. Anthony, and Elizabeth

Cady Stanton, now in the Crypt of the Capitol, be restored to its original state and be placed in the Capitol

Rotunda.

Whereas, in 1995, women of America are celebrating the

75th anniversary of their right to participate in our government through suffrage;

Whereas Lucretia Mott, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and Susan

B. Anthony were pioneers in the movement for women

suffrage and the pursuit of equal rights; and
2

•SCON 21 HDS

Whereas the relocation of the ‘‘Portrait Monument’’ to a

place of prominence and esteem in the Capitol Rotunda

would serve to honor and revere the contribution of thousands of women: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives

2 concurring), That the Architect of the Capitol shall restore

3 the ‘‘Portrait Monument’’ to its original state and place

4 it in the Rotunda of the United States Capitol.

Æ
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSIONWashington, D. C. 20549




FORM 10-K/A


(Admentment No.
1)




ANNUAL REPORT
PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934




Commission
file number 333-138561




SINO FIBRE COMMUNICATIONS, INC.




Nevada
            760616470(State or other jurisdiction of
      incorporation or organization)
            (IRS Employer Identification No.)




The Chrysler
Building 405 Lexington Avenue, 26 th Floor New York, New York 10174




+852-3101-7366






None





Common Stock,
$0.001 par value




YES [  ]    NO
[X]




YES [  ]   
NO [X]




YES
[X]    NO [  ]




[X]








[
 ] [
 ] [ 
] [X]




YES [
 ]    NO [X]




As of March 31, 2009,
the aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity was
$2,373,335.




As of
April 13, 2009, there were 39,555,585 shares of Common Stock outstanding.




---

EXPLANATORY
NOTE












---

SIGNATURES








SINO FIBRE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.

























---
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Rauf Abdul SALAM, a/k/a Pierre Demaro Banks, a/k/a Radio, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-7305

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: December 21, 2017

Decided: December 28, 2017

*207Rauf Abdul Salam, Appellant Pro Se. Ronald Andrew Bassford, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia; Daniel P. Bubar, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appel-lee.

Before WILKINSON and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Rauf Abdul Salam seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certifícate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). 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, 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 motion 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 Salam 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*
EXHIBIT 11

INNOVATIVE MEDICAL SERVICES
COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER COMMON SHARE
FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED OCTOBER 31, 1997 AND 1996



                                              For the Year Ended
                                                  October 31,
                                         ----------------------------
                                            1997             1996
                                         ----------------------------

Shares outstanding                           3,532,851        3,220,851 
                                            ==========       ========== 

Weighted average shares outstanding          3,532,851        1,821,792 
Stock Options                                  406,250           31,250 
Warrants                                     1,798,125        1,187,500 
                                            ----------       ---------- 
     Total weighted average
      shares outstanding                     5,737,226        3,040,542 
                                            ==========       ========== 


Net Income (Loss)                           $ (386,577)      $  (89,074)
                                            ==========       ========== 


Net Earnings (Loss) per share               $    (0.07)      $    (0.03)
                                            ==========       ==========
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 962 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

  1st Session
                                 S. 962

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To extend authorities under the Middle East Peace Facilitation Act of 
                      1994 until August 15, 1995.
    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITIES.

    Section 583 of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal 
Years 1994 and 1995 (Public Law 103-236) is amended by striking ``July 
1, 1995'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``August 15, 1995''.
            Passed the Senate June 23 (legislative day, June 19), 1995.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
104th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                 S. 962

