alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-4963

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus FELIPE AURELIO HERNANDEZ, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Harrisonburg. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge. (CR-02-30046) Submitted: August 30, 2004 Decided: September 17, 2004 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Frederick T. Heblich, Jr., FREDERICK T. HEBLICH, JR., P.C., Charlottesville, Virginia, for Appellant. John L. Brownlee, United States Attorney, William F. Gould, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlottesville, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Felipe Aurelio Hernandez pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of methamphetamine and was sentenced to 240 months of imprisonment. Hernandez raises two issues on appeal. He argues that the district court erred: (1) by denying his motion to withdraw his guilty plea and (2) in its determination of the amount of drugs for which he was held responsible at sentencing. For the reasons that follow, we affirm. We find that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Hernandez’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea. United States v. Ubakanma , 215 F.3d 421, 424 (4th Cir. 2000). The court properly conducted Hernandez’s plea hearing under Fed. R. Crim. P. 11. United States v. Puckett , 61 F.3d 1092, 1099 (4th Cir. 1995). In addition, the court carefully and correctly analyzed the motion, using the relevant factors articulated in this Court’s opinion in United States v. Moore , 931 F.2d 245, 248 (4th Cir. 1991). Accordingly, this claim is without merit. The court did not clearly err in determining the quantity of drugs attributable to Hernandez for sentencing purposes. United States v. Randall , 171 F.3d 195, 210 (4th Cir. 1999). The court’s drug quantity findings were supported by testimony at the sentencing hearing, United States v. Falesbork , 5 F.3d 715, 722 (4th Cir. 1993), and by amounts listed in the presentence report.- 3 - United States v. Love , 134 F.3d 595, 606 (4th Cir. 1998). Accordingly, this claim fails. Hernandez has moved for leave to file a supplemental brief addressing the impact of Blakely v. Washington , 124 S. Ct. 2531 (2004), on this case. The motion is both granted and deemed to be the supplemental brief. In light of our recent order in United States v. Hammoud , No. 03-4253, 2004 WL 1730309 (4th Cir. Aug. 2, 2004) (order), petition for cert. filed , __U.S.L.W.__, (U.S. Aug. 6, 2004) (No. 04-193), relief under Blakelyis denied. Accordingly, we affirm Hernandez’s conviction and sentence. 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.

AFFIRMED
The Honorable William R. Wilson, Jr., United States District Judge for the

1

Eastern District of Arkansas. 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 97-4324

___________

Johnnie L. Ruth, *

 *

Appellant, *

 * Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

 * Eastern District of Arkansas.

Togo D. West, Jr., Secretary of the *

Army, * [UNPUBLISHED]

 *

Appellee. *

___________

 Submitted: August 4, 1998

 Filed: August 10, 1998

___________

Before FAGG, BEAM, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Johnnie L. Ruth appeals the district court&s adverse grant of summary judgment 1

in this employment discrimination action. We have carefully reviewed the record and

the parties& briefs, and conclude that the district court did not err. Accordingly, we

affirm the judgment of the district court for the reasons set forth in its opinion. See 8th

Cir. R. 47B.
-2-

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR. 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 5 TH C IR. R. 47.5.4.

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-11060 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. LEONARD MILES Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:05-CR-109-4 Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Leonard Miles has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Miles has not filed a response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR. R. 42.2. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D June 19, 2008 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk
Exhibit 10.18


 


MG CLEANERS,
LLC


 


September 19, 2017


 


Cynthia Kay Griffith


PO Box 193


Gary, Texas 75643


 


		Re:	Amendment to Real Estate Lien Note dated October 15, 2010 



 


Dear Mrs. Griffith:


 


As you are aware, MG Cleaners, LLC and Stephen Lawrence Christian
issued a Real Estate Lien Note to you on October 15, 2010 in the initial principal amount of $450,000 (the “Note”).
Pursuant to our discussions, this letter agreement shall serve to amend and replace Section 2 of the Note as set forth below. Other
than the amendment to Section 2 set forth herein, all other sections of the Note shall remain in full force and effect.


 


Section 2 shall be amended in its entirety to read as follows:


 


“2. This note and vendor’s lien on the real estate is
further secured by a Deed of Trust of even date.”


 


If you agree with the amendment to Section 2 of the Note set forth
herein, please countersign below and return to us.


 


	 	Sincerely,
	 	 
	 	MG CLEANERS, LLC
	 	 
	 	By: 	 /s/ Stephen Christian
	 	Name:  Stephen Lawrence Christian
	 	Title:    President


 


	 	STEPHEN LAWRENCE CHRISTIAN
	 	 
	 	/s/ Stephen Christian
	 	Stephen Lawrence Christian, Individually


 


	AGREED TO AND ACCEPTED:	 
	 	 
	CYNTHIA KAY GRIFFITH	 
	 	 
	/s/ Cynthia Griffith	 
	Cynthia Kay Griffith	 


 




    1
#### Julia Mejia CERRITOS, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS, III, Attorney General of the United States, Respondent.

