alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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 Local Rule 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 95-50080

_____________________

IN THE MATTER OF: INTELOGIC TRACE, INC.,

Debtor.

TEXAS COMPTROLLER OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

and TEXAS EMPLOYMENT COMMISSION,

Appellants,

versus

INTELOGIC TRACE, INC.,

Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

(CA-SA-94-893)

_________________________________________________________________

June 4, 1996

Before DUHÉ, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The appellants concede that their challenge to the bankruptcy

court order authorizing the debtor to pay, prior to plan

confirmation, employee claims exceeding the limits for priority

wage and benefit claims under 11 U.S.C. § 507(a)(3) and (4), is

moot. They assert, however, that we have jurisdiction to review

the order under the "capable of repetition, yet evading review"

exception to the mootness doctrine, because payment of the claims
- 2 -

at issue had been completed before an appeal of the order could be

litigated, and there is a reasonable expectation that the

appellants will be subjected to the same action again. See, e.g.,

Southern Pacific Terminal Co. v. ICC, 219 U.S. 498 (1911).

We do not reach whether this exception applies. The

appellants' proof of claim was disallowed as untimely, and they did

not appeal the disallowance. Accordingly, the appeal is

DISMISSED.
|                                                                   
|-------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                   
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)           
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                     
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                     
|View History:                                                      
|                                                                   
|Tennessee Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                   
|                                                                   
|Tennessee Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                   

|Year                                                                                                                              | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---
|2010                                                                                                                              | 41  | 38  | 42  | 41  | 43  | 41  | 43  | 43  | 42  | 44  | 43  | 45 
|2011                                                                                                                              | 42  | 37  | 43  | 42  | 44  | 42  | 44  | 44  | 43  | 45  | 45  | 46 
|2012                                                                                                                              | 43  | 39  | 42  | 41  | 42  | 40  | 43  | 43  | 41  | 43  | 42  | 43 
|2013                                                                                                                              | 41  | 37  | 41  | 40  | 41  | 40  | 42  | 42  | 40  | 42  | 41  | 42 
|2014                                                                                                                              | 31  | 28  | 31  | 31  | 32  | 31  | 33  | 33  | 32  | 33  | 32  | 33 
|                                                                                                                                 
|2015                                                                                                                              | 29  | 26  | 29  | 28  | 29  | 28  | 29  | 29  | 28  | 29  | 28  | 29 
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
|                                                                                          
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                          
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                            
|View History: Annual                                                                      
|View History: Annual                                                                      
|View History:                                                                             
|                                                                                          
|Tennessee Natural Gas % of Total Industrial Delivered for the Account of Others  (Percent)
|                                                                                          
|                                                                                          
|Tennessee Natural Gas % of Total Industrial Delivered for the Account of Others  (Percent)
|                                                                                          

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1980's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 37.6  
|1990's                                                                                                                            | 39.7   | 44.4   | 50.4   | 53.7   | 54.3   | 52.4   | 53.0   | 61.7   | 66.9   | 65.3  
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 61.5   | 63.8   | 64.0   | 60.1   | 59.5   | 57.6   | 61.1   | 61.8   | 60.1   | 61.8  
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 65.5   | 70.3   | 70.6   | 70.3   | 70.0   | 70.3   | 72.9   | 76.0   | 76.6   | 77.6  
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 78.2   | 76.7   | 75.6   |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
Exhibit 31.2


ASCENT SOLAR TECHNOLOGIES, INC.


CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Victor Lee, certify that:


1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Ascent Solar Technologies, 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; and


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.





April 27, 2018/s/ VICTOR LEEPresident and Chief Executive Officer and a Director(principal executive officer and principal financial and accounting officer)
|                                                                          
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                          
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                            
|View History: Annual                                                      
|View History: Annual                                                      
|View History:                                                             
|                                                                          
|Minnesota Natural Gas Supplemental Gas - Propane Air  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                          
|                                                                          
|Minnesota Natural Gas Supplemental Gas - Propane Air  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                          

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1980's                                                                                                                            | 48     | 106    | 337    | 1      | 3      | 11     | 2      | 1      | 385    | 315   
|1990's                                                                                                                            | 56     | 49     | 52     | 78     | 289    | 194    | 709    | 172    | 50     | 64    
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 101    | 118    | 13     | 42     | 71     | 154    | 13     | 54     | 46     | 47    
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 12     | 20     | 9      | 22     | 66     | 10     | 58     | 10     | 15     | 115   
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 12     | 29     | 22     |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION 

File Name: 18a0095n.06 

No. 17-3288 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

SYLVESTER COWAN 

 Petitioner-Appellant, 

v. 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Respondent-Appellee. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

ON APPEAL FROM THE 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT 

COURT FOR THE 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF 

OHIO 

BEFORE: BOGGS, BATCHELDER, and THAPAR, Circuit Judges. 