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To extend authorities under the Middle East Peace Facilitation Act of 
                      1994 until August 15, 1995.
```
# CE2004065EN.01018001.xml

| 13.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 65/180 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 65/180

---

(2004/C 65 E/196)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2583/03

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(8 August 2003)

Subject:   Statute of European Schools

Subject:

Does the Commission believe that the UK Government contracts for UK teachers at the European Schools in Brussels are in conformity with Article 12 of the Statute of the European schools to which all Member States are signatory?

What is the Commission's view of the recent rulings of the UK Employment Tribunal in this regard?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(22 September 2003)

(22 September 2003)

As the Honourable Member knows, the European Schools are governed by a specific intergovernmental Convention, the ‘Convention defining the Statute of the European Schools’ a revised version of which entered into force on 1 October 2002. Teaching staff seconded to the schools are subject to the ‘Regulations for Members of the Seconded Staff of the European Schools’ which became applicable from 1 September 2000, but they remain employed by the authorities of the seconding Member State.

Article 12.4(a) of the European Schools' Convention provides that: ‘Staff shall retain promotion and retirement rights guaranteed by their national rules’ and Article 49.2(a) of the ‘Regulations’ stipulates that: ‘The competent national authorities shall pay the national emoluments to the member of staff and shall inform the Director of the amounts paid, specifying all the components taken into account for calculation purposes...’.

The United Kingdom, as the Honourable Member will know, pays a special ‘Threshold’ to teachers employed in England and Wales. In the view of British Department for Education and Skills (DFES), this is a recruitment and retention measure that is not relevant to teachers seconded to the European Schools. In the recent decision of the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT/0884/02) in the United Kingdom, the Tribunal had to interpret the employment contract between certain British teachers at the European Schools and their employer, the DFES. It concluded that, under that contract, the teachers were not entitled to certain additional incremental salary increases following their appointment to the European Schools. The EAT was not, however, asked to consider whether, thus interpreted, the employment contracts were actually compatible with Article 12.4(a) of the European Schools' Convention, cited above.

The Commission has asked its Legal Service to examine whether the terms of the UK contract are in accordance with Article 12.4(a) of the European Schools' Convention.

The Commission will ensure that this issue is appropriately followed up and will readily respond to any further enquiry from the Honourable Member when the legal analysis is available.

---
#### Shane BROOKS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Lisa WALSH, Assistant Warden of Programs and Grievance Co-ordinator; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-15571

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted November 15, 2017 *

Filed November 22, 2017

Shane Brooks, Pro Se

D. Randall Gilmer, Deputy Attorney General, AGNV — Office of the Nevada Attorney General (Las Vegas) Las Vegas, NV, for Defendants-Appellees

Before: CANBY, TROTT, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Shane Brooks, a Nevada state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 action alleging First Amendment free exercise and access-to-court claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. *Mendiola-Martinez v. Arpaio,*836 F.3d 1239, 1247 (9th Cir. 2016). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Brooks’ free exercise claim on the basis of qualified immunity because it would not have been clear to every reasonable official that it was unlawful to require Brooks to fill out a Faith Group Affiliation Declaration form in order to reinstate his participation in the Common Fare diet after Brooks’ voluntary withdrawal. *See Ashcroft v. al-Kidd,*563 U.S. 731, 741, 131 S.Ct. 2074, 179 L.Ed.2d 1149 (2011) (discussing qualified immunity and noting that the right is clearly established only if “every reasonable official would have understood that what he is doing violates that right.” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)); *see also Resnick v. Adams,*348 F.3d 763, 769-71 (9th Cir. 2003) (requiring approval of an application to provide a religious diet does not unduly burden a prisoner’s right to practice his religion).

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Brooks’ access-to-court claim for failure to exhaust administrative remedies because Brooks failed to raise a genuine dispute of material facts as to whether he properly exhausted his administrative remedies. *See Woodford v. Ngo,*548 U.S. 81, 90, 126 S.Ct. 2378, 165 L.Ed.2d 368 (2006) (“[PJroper exhaustion of administrative remedies ... means using all steps that the agency holds out, and doing so properly (so that the agency addresses the issues on the merits)” (emphasis, citation, and internal quotation marks omitted)).

We reject as without merit Brooks’ contention that the district court improperly considered defendants’ evidence in support of summary judgment.

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on appeal. *628*See Padgett v. Wright,*587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3,
•· 

•• , '· ,.. ., f •••••• 

ASSIGNMENT DOWNTOWN COUNCIL 

COMMUNICATIONS COUNCIL 

GREEN BUSINESS COUNCIL 

GOVER.NMEf'I:TAL I.SSl:J.ES COUNCIL 

.lf\IT.ERt-JATIONAL 'BUSLNESSCOUNCIL '. f •• ' • E . ; : I.··.:)'~ 

I}~ .''t"": . ... ~' ,_;' !!t /', I' :f ''/. ',1'•t;':\i ,·r:~ 

¥~:Al~haLey . . . ' r.· '· ,, '?tlice of Ayiation ~lYsis . . . . . . . . . .· . 1200'New;J.ersey Av~ •. ~E, W8~;310 :;:. _. ' · ·' ,;:~: .. · 1

, ~ ~~· ·' • •• • ·: 

Washin~C?Jl,-:0C,.t0590 . . ... ,.c,.> . .. · · , ,;_'-~'?., '~·· ~·. -~,'· ..,..., ... -•. -~:;t.: . I :~ ,; :·,r,··~, / . ... ~..,.._.,,.,., """"'~\~..., ~- . 

· ... ·Re: Small Co~unity AiJ:' ,S~ice. D~~lopment.P.~gram 

nR~~~,~q;t.~sTM2qt'~1).Q~~ ."·, . ·. . . . . · Sarasot~ Braoenton lhtern:attonal Airport (SRQ} 

l (' , ....... · 

Dear Ms. Ley: 

-~(' ' 

LEADERSHIP SARASOTA COUNTY 

MEMBERSHIP BENEFITS & EVENTS COUNCIL 

SMALL. BUSINESS COUNCIL 

