alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Willie Lamark WATERS, a/k/a Boom Boom, a/k/a Bang ’em up, a/k/a Mark, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-7344

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: January 30, 2018

Decided: February 2, 2018

Willie Lamark Waters, Appellant Pro Se. Darryl James Mitchell, Alan Mark Salsbury, Assistant United States Attorneys, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before MOTZ and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Willie Lamark Waters appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for a sentence reduction filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) and Amendment 782 to the *U.S. Sentencing Guidelines.*We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *United States v. Waters,*No. 2:07-cr-00022-AWA-FBS-1 (E.D. Va. Sept. 22, 2017). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED*
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6968

KENNETH FRAZIER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus ALTON BASKERVILLE, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CA-01-000-7) Submitted: October 4, 2001 Decided: October 11, 2001 Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenneth Frazier, Appellant Pro Se. Eugene Paul Murphy, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Kenneth Frazier seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 2001). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistratejudge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Frazier v. Baskerville , No. CA-01-000-7 (W.D. Va. May 31, 2001). We dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Kenny Arloth IGNACIO-FRANCISCO, Defendant-Appellant

No. 17-40363 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed December 7, 2017

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

Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, H. Michael Sokolow, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant

Before WIENER, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Kenny Arloth Ignacio-Francisco appeals his guilty plea conviction for importing 500 grams or more of methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952(a)(1) and 960(a)(1), (b)(1). Ignacio-Francisco argues that the factual basis was insufficient to support his guilty plea conviction because the Government failed to meet its obligation to prove that he knew the type and quantity of drug involved in his offense.

As Ignacio-Francisco concedes, his argument is foreclosed by *United States v. Betancourt,*586 F.3d 303, 308-09 (5th Cir. 2009), which held that *Flores-Figueroa v. United States,*556 U.S. 646, 129 S.Ct. 1886, 173 L.Ed.2d 853 (2009), did not overturn *United States v. Gamez-Gonzalez,*319 F.3d 695 (5th Cir. 2003), and that the Government is not required to prove knowledge of drug type and quantity as an element of a drug offense.

Accordingly, Ignacio-Francisco’s motion for summary disposition is GRANTED, and 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.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

RICHARD EDWARD WEBER,

Petitioner

v.

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 29 WM 2019

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 1st day of August , 2019, the Petition for Leave to File Petition for

Allowance of Appeal Nunc Pro Tunc is DENIED.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-41105

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JOSE URENA-NAVARRO,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:14-CR-786-1

Before JOLLY, GRAVES, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Jose Urena-Navarro raises 

an argument that is foreclosed by United States v. Martinez-Lugo, 782 F.3d 

198, 204-05 (5th Cir. 2015), petition for cert. filed (June 19, 2015) (No. 14-

10355). In Martinez-Lugo, 782 F.3d at 204-05, we held that an enhancement 

under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(i) for a prior conviction of a drug trafficking 

 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

August 18, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 14-41105 Document: 00513158613 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/18/2015
No. 14-41105

2

offense is warranted regardless whether the conviction for the prior offense 

required proof of remuneration or commercial activity.

Urena-Navarro also raises an argument that is foreclosed by United 

States v. Rodriguez-Escareno, 700 F.3d 751, 753-54 (5th Cir. 2012), which held 

that the sentence enhancement provided for in § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(i) applies to a 

conviction for the federal crime of conspiracy to commit a federal drug 

trafficking offense

Accordingly, the motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, the 

alternative motion for an extension of time to file a brief is DENIED, and the 

judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

 Case: 14-41105 Document: 00513158613 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/18/2015
-----~---0-~-- ·--------

~) 

Maurice Ceasar, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Civil Action No. 

Carnigie Institute/Theatre et a!., 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Defendants. 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

FILED 

JUN 1 1 2012 

Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy 

Courts for the District of Columbia 

12 0959 

This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs prose complaint and application to proceed 

in forma pauperis. The Court will grant plaintiffs application and dismiss the complaint for lack 

of subject matter jurisdiction. 

The subject matter jurisdiction of the federal district courts is limited and is set forth 

generally at 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1332. Under those statutes, federal jurisdiction is available 

only when a "federal question" is presented or the parties are of diverse citizenship and the 

amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. A party seeking relief in the district court must at least 

plead facts that bring the suit within the court's jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). Failure to 

plead such facts warrants dismissal of the action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3). 