ALICE M. BATCHELDER, Circuit Judge. Sylvester Cowan appeals the district 

court’s dismissal of his collateral attack on his 2003 sentence for federal bank-robbery offenses. 

The sentencing court arrived at Cowan’s sentence after finding that both Cowan’s four instant 

offenses and at least two prior offenses qualified as “crimes of violence.” Cowan was adjudged 

a career offender under the career-offender provision of the then-mandatory Sentencing 

Guidelines. After having served nearly fourteen years of his sentence, Cowan challenges his 

sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 on the grounds that the Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v. 

United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015) renders his current sentence unlawful and entitles him to 

resentencing. 

As a threshold matter, 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f) requires that collateral attacks be timely. To 

satisfy this requirement, Cowan must have filed his claim within one year, running from, as 

relevant here, “the date on which the right asserted was initially recognized by the Supreme 
No. 17-3288 

Cowan v. United States 

-2- 

Court, if that right has been newly recognized by the Supreme Court and made retroactively 

applicable to cases on collateral review.” 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f)(3). 

Cowan filed his claim on June 9, 2016—within one year of the Supreme Court’s decision 

in Johnson. His motion for relief, however, remains untimely under § 2255(f)(3) because this 

circuit has explicitly held that Johnson did not recognize a right that applies to Cowan’s 

situation—a sentence under the pre-Booker Sentencing Guidelines. In Raybon v. United States, 

867 F.3d 625 (6th Cir. 2017), we held that a Johnson-based collateral attack of a pre-Booker

sentence was untimely “because the Supreme Court has not decided whether the residual clause 

of the mandatory Sentencing Guidelines is unconstitutionally vague.” Id. at 630-31 (citation and 

alteration omitted)). 

Cowan acknowledges Raybon but argues that it was wrongly decided. Whatever merits 

Cowan’s argument may have, it cannot prevail before this panel because “only the en banc 

process, a material intervening Supreme Court decision, or a relevant change to the Guidelines 

permits us to override binding circuit precedent.” United States v. Verwiebe, 874 F.3d 258, 262 

(6th Cir. 2017). None of these bases for deviating from binding circuit precedent is available 

here. See e.g., Gipson v. United States, No. 17-5333, 2018 WL 739382, at *1 (6th Cir. Feb. 7, 

2018). 

 Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.
#### COM. v. DEANGELO, D.

1976 MDA 2016

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

08/10/2017

CP-06-CR-0005383-2014 (Berks)

Reversed
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5, the Court has determined th a t

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. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 96-10571 Summary Calendar

_____________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MARIO MENDEZ, JR.,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas

(4:96-CV-108-A)

_________________________________________________________________
June 9, 1999

Before POLITZ, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Mario Mendez, Jr., federal prisoner # 24717-077, appeals the

denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. Because Mendez filed his

motion prior to the 24 April 1996 effective date of the

Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, he is not required

to obtain a certificate of appealability. S ee United States v.

Carter , 117 F.3d 262, 264 (5th Cir. 1997).

Mendez contends that his trial counsel was ineffective: (1)

in failing to object to the denial of an offense-level reduction

for being a minimal or minor participant; (2) in not showing a

violation of the concurrent-sentence doctrine; (3) in not obtaining- 2 -

recusal of the district judge; (4) in not objecting to an alleged

violation of Batson v. Kentucky

, 476 U.S. 79 (1986); and (5) in not

objecting to a sentence enhancement for possession of a firearm.

We have reviewed the record and Mendez’s brief, and we AFFIRM

the denia l of § 2255 relief for essentially the reasons given by

the district court. U nited States v. Mendez

, No. 4:96-CV-108- A

(N.D. Tex. Apr. 24, 1996) (unpublished).

The additional claimed bases for ineffective assistance,

raised for the first time in Mendez’s reply brief, are not properly

before this court and are not considered. E.g.
, United States v.

J ackson

, 50 F.3d 1335, 1340 n.7 (5th Cir. 1995) (court wil l not

consider issues raised for first time in reply brief).

AFFIRMED
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Michael Burgos, Appellant.