YOUNG PROFESSIONALS GROUP 

WORKFORCE INNOVATION & TALENT DEVELOPMENT 

···: .. 

'.!.!.'.···· 

·~- .. J ... 

I am writing as President, The Greater Sarasota Chamber of Commerce, to express our strOng support for 

the above referenced grant application to the Small Community Air Service Development Program. The 

recent decision by Southwest Airlines to pull AirTran service from SRQ is a major blow to the air service 

and economic competitiveness of the entire region served by Sarasota Bradenton International Airport. 

AirTran accounted for over 360,000 passengers or nearly 30% of all passenger traffic at SRQ in 201 L 

- ·::~t.p·;·: .. ·· ~ I r·;·b.,. ": ·: ... ·. )'!: .. ,..... :· ~ ~- ~ ., .. .• : 

Sa.rasotfi J:lradenron~also suffers'froin' a lack' ofacce8s to a westbound airline gateway. 'This forces local 

consumers to dri~e to. other afl,:l~~s~'ihet;ebyinflicti?fJ~~omic damage on tb~ local economy. 

A 19~1:-Economic Impact Study completed as part of the SRQ Master Plan Update revealed that 57% of 

1U enplapements at .SRQ were.out of area visitors spending an average of $665.00 per visit. Using the 

CY. 20U AirTran pas$enger traffic, this equates to 102,600 visitors to the SRQ area. When combined 

·.vith the.-~00,000 passengers lost due to no westbound service~ t~is equates to a loss of over $105,000,0QO 

of direcfvisitor expenditures· annually. When the multiplier effect is factored in, it equates to a ·loss of 

. nearly $285#0.00,000 of economic impact and 2~600 jobs to the area. t,i _l:•l .1 

'The community is partnering with the airport to matchthe grant funds dollar for dollar on this critical 

'11tltter. Vve ask the Department consider the serious negative effects the recent approval provided to 

~")outhwest Airlines to acquire AirTran Airways has had on our community and approve the application 

i()r assistance. l11an.k you for your consideration. 

Sincerely, 

(~c: rhe Honorable Ray H. LaHood 

'ecretary of Transportation 

.~::iced States Department of Transportation 

.(10-New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

·vashingto~ DC 20590 

1945 Fruitville Road , Sarasota, FL 34236 941-955-8187 . Fax 941-366-5621 www.sarasotachamber.com
EXHIBIT 31.1

             CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13A-14(D)/15D-14(D)
                  UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

I, Anthony N. Renzi, certify that:
1. I have  reviewed  this  report  on Form  10-K and all  reports  on Form  10-D
   required to be filed in respect of the period  covered by this report on Form
   10-K of RALI Series 2006-QS18 Trust (the "Exchange Act periodic reports");
2. Based on my knowledge,  the Exchange Act periodic reports,  taken as a whole,
   do 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,  all  of  the  distribution,  servicing  and  other
   information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by
   this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;
4. I am responsible for reviewing the activities  performed by the servicers and
   based on my knowledge and the compliance  reviews  conducted in preparing the
   servicer  compliance  statements  required in this report  under Item 1123 of
   Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic  reports,
   the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreements
   in all material respects; and
5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance  with  servicing  criteria for
   asset-backed  securities and their related  attestation reports on assessment
   of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to
   be included in this report in accordance  with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and
   Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this
   report,  except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances
   of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report
   on Form 10-K.

   In giving the  certifications  above, I have reasonably relied on information
   provided  to  me  by  the  following   unaffiliated  parties:  HSBC  Mortgage
   Corporation  (USA),  National  City Mortgage Co.,  SunTrust  Mortgage,  Inc.,
   Wachovia Mortgage Corporation and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas.

Date:  March 26, 2007

By:   /s/ Anthony N. Renzi
Name:  Anthony N. Renzi
Title:    Managing Director
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 134 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 134

Expressing the Senate's gratitude to Sheila P. Burke for her service as 
                        Secretary of the Senate.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                June 15 (legislative day, June 5), 1995

    Mr. Dole (for himself and Mr. Daschle) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Expressing the Senate's gratitude to Sheila P. Burke for her service as 
                        Secretary of the Senate.
Whereas Sheila P. Burke faithfully served the Senate of the United States as 
        Secretary of the Senate from January 4, 1995, to June 8, 1995, and 
        discharged the difficult duties and responsibilities of that office with 
        unfailing devotion and a high degree of efficiency;
Whereas since May 26, 1977, Sheila P. Burke has ably and faithfully upheld the 
        high standards and traditions of the staff of the Senate of the United 
        States for a period that includes 10 Congresses, and she continues to 
        demonstrate outstanding dedication to duty as an employee of the Senate; 
        and
Whereas through her exceptional service and professional integrity as an officer 
        and employee of the Senate of the United States, Sheila P. Burke has 
        gained the esteem, confidence, and trust of her associates and the 
        Members of the Senate: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate recognizes the notable contributions of 
Sheila P. Burke to the Senate and to her country and expresses to her 
its appreciation and gratitude for her long, faithful, and continuing 
service.
    Sec. 2. The Secretary of the Senate shall transmit a copy of this 
resolution to Sheila P. Burke.
                                 <all>
```
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-11-00467-CR

Allen Lee Polk

v.

The State of Texas

§

§

§

§

§

From the 213th District Court

of Tarrant County (1226707D)

July 3, 2013

Per Curiam

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

there was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of 

the trial court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

PER CURIAM