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

No. 16-30103

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted November 14, 2017 Pasadena, California

Filed December 18, 2017

Bryan Schroder, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Jo Ann Farrington, Office of the-U.S. Attorney, Anchorage, AK, Gregory Victor Davis, Attorney, Elissa Hart-Mahan, S. Robert Lyons, Attorney, DOJ—U.S. Department of Justice, Tax Division/Appellate Section, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff-Appellee

D. Randall Ensminger, Ensminger Law Offices, Lincoln, CA, for Defendant-Appellant

Before: KOZINSKI, HAWKINS, and PARKER,* Circuit Judges.

*

 The Honorable Barrington D. Parker, United States Circuit Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM **

The District Court correctly denied Brandner’s motion to suppress the testimony of witness Joseph Saranello. The record established that Saranello was not an attorney, that it would hot have *442been reasonable for Brandner to believe that Saranello was an attorney, and, consequently, that no attorney-client relationship existed. The District Court also correctly concluded that, even if the attorney-client privilege applied, the privilege was overcome by the crime-fraud exception because there was “reasonable cause to believe that the attorney’s services were utilized in furtherance of the ongoing unlawful scheme.” *In re Grand Jury Proceedings,*87 F.3d 377, 381 (9th Cir. 1996) (citation and quotation marks omitted).

We see no merit in Brandner’s argument that the District Court should have dismissed the indictment because Saranel-lo purportedly perjured himself at the suppression hearing. The District Court correctly concluded .that Saranello’s testimony was not actually false and that the government did not knowingly present false testimony.

Further, we see no merit in Brandner’s contention that the District Court erred in computing the applicable sentencing guidelines or imposed a substantively unreasonable sentence. The District Court correctly concluded that Brandner did not intend to return the funds he'took to Central America and that he had moved them out of the United States in an attempt to conceal them from his wife and the Alaska court in which his divorce proceeding was pending. The District Court’s ensuing guidelines calculations were correct.

Nor was Brandner’s sentence substantively unreasonable. The District Court properly considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors. Although the District Court calculated his guidelines range to be 87 to 108 months, the District Court sentenced Brandner to 48 months of imprisonment, a substantial downward variance.

We have considered Brandner’s other arguments pertaining to, *inter alia,*jury instructions and the denial of a lengthy continuance of the second trial due to his first trial counsel’s unavailability and find them either not preserved or meritless.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3,
# Official Journal L 315/2016

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 315 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 5923 November 2016 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 315

English edition

Legislation

Volume 5923 November 2016

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2043 of 22 November 2016 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables | 1 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2043 of 22 November 2016 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

1

| 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.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6297

JAMES GREGORY STARKIE, Petitioner - Appellant, versus TOM C. MARTIN, Warden, Respondent - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-97-637-5-H) Submitted: July 22, 1998 Decided: August 6, 1998 Before ERVIN, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Gregory Starkie, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: James Gregory Starkie seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Starkie v. Martin , No. CA-97- 637-5-H (E.D.N.C. Jan. 15, 1998). Starkie’s motion for appointment of counsel is denied. 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
#### Clarence A. BRANCH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 17-2292

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: February 22, 2018

Decided: February 26, 2018

Clarence Branch, Appellant Pro Se.

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

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Clarence A. Branch seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his complaint. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.

When the United States or its officer or agency is a party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than 60 days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement.” *Bowles v. Russell,*551 U.S. 205, 214, 127 S.Ct. 2360, 168 L.Ed.2d 96 (2007).

The district court’s order was entered on the docket on June 2, 2014. The notice of appeal was filed on November 3, 2017. Because Branch failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma*310terials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED*
EXHIBIT 32
                                                                     ----------

                CERTIFICTION 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 TVC Telecom  Incorporated (the Company)  Quarterly Report
on Form  10-QSB  for the  period  ending  September  30,  2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Harley
L. Rollins,  Chief Executive Officer 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 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, as amended; 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:  November 14, 2003            By:  /s/ Harley L. Rollins
                                         ---------------------------------------
                                         Harley L. Rollins President,
                                         Chief   Executive   Office   and  Chief
                                         Financial Officer (principal  executive
                                         officer  and  principal  financial  and
                                         accounting officer) and Director
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Tony Tong, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of PacificNet Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does 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, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent
fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant`s board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant`s ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls over
financial reporting.


Date: May 22, 2006                          /s/ TONY TONG
                                            --------------------
                                            Tony Tong
                                            Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
                                            (Principal Executive Officer)
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 23.2

                         INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


   We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Amendment No. 2 to
Registration Statement No. 333-96981 of BJ Services Company on Form S-3/A of
our report dated November 14, 2001, appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K
of BJ Services Company for the year ended September 30, 2001, and to the
reference to us under the heading "Experts" in the Prospectus, which is part of
this Registration Statement.


DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Houston, Texas

October 16, 2002
No. 11-1262.

#### White, Warden *v.*Rice.

C. A. 6th Cir. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis*granted. Certiorari denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                         435,856
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               41,603,447
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              94,919,879
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        60,086
<OTHER-SE>                                  38,519,148
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                94,919,879
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             8,277,773
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,881,150
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               293,270
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,054,909
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,048,444
<INCOME-TAX>                                   436,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            612,444
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 3,199,758
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .10
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 133 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  2d Session

                             H. J. RES. 133

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 1999, and 
                          for other purposes.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
105th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. J. RES. 133

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 1999, and 
                          for other purposes.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That section 106(c) of Public 
Law 105-240 is amended by striking ``October 9, 1998'' and inserting in 
lieu thereof ``October 12, 1998''.

            Passed the House of Representatives October 9, 1998.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
# Official Journal L 172/2019

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 172 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 6226 June 2019 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 172

English edition

Legislation

Volume 6226 June 2019

---

| Contents | | I   Legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Regulation (EU) 2019/1022 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 establishing a multiannual plan for the fisheries exploiting demersal stocks in the western Mediterranean Sea and amending Regulation (EU) No 508/2014 | 1 |
| | | DIRECTIVES |
| | * | Directive (EU) 2019/1023 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on preventive restructuring frameworks, on discharge of debt and disqualifications, and on measures to increase the efficiency of procedures concerning restructuring, insolvency and discharge of debt, and amending Directive (EU) 2017/1132 (Directive on restructuring and insolvency) (
  1
  ) | 18 |
| | * | Directive (EU) 2019/1024 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on open data and the re-use of public sector information | 56 |

Contents

I   Legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Regulation (EU) 2019/1022 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 establishing a multiannual plan for the fisheries exploiting demersal stocks in the western Mediterranean Sea and amending Regulation (EU) No 508/2014

1

DIRECTIVES

*

Directive (EU) 2019/1023 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on preventive restructuring frameworks, on discharge of debt and disqualifications, and on measures to increase the efficiency of procedures concerning restructuring, insolvency and discharge of debt, and amending Directive (EU) 2017/1132 (Directive on restructuring and insolvency) (
  1
  )

1

18

*

Directive (EU) 2019/1024 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on open data and the re-use of public sector information

56

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

| 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.
#### Richard POLIDI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Wayne TRUAX, in Each of His Official and Individual Capacities; James O. Payne, in Each of His Official and Individual Capacities, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-1792

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: December 19, 2017

Decided: December 21, 2017

*798Richard Polidi, Appellant Pro Se.

Before SHEDD, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding 'precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Richard Polidi appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his civil complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *Polidi v. Truax,*No. 1:17-cv-00054-WO-LPA, 2017 WL 4465408 (M.D.N.C. June 1, 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*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF AGATE TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES FOR THE NINE
MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> US

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                         686,133
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  252,109
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (19,457)
<INVENTORY>                                    407,274
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,375,705
<PP&E>                                         303,210
<DEPRECIATION>                               (227,788)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,599,780
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          512,867
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        183
<COMMON>                                         1,293
<OTHER-SE>                                      56,011
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,599,780
<SALES>                                      1,084,807
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,084,807
<CGS>                                          339,152
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                (339,152)
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           (2,078,222)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (9,118)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,286,505)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (63,241)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,349,746)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,349,746)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.11)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.11)


</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21-7071

DARRELL L. GOSS, 

Petitioner - Appellant, 

v. 

CHARLES WILLIAMS, 

Respondent - Appellee. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at 

Charleston. Bruce H. Hendricks, District Judge. (2:18-cv-02938-BHH) 

Submitted: October 14, 2021 Decided: October 19, 2021

Before DIAZ and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge. 

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Darrell L. Goss, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2

PER CURIAM: 

Darrell L. Goss seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 

60(b) motion for relief from the court’s prior order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 

petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of 

appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A). See generally United States v. McRae, 793 F.3d 

392, 400 & n.7 (4th Cir. 2015). 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). 

When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by 

demonstrating that reasonable jurists could find the district court’s assessment of the 

constitutional claims debatable or wrong. See Buck v. Davis, 137 S. Ct. 759, 773-74 

(2017). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must 

demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable and that the petition 

states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 

134, 140-41 (2012) (citing Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)). 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Goss 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