alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 96 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 96

      Commending Chick Reynolds on the occasion of his retirement.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

               March 29 (legislative day, March 27), 1995

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
      Commending Chick Reynolds on the occasion of his retirement.

Whereas Chick Reynolds will retire from service to the United States Senate 
        after twenty years as a member of the staff of the Official Reporters of 
        Debates;
Whereas he has served the United States Senate with honor and distinction since 
        joining the staff of the Official Reporters of Debates on July 1, 1974;
Whereas his hard work and outstanding excellence as an official reporter 
        resulted in his appointment to the position of Chief Reporter on May 1, 
        1988;
Whereas Chick Reynolds, as Chief Reporter of the Congressional Record, has at 
        all times executed the important duties and responsibilities of his 
        office with great efficiency and diligence; and
Whereas Chick Reynolds has demonstrated loyal dedication to the United States 
        Senate as an institution and leaves a legacy of superior and 
        professional service: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the United States Senate expresses its deep 
appreciation and gratitude to Chick Reynolds for his years of faithful 
and exemplary service to his country and to the United States Senate.
    Sec. 2. The Secretary shall transmit a copy of this resolution to 
Chick Reynolds.
                                 <all>
```
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Mario Alberto CIRIZA-SAENZ, Defendant-Appellant

No. 17-50380 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed January 12, 2018

Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Mario Alberto Ciriza-Saenz, Pro Se

Before REAVLEY, PRADO, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Mario Alberto Ciriza-Saenz 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). Ciriza-Saenz 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 Cir. 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 the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-6608

MARK WILLIAM COLE,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

LONNIE M. SAUNDERS, Warden, Augusta

Correctional Center,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District

Judge. (CA-01-395-7)

Submitted: August 27, 2002 Decided: September 6, 2002

Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

David Bernard Hargett, HARGETT & WATSON, P.L.C., Richmond,

Virginia, for Appellant. Donald Eldridge Jeffrey, III, OFFICE OF

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Mark William Cole seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000).

We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and

conclude on the reasoning of the district court that Cole has not

made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.

See Cole v. Saunders, No. CA-01-395-7 (W.D. Va. Mar. 27, 2002).

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 the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### Seavon PIERCE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Donald J. TRUMP, President, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 16-16523

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted December 18, 2017 *

Filed December 28, 2017

Seavon Pierce, Pro Se

Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

*

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

*409MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Seavon Pierce appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 action for failure to pay the filing fee, after denying Pierce’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) on the basis that Pierce has three strikes under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. *Washington v. L.A. Cty. Sheriff’s Dep’t,*833 F.3d 1048, 1054 (9th Cir. 2016). We affirm.

The district court properly denied Pierce’s motion to proceed IFP because at the time Pierce filed the complaint, he had filed three actions that qualified as strikes, and he did not plausibly allege that he was “under imminent danger of serious physical injury” at the time he lodged the complaint. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); *Andrews v. Cervantes,*493 F.3d 1047, 1053, 1055-56 (9th Cir. 2007) (discussing the imminent danger exception to § 1915(g)).

We do not consider documents and facts not presented to the district court. *See United States v. Elias,*921 F.2d 870, 874 (9th Cir. 1990) (“Documents or facts not presented to the district court are not part of the record on appeal.”).

Pierce’s requests for judicial notice, set forth in his opening brief and Docket Entry Nos. 8 and 17, are denied.

AFFIRMED.

**

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

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 

The undersigned, Qiang Hao, the ChiefFinancial Officer and Treasurer of GOLDEN ELEPHANT GLASS TECHNOLOGY, INC. (the"Company"), DOES HEREBY CERTIFY that: 

1.     TheCompany’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2008(the "Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and 

2.    Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operation of the Company. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of theundersigned has executed this statement this 14th day of November, 2008. 

|   | /s/ Qiang Hao                                                                       |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Qiang Hao    Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer    (Principal Financial Officer) |

A signed original of this written statement required bySection 906 has been provided to Golden Elephant Glass Technology, Inc. and willbe retained by Golden Elephant Glass Technology, Inc. and furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. 

The forgoing certification is being furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission pursuant to § 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It isnot being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing ofthe Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of anygeneral incorporation language in such filing. 

----
No. 11-10882.

#### Patterson *v.*Clarke, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections.

C. A. 4th Cir. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis*denied, and certio-rari dismissed. See this Court’s Rule 39.8.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kurtis Lee WORTLEY, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-30273

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted December 5, 2017 * Seattle, Washington

Filed December 8, 2017

Zeno Benjamin Baucus, Leif Johnson, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the US Attorney, Billings, MT, for Plaintiff-Appel-lee

Joslyn Michelle Hunt, FDMT-Federal Defenders of Montana (Helena), Helena, MT, for Defendant-Appellant

Before: HAWKINS, McKEOWN, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Kurtis Lee Wortley (“Wortley”) challenges the 48-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea to being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

*650Wortley argues error in the application of a four-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) based on his use of a firearm in connection with another felony offense. Because this issue involves a straightforward application of the Guidelines and accompanying commentary to the facts, we review the district court’s application of the enhancement for abuse of discretion. *See United States v. Gasca-Ruiz,*852 F.3d 1167, 1170 (9th Cir. 2017) (en banc).

Here, Wortley pled guilty to being a felon in possession of a rifle during a several-week period in January 2016. Wortley admitted placing firearms in his vehicle in early January. Approximately one week later, Wortley fired a pistol through the window of a home where an individual was sleeping. Several days later, law enforcement discovered the rifle in Worthy's vehicle.

Worthy’s pistol firing, which he concedes constituted the separate felony of: fenses of criminal endangerment and criminal mischief, constituted the use of a firearm in another felony offense. *See United States v. Polanco,*93 F.3d 555, 565 (9th Cir. 1996). Therefore, application of the enhancepent under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) was proper if his use of the pistol was part of the “same course of conduct, common scheme, or plan” as his possession of the rifle. *Id.*app. n. 14(E)(ii).

There was no abuse of discretion in determining that the offenses were part of the “same course of conduct, common scheme, or plan,” given their timing and nature. *See*U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3 cmt. n.5(B) (appropriate factors include: the nature of the offenses, “the degree of similarity of the offenses, the regularity (repetitions) of the offenses, and the time interval between the offenses”).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 29 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. CON. RES. 29

 Providing for marking the celebration of Jerusalem on the occasion of 
                        its 3000th Anniversary.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

           September 29 (legislative day, September 25), 1995

   Mr. Dole submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
                        considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
 Providing for marking the celebration of Jerusalem on the occasion of 
                        its 3000th Anniversary.

Whereas the Senate wishes to mark the 3000th anniversary of King David's 
        establishment of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel;
Whereas Jerusalem, the City of David, has been the focal point of Jewish life;
Whereas Jerusalem, the City of Peace, has held a unique place and exerted a 
        unique influence on the moral development of Western Civilization; and
Whereas no other city on Earth is today the capital of the same country, 
        inhabited by the same people, speaking the same language, and 
        worshipping the same God as it was 3000 years ago: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
The architect is directed to make the necessary arrangements for a date 
in October to be mutually agreed upon by the Speaker of the House and 
the majority leader of the Senate, after consultation with the minority 
leaders of the two Houses, for the use of the Rotunda for a celebration 
of the founding of the city of Jerusalem.
                                 <all>
```
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Adrienne Gallien v. WELLS FARGO HOME MORTGAGE INC.,