No. 17-1576

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: December 15, 2017

Filed: December 21, 2017

Pamela Ann Wingert, Wingert Law Office, Spirit Lake, IA, for Petitioner

Andrea Gevas, Carl H. McIntyre, OIL, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, for Respondent

Before WOLLMAN, LOKEN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Salvadoran Julia Mejia Cerritos sought asylum for herself and her two minor children based on her membership in a particular social group. Before the agency, she identified the asserted social group as “El Salvadorans who report criminal activity of the MS-13 gang,” “witnesses to gang violence who report the crime or retribution to the police,” or “El Salvadorans who witness gang criminal .activities and face retaliation.” An immigration judge (IJ) denied her request for asylum, and the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissed her appeal, Mejia Cerritos petitions for review, contending that one or more of her proposed groups qualify as a social group for purposes of asylum relief.

We conclude that substantial evidence supports the finding that Mejia Cerritos failed to show past persecution in El Salvador, or a well-founded fear of future persecution there, due to membership in a particular social group. *See*8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1)(B)(i). The proposed groups in which Mejia Cerritos and her children assert membership are not cognizable particular social groups for purposes of immigration relief. Mejia Cerritos did not demonstrate that Salvadoran society recognized any of her proposed groups as unique, and did not otherwise present evidence to support the conclusion that having witnessed and reported criminal gang activity would satisfy the particularity or social distinction factors the BIA considers when evaluating the cognizability of in a particular social group. *See Juarez Chilel v. Holder,*779 F.3d 850, 854-55 (8th Cir. 2015). The petition for review is therefore denied. *See*8th Cir. R. 47B.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
STATEMENTS OF FINANCIAL POSITION, INCOME AND CASH FLOWS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-01-2000
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0<F1>
<RECEIVABLES>                                  228,802
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0<F1>
<INVENTORY>                                          0<F1>
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                               0<F1>
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0<F1>
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 229,193
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                        213,025
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0<F1>
<PREFERRED>                                          0<F1>
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                       5,341
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   229,193
<SALES>                                              0<F1>
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 4,809
<CGS>                                                0<F1>
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0<F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    12
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0<F1>
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,773
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     24
<INCOME-TAX>                                         8
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0<F1>
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0<F1>
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0<F1>
<CHANGES>                                            0<F1>
<NET-INCOME>                                        16
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0<F1>
<FN>
<F1>NOT APPLICABLE
</FN>


</TABLE>
#### Marissa Dayrit Pascua SIGUA, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 15-73200

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted January 16, 2018 *

Filed January 19, 2018

Rodel E. Rodis, Counsel, Law Offices of Rodel E. Rodis, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner

Linda Y. Cheng, Trial Attorney, 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: REINHARDT, TROTT, 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).

MEMORANDUM **

Marissa Dayrit Pascua Sigua, a native and citizen of the Philippines, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s (“U”) decision denying her request for a continuance. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a continuance and review de novo questions of law. *Ahmed v. Holder,*569 F.3d 1009, 1012 (9th Cir. 2009). We deny the petition for review.

The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying Pascua Sigua’s request for a fifth continuance because she did not demonstrate good cause. *See*8 C.F.R. § 1003.29; *Ahmed,*569 F.3d at 1012 (factors considered in determining whether the denial of a continuance constitutes an abuse of discretion include the nature of the evidence excluded and the number of continuances previously granted).

Pascua Sigua has not shown that the IJ was biased, and her remaining due process claims fail for lack of prejudice. *See Lata v. INS,*204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error and substantial 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.
## Devany, Dennis

# (aSn From: carol czaja [nccoop@westelcom.com] 

### Sent:
. .. Monday, February 15, 2010 2:07 PM



## - ToC Dewny, Dennis 

### (OST) Subject: FW: Cape Air



### From: I\lorth Country Food Co-op [mailto:nccoop@westelcom.com] 

### Sent: Monday, February 15, 2010 2:05 PM 

## To: 'braln.swanson@dot.gov' 

### Subject: Cape Air
. To Whom It MayConcern, I would like to express my opposition to the proposed replacement ofCape Airwith Colgan Airline. A recent editorial by Andrew Schonbek touched a nerve, as I felt our county legislators' decision will not contribute to the continued success ofthe Clinton County Airport. I completely agree with Andrew Schonbek's editorial points ofCape Air'sflexibility, safety, and price. Expansion does not always have totranslate into larger planes, and casting offa proven company as Cape Air Simply on the basis ofa biased, ill-constructed survey does not necessarily equate to continued growth. Perhaps those responding to the survey would have felt differently ifthey had known about Colgan's Buffalo crash, which exposed that company's poor labor practices, unfortunately atthe cost ofmany lives. Iam encouragedthatthere may still be time to rethink this issue/ and respectfully urge you to do the same. Please keep Cape Air running! CarollCzaja, General Manager North Country Food Co-op