Plaintiff is an inmate at the District of Columbia Jail. He sues a private entity in the 

District of Columbia, its receptionist whom he does not name, and eight unnamed contract 

painters purportedly under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 "for Deprivation-Criminal Assault With Reckless 

Intents, Assaults to Cause Bodily Harm (Also) Violation of Due Process of Law, Abuse of 

Authority." Compl. at 1. Plaintiff seeks equitable relief and $500,000 in damages. !d. at 18. 
The complaint does not present a federal question because § 1983 applies only to "person[ s] who 

[act], under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory 

or the District of Columbia," which is not pleaded here. 1 The complaint does not assert or plead 

facts reflecting diversity jurisdiction. A separate Order of dismissal accompanies this 

Memorandum Opinion. 

Date: May _JJ_, 2012 

United States District Judge 

1 Judicial notice is taken of the fact that the address plaintiff has listed for the defendants 

is that of the Carnegie Institution for Science, which is not a governmental entity. See http:// 

carnegiescience.edu. 

2
III

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 257

To designate June 15, 1996, as ‘‘National Race for the Cure Day’’.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 4, 1996

Mr. FORD (for himself, Mr. BAUCUS, Mr. BIDEN, Mr. BINGAMAN, Mrs.

BOXER, Mr. BRADLEY, Mr. BRYAN, Mr. BUMPERS, Mr. COATS, Mr.

COHEN, Mr. CRAIG, Mr. DASCHLE, Mr. DEWINE, Mr. DODD, Mr. DOMENICI, Mr. EXON, Mr. FRIST, Mr. GRAMS, Mr. GRASSLEY, Mr. HEFLIN,

Mr. HELMS, Mr. HOLLINGS, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. INOUYE, Mrs. KASSEBAUM, Mr. KEMPTHORNE, Mr. LAUTENBERG, Mr. LEAHY, Mr. LEVIN,

Mr. LUGAR, Mr. MACK, Mr. MCCONNELL, Mr. MURKOWSKI, Mrs. MURRAY, Mr. NUNN, Mr. PRESSLER, Mr. PRYOR, Mr. REID, Mr. ROBB, Mr.

SARBANES, Mr. SIMON, Mr. SMITH, Mr. SPECTER, Mr. THOMAS, Mr.

THURMOND, Mr. WARNER, Mr. WELLSTONE, Mr. WYDEN, Mr. KERRY of

Massachusetts, Mr. GRAMM, Mrs. HUTCHISON, Ms. SNOWE, Mr. AKAKA,

Mr. LIEBERMAN, Ms. MIKULSKI, Ms. MOSELEY-BRAUN, Mr. ROCKEFELLER, Mr. PELL, Mr. JOHNSTON, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. SIMPSON, Mrs.

FEINSTEIN, Mr. COVERDELL, Mr. KOHL, Mr. MCCAIN, Mr. BREAUX, Mr.

LOTT, and Mr. MOYNIHAN) submitted the following resolution; which was

referred to the Committee on Judiciary

JUNE 5, 1996

Committee discharged, considered and agreed to

RESOLUTION

To designate June 15, 1996, as ‘‘National Race for the

Cure Day’’.

Whereas breast cancer strikes an estimated 184,000 women

and 1,000 men in the United States annually;
2

•SRES 257 ATS

Whereas breast cancer will kill 44,300 women in the United

States alone this year;

Whereas breast cancer is the leading cause of death for

women between the ages of 35 and 54;

Whereas death rates resulting from breast cancer could be

substantially decreased if women were informed about the

risks of contracting the cancer and if they received mammograms on a regular basis;

Whereas the Race for the Cure is dedicated to eradicating

breast cancer through providing funding for research,

education, treatment, and screenings for low-income

women;

Whereas throughout the year, almost 340,000 participants in

65 cities across the United States (including the firsttime host cities of Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Cheyenne,

Sacramento, Battle Creek, Baton Rouge, and Louisville)

will join together in Races for the Cure to demonstrate

their commitment to fighting breast cancer;

Whereas the National Race for the Cure in Washington,

D.C., is the largest 5 kilometer race in the country, with

over 35,000 walkers, runners, and in-line skaters expected to participate this year; and

Whereas the Seventh National Race for the Cure is to be held

on Saturday, June 15, 1996, in Washington, D.C.: Now,

therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the Senate designates Saturday, June

2 15, 1996, as ‘‘National Race for the Cure Day’’. The

3 President is authorized and requested to issue a proclama-
3

•SRES 257 ATS

1 tion calling upon the people of the United States to ob2 serve the day with appropriate programs and activities.

