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

No. 17-4407

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: November 20, 2017

Decided: November 28, 2017

Kimberly Dawn Palmer, Appellant Pro Se. Jill Westmoreland Rose, United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina; John Daren Pritchard, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before SHEDD, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

In December 2014, the district court sentenced Kimberly Dawn Palmer to 168 months’ imprisonment pursuant to her guilty plea to a drug-related offense. In May 2017, Palmer noted an appeal of the criminal judgment pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a) (2012). The district clerk failed *268to send a copy of Palmer’s notice of appeal to this court, as required under Fed. R. App. P. 3(d)(1). Instead, the district court denied relief on Palmer’s filing, noting that her appeal was untimely filed and that the appeal period is mandatory and jurisdictional.* In June 2017, Palmer filed a notice of appeal from the court’s order denying relief, which is now before us.

Because Palmer’s first notice of appeal was not properly docketed, we remand to the district court for the limited purpose of docketing Palmer’s May 2017 pleading as a notice of appeal of the December 2014 criminal judgment. The record, as supplemented, will then be returned to this court for further consideration.

*REMANDED*

*

 Although the appeal period in civil matters is mandatory and jurisdictional, the appeal period in criminal cases is a non-jurisdictional claims processing rule. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 4(a), (b); *Bowles v. Russell,*551 U.S. 205, 214, 127 S.Ct. 2360, 168 L.Ed.2d 96 (2007); *United States v. Urutyan,*564 F.3d 679, 685 (4th Cir. 2009). Moreover, the district court did not have the authority to dismiss a notice of appeal. *Camby v. Davis,*718 F.2d 198, 200 n.2 (4th Cir. 1983).
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Sean Lamont DUDLEY, a/k/a John D. Brown, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-7192

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: December 21, 2017

Decided: December 28, 2017

Sean Lamont Dudley, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Ashe-ville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

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

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Sean Lamont Dudley seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing Dud*212ley’s motion to vacate his criminal judgment as a successive and unauthorized 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate 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 Dudley 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 No. 32.1  Form 10-K Harcom Productions Inc. File No. 333-139685  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 Harcom Productions, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Shane Harwell, Chief Executive and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  (1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  (2)  the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.   Dated: March 31, 2009 /s/ Shane Harwell Shane Harwell Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer    A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Harcom Productions, Inc. and will be retained by Harcom Productions, Inc. and can be furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
III

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. RES. 100

To proclaim April 5, 1995, as National 4–H Day, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

APRIL 4 (legislative day, MARCH 27), 1995

Mrs. HUTCHISON (for herself and Mr. HEFLIN) submitted the following

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

APRIL 5, 1995

Committee discharged; considered and agreed to

RESOLUTION

To proclaim April 5, 1995, as National 4–H Day, and for

other purposes.

Whereas the Senate is proud to honor the National 4–H

Youth Development Program of the Cooperative State

Research, Education, and Extension Service for 85 years

of experience-based education to young people throughout

the United States;

Whereas this admirable Program seeks to provide a learning

experience for the whole child (including head, heart,

hands, and health) and help children of the United States

to acquire knowledge, develop life skills, and form attitudes to enable the children to become self-directed, productive, and contributing members of society;
2

•SRES 100 ATS

Whereas the 5,500,000 urban, suburban, and rural participants in the Program, ranging from 5 to 19 years of age,

hail from diverse ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds

and truly represent a cross-section of the United States;

Whereas the Program could not have achieved success without the service of the more than 65,000 volunteers who

have given generously of their time, talents, energies, and

resources; and

Whereas throughout the proud history of the Program, the

Program has developed positive role models for the youth

of the United States and (through its innovative and inspiring programs) continues to build character and to instill the values that have made the United States strong

and great: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the Senate—

2 (1) proclaims April 5, 1995, as National 4–H

3 Day;

4 (2) commends the 4–H Youth Development

5 Program and the many children and volunteers who

6 have made the Program a success; and

7 (3) requests the President to issue a proclama8 tion calling on the people of the United States to ob9 serve the day with appropriate ceremonies and

10 activities.

Æ
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 48 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        S.Con.Res.48
                                        Agreed to August 2, 1996        

                       One Hundred Fourth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
   the third day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-six

                          Concurrent Resolution

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That (a) the rotunda of the United States Capitol is hereby authorized 
to be used on January 20, 1997, by the Joint Congressional Committee on 
Inaugural Ceremonies (the ``Joint Committee'') in connection with the 
proceedings and ceremonies conducted for the inauguration of the 
President-elect and the Vice President-elect of the United States.
    (b) The Joint Committee is authorized to utilize appropriate 
equipment and the services of appropriate personnel of departments and 
agencies of the Federal Government, under arrangements between such 
Committee and the heads of such departments and agencies, in connection 
with such proceedings and ceremonies. The Joint Committee may accept 
gifts and donations of goods and services to carry out its 
responsibilities.
  Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.