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., Cristobal Nino, Individually and as

Executor of the Estate of Veronica Castillo Nino and Kathy Orsak

Appellate case number: 01

- 17

- 00385

- CV

Trial court case number: 2015

- 75452

Trial court: 157th District Court of Harris County

Appellant’s motion for extension of time to file a reply brief is dismissed as moot.

Appellant’s motion to exceed the word limit in her reply brief is denied. Appellant’s

reply brief is struck. Any redrafted reply brief shall comply with the word limit in Rule of

Appellate Procedure 9.4(i)(2)(C) and shall be filed within 20 days of the date of this order.

Absent extr aordinary circumstances, the court will not entertain any motion for extension of time

to file any redrafted reply brief.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Michael Massengale

Acting individually

Date: __ November 6, 2018

___
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Antonio OWENS, a/k/a Tonio, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-7498

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: January 30, 2018

Decided: February 2, 2018

Antonio Owens, Appellant Pro Se. Beth Drake, Acting United States Attorney, John C. Potterfield, Jane Barrett Taylor, Assistant United States Attorneys, William Camden Lewis, Columbia, South Carolina, Carrie Fisher Sherard, Leesa Washington, Assistant United States Attorneys, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee.

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

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Antonio Owens appeals the district • court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for sentence reduction based on Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. *See United States v. Owens,*No. 3:02-cr-00548-CMC-26 (D.S.C. Oct. 27, 2017); *see also*U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 1B1.10(b)(2) (2016) (providing that a district court may not impose a sentence below the bottom of an amended Guidelines range unless the original term of imprisonment was below the original Guidelines range as a result of a Government motion for a substantial assistance reduction). 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 in the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED*
#### LIL’ MAN IN THE BOAT, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. AUK TA SHAA DISCOVERY, LLC, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 16-17299

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted December 7, 2017 San Francisco, California

Filed January 11, 2018

Nevin Brownfield, David R. Ongaro, On-garo PC, San Francisco, CA, Lawrence Dale Murray, Murray & Associates, San Francisco, CA, J. T. Williams, San Francisco, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant

Howard Holderness, III, Katharine Malone, Greenberg Traurig, LLP, San Francisco, CA, Defendant-Appellee ■

Before: SCHROEDER and OWENS,* Circuit Judges, and ELLIS,** District Judge.