[768 NYS2d 346]

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Mullen, J.), rendered August 12, 1998, convicting him of attempted robbery in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see Anders v California,*386 US 738 [1967]; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631 [1976]; *cf. People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606 [1979]). Santucci, J.P., Goldstein, Schmidt and Cozier, JJ., concur.
No. 12-256.

#### State Street Bank & Trust Co. *v.*Pfeil et al.

C. A. 6th Cir. Motion of American Benefits Council for leave to file brief as *amicus curiae*granted. Certiorari denied.
[4910-13-P]

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION C{)NCURRF"~(:ES

~O""~U ~"MBOL

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

I

[Docket No. FAA-2007-283i77; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-063-ADj

1&2.177 I 'J-DIO·-b~ -02

Amendment 39-*****; AD ' -** -**]

RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER) Mo

ERJ 170 and ERJ 190 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation

(DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

illrl~1<

INITIALS;''';

z-t/-/o

"OUHNG WMfl<:H.

IllrCS

":;2 'ItJ//cJ

R()liT1NO.,.MIlOI.

-7

tMTlAIS"S,G

c.~

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airw011hiness directive (AD) for the products list ~,o

~OlJlmG SYMBOL

above. This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MeAl)

originated by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe

I

condition on an aviation product. The MeAl describes tpe unsafe condition as:

I

Periodic operational qheck of the firewall hydraulic shutoffvalves

[FWSOV], made during routine maintenance, has revealed that the failure

rate oftbat component is significantly higher than expected. Such a

d01l11antfailure, when combined with further possible failures, such as

engine fire, may lead to an unacceptable reduction of safety margins.

The unsafe condition is failure of the firewall hydraulic shutoff valve, which, in

combination with an engine fIre, could result in the spread of an engine fire beyond the

I INITI.'''~'rs''}

firewall. We are issuing this fD to require actions to correct the unsafe condition on ~",""T.----

tbese products.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1058 

To allow seniors to file their Federal income tax on a new Form 1040SR. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 14, 2011 

Mr. FLEMING (for himself, Mr. BARROW, Mr. NUGENT, and Ms. RICHARDSON) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To allow seniors to file their Federal income tax on a new 

Form 1040SR. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Seniors’ Tax Sim5 plification Act of 2011’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FORM 1040SR FOR SENIORS. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Treasury (or 

8 the Secretary’s delegate) shall make available a form, to 

9 be known as ‘‘Form 1040SR’’, for use by individuals to 

10 file the return of tax imposed by chapter 1 of the Internal 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1058 IH

1 Revenue Code of 1986. Such form shall be as similar as 

2 practicable to Form 1040EZ, except that— 

3 (1) the form shall be available to individuals 

4 who have attained age 65 as of the close of the tax5 able year, 

6 (2) the form may be used even if income for the 

7 taxable year includes— 

8 (A) social security benefits (as defined in 

9 section 86(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 

10 1986), 

11 (B) distributions from qualified retirement 

12 plans (as defined in section 4974(c) of such 

13 Code), annuities or other such deferred pay14 ment arrangements, 

15 (C) interest and dividends, or 

16 (D) capital gains and losses taken into ac17 count in determining adjusted net capital gain 

18 (as defined in section 1(h)(3) of such Code), 

19 and 

20 (3) the form shall be available without regard 

21 to the amount of any item of taxable income or the 

22 total amount of taxable income for the taxable year. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1058 IH

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The form required by sub2 section (a) shall be made available for taxable years begin3 ning after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 88 (Thursday, May 7, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25221-25222]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-12100]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Center for Research Resources; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as

[[Page 25222]]

amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
National Center for Research Resources Special Emphasis Panel (SEP) 
meeting:

    Name of SEP: Research Centers in Minority Institutions.
    Date: June 1, 1998.
    Time: 5:00 p.m.
    Place: Doubletree Hotel, 1750 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 
20852, (301) 468-1100.
    Contact Person: Dr. Bela J. Gulyas, Scientific Review 
Administrator, 6705 Rockledge Drive, MSC 7965, Room 6018, Bethesda, 
MD 20892-7965, (301) 435-0811.
    Purpose/Agenda: To evaluate and review grant applications.

    The meeting will be closed in accordance with the provisions set 
forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5, U.S.C. 
Applications and/or proposals and the discussions could reveal 
confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable 
material and personal information concerning individuals associated 
with the applications and/or proposals, the disclosure of which 
would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program No. 93.398, Research 
Centers in Minority Institutions, National Institutes of Health, 
HHS)

    Dated: April 29, 1998.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Committee Management Officer, NIH.
[FR Doc. 98-12100 Filed 5-6-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M