  Attest:

                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.
```
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 731 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 731

To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide that the reduction by 
  waiver of retired pay due to receipt of compensation or pension not 
  apply to retired pay attributable to pay for extraordinary heroism.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

               April 27 (legislative day, April 24), 1995

  Mr. Chafee introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
             referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide that the reduction by 
  waiver of retired pay due to receipt of compensation or pension not 
  apply to retired pay attributable to pay for extraordinary heroism.

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

SECTION 1. EXCLUSION OF PAY FOR EXTRAORDINARY HEROISM FROM REQUIRED 
              REDUCTION IN RETIRED PAY AS PART OF RECEIPT OF 
              COMPENSATION OR PENSION.

    (a) Exclusion.--The first sentence of section 5305 of title 38, 
United States Code, is amended by inserting ``(other than pay for 
extraordinary heroism payable to the person under section 1402(f), 
1402a(f), 3991(a)(2), 6330(c)(3), or 8991(a)(2) of title 10)'' after 
``such person's retired or retirement pay''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act. No person shall 
be entitled to receive by reason of the amendment made by subsection 
(a) any benefits for any period before such date.
                                 <all>
```
#### Elton Javier RUGAMA, AKA Elton Rugama, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 16-70458

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted October 23, 2017 *

Filed November 3, 2017

Brian David Lerner, Law Offices of Brian D. Lerner, Long Beach, CA, for Petitioner

OIL, Kathleen Kelly Volkert, Trial Attorney, Anthony Cardozo Payne, Senior Litigation Counsel, DOJ—U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent

Before: LEAVY, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Elton Javier Rugama, a native and citizen of Nicaragua, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, and review de novo constitutional claims. *Mohammed v. Gonzales,*400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny the petition for review.

To the extent Rugama submitted noncumulative evidence of rehabilitation in support of his motion to reopen, the BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion where he did not establish that the evidence would likely have changed the outcome of his case. *See*8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a), (c); *Shin v. Mukasey,*547 F.3d 1019, 1025 (9th Cir. 2008) (a motion to open must show that “if proceedings were reopened, the new evidence would likely change the result in the case” (citation omitted)); *Fernandez v. Gonzales,*439 F.3d 592, 601-03 (9th Cir. 2006). We reject Ru-gama’s contention that the BIA mischarac-terized its previous October 1, 2015, decision.

Rugama’s contention that the BIA failed to consider relevant evidence is not supported by the record. *See Fernandez,*439 F.3d at 603 (petitioner did not overcome the presumption that the BIA did review the record); *Lata v. INS,*204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error and prejudice to prevail on a due process claim).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Gregg INOSHITA, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-15931

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted September 26, 2017 *

Filed September 29, 2017

Darren Ching, Assistant U.S. Attorney, DOJ—Office of the US Attorney, Honolulu, HI, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Peter C. Wolff, Jr., Federal Public Defender, FPDHI—Federal Public Defender’s Office (Honolulu), Honolulu, HI, for Defendant-Appellant

Before: SILVERMAN, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Gregg Inoshita appeals from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we dismiss.

Inoshita challenges his career offender sentence, contending that his prior convictions for bank robbery under 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) are not “crime[s] of violence” under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1(a) (2015). The government argues that this appeal is barred by a valid appeal waiver. We review de novo whether a defendant has waived his right to appeal. *See United States v. Harris,*628 F.3d 1203, 1205 (9th Cir. 2011). The terms of the appeal waiver in Inoshi-ta’s plea agreement unambiguously encompass the claims raised in this appeal. *See id.*at 1205-06. We reject as meritless Ino-shita’s arguments that his waiver is unenforceable. Accordingly, we dismiss pursuant to the valid waiver. *See id.*at 1207.

DISMISSED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 49 (Monday, March 14, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 14290]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-05314]



[[Page 14290]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration

[Docket No. DEA-982]


Bulk Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Application: Janssen 
Pharmaceuticals Inc.

AGENCY: Drug Enforcement Administration, Justice.

ACTION: Notice of application.

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

SUMMARY: Janssen Pharmaceuticals Inc., has applied to be registered as 
a bulk manufacturer of basic class(es) of controlled substance(s). 
Refer to Supplemental Information listed below for further drug 
information.

DATES: Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic class(es), 
and applicants therefore, may submit electronic comments on or 
objections to the issuance of the proposed registration on or before 
May 13, 2022. Such persons may also file a written request for a 
hearing on the application on or before May 13, 2022.