1
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose SOLIS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-15670 Non-Argument Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

(January 9, 2018)

Steven E. Butler, Adam W. Overstreet, Kenyen Ray Brown, George F. May, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Mobile, AL, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Jose Solis, Pro Se

Before WILLIAM PRYOR, JULIE CARNES and HULL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Andrew M. Jones, appointed counsel for Jose Solis in this direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant- and filed a brief pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Solis’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 35.1



AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE CORPORATION

ANNUAL COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE

PURSUANT TO SECTION 3.11(a) OF THE

SALE AND SERVICING AGREEMENT AND

ITEM 1123 OF REGULATION AB



I, Paul C. Honda, do
hereby certify that I am the Vice President and Assistant Secretary of American Honda Finance Corporation, a California corporation
(the "Company"), and further certify on behalf of the Company in its capacity as servicer (the "Servicer" and
"Sponsor") under the Sale and Servicing Agreement (the "Agreement") dated as of November 26, 2014 among the
Servicer and Sponsor, American Honda Receivables LLC, as Seller, and Honda Auto Receivables 2014-4 Owner Trust, as follows:



| | (i) | A review of the activities of the Servicer during the reporting period ended March 31, 2015, and of its performance under the
Agreement has been made under my supervision.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) | To the best of my knowledge and information, based upon such review, the Servicer has fulfilled
all its obligations under the Agreement throughout such period in all material respects.
| | ---- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set
my hand this 8thday of June, 2015.



| | /s/ Paul C. Honda                                   
| | ----------------------------------------------------
| | Paul C. Honda                                       
| | Vice President and Assistant Secretary              
| | (senior officer in charge of the servicing function)
III

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 66

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 13, 1997

Received

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Authorizing the use of the Capitol grounds for the sixteenth

annual National Peace Officers’ Memorial Service.

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring),
2

HCON 66 RDS

1 SECTION 1. USE OF CAPITOL GROUNDS FOR NATIONAL

2 PEACE OFFICERS’ MEMORIAL SERVICE.

3 The National Fraternal Order of Police and its auxil4 iary shall be permitted to sponsor a public event, the six5 teenth annual National Peace Officers’ Memorial Service,

6 on the Capitol grounds on May 15, 1997, or on such other

7 date as the Speaker of the House of Representatives and

8 the President pro tempore of the Senate may jointly des9 ignate, in order to honor the more than 117 law enforce10 ment officers who died in the line of duty during 1996.

11 SEC. 2. TERMS AND CONDITIONS.

12 (a) IN GENERAL.—The event authorized to be con13 ducted on the Capitol grounds under section 1 shall be

14 free of admission charge to the public and arranged not

15 to interfere with the needs of Congress, under conditions

16 to be prescribed by the Architect of the Capitol and the

17 Capitol Police Board.

18 (b) EXPENSES AND LIABILITIES.—The National

19 Fraternal Order of Police and its auxiliary shall assume

20 full responsibility for all expenses and liabilities incident

21 to all activities associated with the event.

22 SEC. 3. EVENT PREPARATIONS.

23 (a) STRUCTURES AND EQUIPMENT.—Subject to the

24 approval of the Architect of the Capitol, the National Fra25 ternal Order of Police and its auxiliary are authorized to

26 erect upon the Capitol grounds such stage, sound amplifi-
3

HCON 66 RDS

1 cation devices, and other related structures and equip2 ment, as may be required for the event authorized to be

3 conducted on the Capitol grounds under section 1.

4 (b) ADDITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS.—The Architect of

5 the Capitol and the Capitol Police Board are authorized

6 to make any such additional arrangements as may be re7 quired to carry out the event.

Passed the House of Representatives May 13, 1997.

Attest: ROBIN H. CARLE,

Clerk.
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 Quarterly Report of CPS Technologies Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q/A for the three month and six month periods ended July 2, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Grant C. Bennett, President and Treasurer 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 to the best of my knowledge:

1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(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.

Date:	September 15, 2011
/s/	Grant C. Bennett
Grant C. Bennett
President and Treasurer
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 60 (Tuesday, March 29, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 18010]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-06502]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission


Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural 
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP22-710-000.
    Applicants: Midwestern Gas Transmission Company.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate PAL Remove 
Twin Eagle RP3067 to be effective 4/22/2022.
    Filed Date: 3/22/22.
    Accession Number: 20220322-5009.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 4/4/22.

    Docket Numbers: RP22-711-000.
    Applicants: Viking Gas Transmission Company.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate PAL Remove 
World Fuel Services Feb 2022 to be effective 4/22/2022.
    Filed Date: 3/22/22.
    Accession Number: 20220322-5017.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 4/4/22.

    Any person desiring to protest in any the above proceedings must 
file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18 
CFR 385.211) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified 
comment date.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system 
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying 
the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing 
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying 
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 
(toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: March 22, 2022.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-06502 Filed 3-28-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P