*

This case was submitted to a panel that included Judge Kozinski, who recently retired. Following Judge Kozinski's retirement, Judge Owens was drawn by lot to replace him. Ninth Circuit General Order 3.2.h, Judge Owens has read the briefs, reviewed the record, and listened to oral argument.

**

 The Honorable Sara Lee Ellis, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Illinois, sitting by designation,

MEMORANDUM ***

Lil’ Man In The Boat, Inc. (“Lil’ Man”) seeks remedies for breach of contract, claiming defendant, Auk Ta Shaa Discovery, LLC (“Auk Ta Shaa”), wrongfully refused to deliver the Queen of Seattle vessel after the parties had allegedly orally agreed to the terms of a purchase. The District Court dismissed the action. We affirm because, even if the District Court erred in dismissing for lack of personal jurisdiction, Lil’ Man failed to state a claim.

There are at least'two reasons Lil’ Man failed to state a claim. First, there was never any agreement as to the terms of the purchase. Although Lil’ Man contends it accepted a “counter offer” from Auk Ta Shaa’s broker, the broker’s response to Lil’ Man’s offer was not a counter offer, but rather a suggestion that Lil’ Man offer more money. Second, the alleged written and agreed-upon contractual terms did not contain the signature of Auk Ta Shaa or its broker as required by the statute of frauds. *See*Cal. Civ. Code § 1624.5(a) (requiring sale of personal property over $5,000 to-be in writing and signed by party against whom enforcement is sought); *Secrest v. Sec. Nat'l Mortg. Loan Tr. 2002-2,*167 Cal.App.4th 544, 84 Cal.Rptr.3d 275, 281 (2008) (“A contract coming within the statute of frauds is invalid unless it is memorialized by a writing subscribed by the party to be charged or by the party’s agent.”).

AFFIRMED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
# Official Journal L 157/2021

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 157 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 645 May 2021 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 157

English edition

Legislation

Volume 645 May 2021

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Regulation (EU) 2021/728 of the European Central Bank of 29 April 2021 amending Regulation (EU) No 795/2014 on oversight requirements for systemically important payment systems (ECB/2021/17) | 1 |
| | | DECISIONS |
| | * | Decision (EU) 2021/729 of the European Central Bank of 29 April 2021 amending Decision (EU) 2017/2098 on procedural aspects concerning the imposition of corrective measures for non-compliance with Regulation (EU) No 795/2014 (ECB/2021/18) | 5 |
| | * | Decision (EU) 2021/730 of the European Central Bank of 29 April 2021 amending Decision (EU) 2019/1349 on the procedure and conditions for exercise by a competent authority of certain powers in relation to oversight of systemically important payment systems (ECB/2021/19) | 7 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Regulation (EU) 2021/728 of the European Central Bank of 29 April 2021 amending Regulation (EU) No 795/2014 on oversight requirements for systemically important payment systems (ECB/2021/17)

1

DECISIONS

*

Decision (EU) 2021/729 of the European Central Bank of 29 April 2021 amending Decision (EU) 2017/2098 on procedural aspects concerning the imposition of corrective measures for non-compliance with Regulation (EU) No 795/2014 (ECB/2021/18)

5

*

Decision (EU) 2021/730 of the European Central Bank of 29 April 2021 amending Decision (EU) 2019/1349 on the procedure and conditions for exercise by a competent authority of certain powers in relation to oversight of systemically important payment systems (ECB/2021/19)

7

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
| (logo) WELLS FARGO | **Corporate Trust Services**

  MAC R1204-010  9062 Old Annapolis Road  Columbia, MD 21045  Tel: 410 884 2000  Fax: 410 715 2380 |
|--------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

Re: Annual Statement ofCompliance for Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities, Inc., CommercialMortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2014-C24

 

Per the Pooling and ServicingAgreement dated as of November 1, 2014 (the "Agreement"), theundersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., asCertificate Administrator ("Wells Fargo"), hereby certifies asfollows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2016 (the "ReportingPeriod"):

 

(a) A review of Wells Fargo'sactivities during the Reporting Period and of its performance under theAgreement has been made under such officer's supervision; and

 

(b) To the best of suchofficer's knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of itsobligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout theReporting Period.

 

 

February 27, 2017

 

 

/s/ Brian Smith

BRIAN SMITH

Vice President

 

 

| Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. | (logo) Together we’ll  go far |
|------------------------|-------------------------------------|