ADDRESSES: DEA requires that all comments be submitted electronically 
through the Federal eRulemaking Portal, which provides the ability to 
type short comments directly into the comment field on the web page or 
attach a file for lengthier comments. Please go to https://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions at that site for 
submitting comments. Upon submission of your comment, you will receive 
a Comment Tracking Number. Please be aware that submitted comments are 
not instantaneously available for public view on https://www.regulations.gov. If you have received a Comment Tracking Number, 
your comment has been successfully submitted and there is no need to 
resubmit the same comment.''

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33(a), this 
is notice that on December 10, 2021, Janssen Pharmaceuticals Inc., 1440 
Olympic Drive Athens, Georgia 30601-1645, applied to be registered as a 
bulk manufacturer of the following basic class(es) of controlled 
substance(s):

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Drug
          Controlled substance            code           Schedule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Methylphenidate........................    1724  II
Hydromorphone..........................    9150  II
Hydrocodone............................    9193  II
Oripavine..............................    9330  II
Thebaine...............................    9333  II
Tapentadol.............................    9780  II
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The company plans to manufacture the above-listed controlled 
substances in bulk for distribution to its customers. No other 
activities for these drug codes are authorized for this registration.

Matthew J. Strait,
Deputy Assistant Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2022-05314 Filed 3-11-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
#### IN RE: Corey LANE, Petitioner

No. 17-3677

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P. December 21, 2017

(Opinion filed January 8, 2018)

Corey Lane, Pro Se

Juliana C. Deangelis, Esq., Office of Attorney General of New Jersey, Appellate Division Central Appellate Research, Trenton, NJ, Benjamin H. Zieman, Esq., Office of Attorney General of New Jersey, Division of Law Tort Litigation and Judiciary, Trenton, NJ, for Defendant-Respondent

Before: AMBRO, RESTREPO and NYGAARD, Circuit Judges

OPINION *

PER CURIAM

Corey Lane filed a federal civil rights complaint against the State of New Jersey, raising claims related to a child welfare proceeding in state court. Currently pending in the District Court are: (1) Lane’s “demand for judgment” under Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(c), see ECF 40 (filed in May 2017); (2) a fully briefed motion under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b) to dismiss Lane’s amended complaint, see ECF 69-71 (briefing completed in October 2017); and (3) Lane’s motion under Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2) to further amend his complaint, see ECF 72 (filed in November 2017), to which New Jersey has not responded. In December 2017, Lane filed with this Court a petition for a writ of mandamus, requesting that we compel the District Court to immediately rule on both his “demand for judgment” and his motion to amend.1

Lane’s mandamus petition will be denied. As we have previously indicated to Lane in denying him mandamus relief, see In re Lane, 697 Fed.Appx. 120, 121 (3d Cir. 2017), while issuance of the writ may be warranted when adjudicatory delay by the District Court is so protracted as to amount to a failure to exercise jurisdiction, see Madden v. Myers, 102 F.3d 74, 79 (3d Cir. 1996), we are not yet faced with such delay in the proceedings below. Cf. id. (8 months of inaction on motion insufficient to compel mandamus relief). We remain confident that the District Court will, in due course, rule on the pending motions at issue.

*

 This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent.

1

. The Clerk of the District Court appears to have entered the “demand for judgment” on the docket as a motion seeking relief under Fed. R, Civ. P. 54(b). But Lane had invoked only the language of Rule 54(c) to support a request that the District Court grant him “Ha-beas Corpus Relief of enforcing my right to unsupervised visitation and unsupervised physical custody of my 4 minor children.” ECF 40, p. 4. While Lane’s mandamus petition indicates — contrary to the text of his Rule 54(c) motion — that he sought relief under Rule 54(b), this discrepancy is immaterial to our disposition. We note for Lane’s benefit, however, that Rule 54(c) merely “makes clear that a judgment should give the relief to which a party is entitled, regardless of whether it is legal or equitable or both.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 54 advisory committee's note to 1937 adoption. It "was meant to protect a plaintiff from clumsy pleading, which, through technical oversight, might deprive it of a deserved recovery.” USX Corp. v. Barnhart, 395 F.3d 161, 165 (3d Cir. 2004).
EXHIBIT 35.1



                         ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE


                      OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE OF THE SERVICER

In compliance with Section 4.04 (g) of the Indenture of Trust by and between
Nelnet Student Loan Trust 2006-3 and Zions First National Bank, as Trustee,
dated as of December 1, 2006, I, Terry J. Heimes, certify that:

        1.     A review of the activities of the Master Servicer and of its
               performance under the Master Servicing Agreement during the
               period from December 1, 2006 through December 31, 2006 has been
               made under my supervision; and

        2.     Based on my knowledge of such review, the Master Servicer has
               fulfilled in all material respects all its obligations under the
               Master Servicing Agreement during such period.

April 2, 2007


By:     /s/ TERRY J. HEIMES
        -----------------------------------
        Terry J. Heimes
        Chief Financial Officer,
        Treasurer,
        National Education Loan Network, Inc.