Æ
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

Hoeorrhle Herry ILeO%‘ uhelrnen 

S*t8 Basrd of Control 

henin, T8ufa 

Door sir1 

9, 19&l, askfda 

lowleg pueatiaer 

h Lo&nlatura, Roaua 0h0rirr or Ony ooene\f1e 

th8 arr1eor reorillng mm0 aall 

o ountoby the porroe named theredesi$netod tW ‘end plaoo shal.2 hnto 

urn of 6aib onrruit betom t&o Cbuetr 
,
III

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. RES. 71

A resolution designating the chairmen of certain Senate committees for the

One Hundred Fourth Congress.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 24 (legislative day, JANUARY 10), 1995

Mr. KEMPTHORNE (for Mr. DOLE) submitted the following resolution; which

was considered and agreed to

RESOLUTION

A resolution designating the chairmen of certain Senate

committees for the One Hundred Fourth Congress.

1 Resolved, That the following Senators are designated

2 as the chair of the following committees for the One Hun3 dred Fourth Congress, or until their successors are cho4 sen:

5 COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET: Mr. Domenici, chair6 man.

7 COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS: Mr. Simpson,

8 chairman.

9 COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS: Mr. McCain, chair10 man.
2

SRES 71 ATS

1 SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE: Mr. Spec2 ter, chairman.

Æ
#### UNITED STATES of America v. Frederick H. BANKS, Appellant

No. 17-2874

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

Submitted for Possible Summary Action Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 27.4 and I.O.P. 10.6 November 30, 2017

(Opinion filed: December 5, 2017)

Rebecca R. Haywood, Esq., Office of United States Attorney, Pittsburgh, PA, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Frederick H. Banks, Pro Se

Before: AMBRO, RESTREPO and NYGAARD, Circuit Judges

OPINION *

PER CURIAM

Frederick Banks appeals the District Court’s order denying his motion for the appointment of counsel. For the reasons below, we will summarily affirm the District Court’s order.

In 2004, Banks was convicted of mail fraud, criminal copyright infringement, uttering and possession of a counterfeit or forged security, and witness tampering. See United States v. Vampire Nation, 451 F.3d 189, 192 (3d Cir. 2006). His sentence, including a period of supervised release, expired in May 2015. See United States v. Banks, 612 Fed.Appx. 643, 643 (3d Cir. Aug. 19, 2015) (per curiam). In August 2017, Banks filed a motion to appoint counsel in his closed criminal case. Banks asserted that the District Court, in another ongoing criminal case against Banks, had declared that he was incompetent. Thus, Banks argued, he was entitled to the appointment of counsel pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(c)(2) (providing for appointment of guardian to protect incompetent person). The District Court denied the motion, and Banks filed a notice of appeal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. See Isidor Paiewonsky Assoc. v. Sharp Props., Inc., 998 F.2d 145, 149-50 (3d Cir. 1993) (post-judgment orders are final and immediately appealable).

The District Court did not err in denying Banks’s motion. The criminal proceedings at issue here were completed years ago, and Banks has finished serving his *71sentence. He has no active challenge to this criminal conviction that has reached a stage where the appointment of counsel would be necessary. Nor does the finding of incompetency by the District Court in Banks’s active criminal case, where he is represented by counsel, entitle him to the appointment of counsel to challenge closed criminal cases. In any event, to the extent that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure apply to a closed criminal proceeding, Rule 17(c)(2) addresses the appointment of a *guardian,*not an attorney.

For the above reasons, we will summarily affirm the District Court’s order.

*

 This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent.
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

 
 

EXHIBIT 10.2    
  


 
 

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS    
  


        We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in this Registration Statement (No. 333-65454) on Form F-3 of
Petróleos de Venezuela, S.A. and PDVSA Finance Ltd. of our report dated March 20, 2000 relating to the financial statements of PDVSA Finance Ltd., for the year
ended December 31, 1999, which appears in PDVSA Finance Ltd.'s Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2001. 


      



Espiñeira,
Sheldon y Asociados

(a member firm of PricewaterhouseCoopers) 


/s/
Carlos Hugo Odremán

Carlos Hugo Odremán 


CPC
463

Caracas, Venezuela

June 13, 2002 









QuickLinks



EXHIBIT 10.2


CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS
III

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 278

To authorize testimony, production of documents, and representation of

Senate employee in State of Florida v. Kathleen Bush

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 12, 1996

Mr. LOTT (for himself and Mr. DASCHLE) submitted the following resolution;

which was considered and agreed to

RESOLUTION

To authorize testimony, production of documents, and representation of Senate employee in State of Florida v.

Kathleen Bush

Whereas, in the case of State of Florida v. Kathleen Bush,

Case No. 96–6912 CF10(A), pending in the Circuit

Court for Broward County, Florida, testimony and document production has been requested from Mary Chiles,

an employee on the staff of Senator Bob Graham;

Whereas, pursuant to sections 703(a) and 704(a)(2) of the

Ethics in Government Act of 1978, 2 U.S.C. §§ 288b(a)

and 288c(a)(2), the Senate may direct its counsel to represent employees of the Senate with respect to any subpoena, order, or request for testimony or documents relating to their official responsibilities;
2

SRES 278 ATS

Whereas, by the privileges of the Senate of the United States

and Rule XI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, no evidence under the control or in the possession of the Senate may, by the judicial process, be taken from such control or possession but by permission of the Senate; and

Whereas, when it appears that evidence under the control or

in the possession of the Senate may promote the administration of justice, the Senate will take such action as will

promote the ends of justice consistently with the privileges of the Senate: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That Mary Chiles, and any other employee

2 from whom testimony may be required, are authorized to

3 testify and to produce documents in the case of State of

4 Florida v. Kathleen Bush, except concerning matters for

5 which a privilege should be asserted.

6 SEC. 2. That the Senate Legal Counsel is authorized

7 to represent Mary Chiles, and any other employee from

8 whom testimony or document production may be required,

9 in connection with State of Florida v. Kathleen Bush.

Æ
# Official Journal C 22/2007

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 22 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5031 January 2007 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 22

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5031 January 2007

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Resolutions, recommendations, guidelines and opinions |
| | OPINIONS |
| | Commission |
| 2007/C 022/01 | Commission Opinion of 30 January 2007 concerning the modified plan for the disposal of radioactive waste from the Centraco Plant in France, in accordance with Article 37 of the Euratom Treaty | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

I   Resolutions, recommendations, guidelines and opinions

OPINIONS

Commission

2007/C 022/01

Commission Opinion of 30 January 2007 concerning the modified plan for the disposal of radioactive waste from the Centraco Plant in France, in accordance with Article 37 of the Euratom Treaty

1

---

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES |
| | Commission |
| 2007/C 022/02 | Euro exchange rates | 2 |
| | NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES |
| | Commission |
| 2007/C 022/03 | Winding-up proceedings — Decision to open winding-up proceedings in respect of Marina Mutual Insurance Association Limited High 5746 of 2006 (Publication made in accordance with Article 14 of Directive 2001/17/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 March 2001 on the reorganisation and winding-up of insurance undertakings) | 3 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES

Commission

2007/C 022/02

Euro exchange rates

2

NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES

Commission

2007/C 022/03

Winding-up proceedings — Decision to open winding-up proceedings in respect of Marina Mutual Insurance Association Limited High 5746 of 2006 (Publication made in accordance with Article 14 of Directive 2001/17/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 March 2001 on the reorganisation and winding-up of insurance undertakings)

(Publication made in accordance with Article 14 of Directive 2001/17/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 March 2001 on the reorganisation and winding-up of insurance undertakings)

3

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
EXHIBIT 32.1
 
 
 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 Bridgeline Software, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Thomas L. Massie, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:
 
 (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
 
 (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the consolidated financial condition of the Company as of the dates presented and result of operations of the Company for the periods presented.
 
 
 Date:       December 29, 2010

/s/ Thomas L. MassieName:
Thomas L. MassieTitle:
President and Chief Executive Officer

(Principal Executive Officer)
 
 This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.