alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Submitted December 19, 2011

Decided December 20, 2011

Before

KENNETH F. RIPPLE, Circuit Judge

ILANA DIAMOND ROVNER

, Circuit Judge

ANN CLAIRE WILLIAMS, Circuit Judge

No. 10

‐ 3234

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

‐ Appellee,

v.

JEROME ALEXANDER WRIGHT,

Defendant

‐ Appellant. Appeal from the United States District

Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.

No. 09

‐ CR

‐ 287

C. N. Clevert, Jr.,

Chief Judge

.

O R D E R

Jerome Wright pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of two firearms, 18

U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), and the district court sentenced him to 32 months of imprisonment.

Wright filed a notice of appeal, but his appointed counsel seeks to withdraw under Anders

v. California

, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967), because he cannot identify a nonfrivolous issue to

pursue. Wright has not responded to his attorney’s submission. See C IR

. R. 51(b). We confine

our review to the potential issue identified in counsel’s facially adequate brief. See United

States v. Schuh

, 289 F.3d 968, 973–74 (7th Cir. 2002).

Wright has informed his attorney that he does not want his guilty plea set aside. NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited only in accordance with

Fed. R. App. P. 32.1Page 2

Thus, counsel appropriately omitted from his brief any discussion of the adequacy of the

plea colloquy and the voluntariness of the guilty plea. See United States v. Knox, 287 F.3d 667,

671–72 (7th Cir. 2002).

Counsel considers whether Wright could argue that his 32

‐ month sentence is

unreasonable. But the district court properly calculated the guidelines range of 30 to 37

months, and Wright’s within

‐ guidelines sentence is presumed reasonable. See Rita v. United

States

, 551 U.S. 338, 347 (2007); United States v. Pillado

, 656 F.3d 754, 772 (7th Cir. 2011).

Counsel cannot identify a reason to disturb that presumption. The court, acknowledging

Wright’s personal circumstances, commended him for returning to school and taking care of

his children. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(1). But the court explained that Wright, as a convicted

felon, needed a punishment that would reflect the danger of possessing firearms,

particularly in a home with children. See id. § 3553(a)(2). Thus, we agree with counsel that it

would be frivolous to challenge Wright’s sentence.

The motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the appeal is DISMISSED.
#### NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. COCA-COLA BOTTLING COMPANY OF SOUTHEAST ARKANSAS.

No. 14146.

United States Court of Appeals Eighth Circuit

May 9, 1950.

*349A. Norman Somers, Assistant General Counsel, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D. C., for petitioner.

Lawrence B. Burrow, Little Rock, Ark., for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Order of National Labor Relations Board enforced, on petition for enforcement, and stipulation filed with Board.
Exhibit 31.1

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,
Matthew Foster, President and Chief Executive Officer of Ascent Solar Technologies, Inc., certify that:

1.     I
have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Ascent Solar Technologies, Inc. for the period ended December 31, 2007;

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 officer(s) 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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f))
for the registrant and have:



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



Date:
March 14, 2008

| |  | /s/MATTHEW FOSTERMatthew Foster, President
and Chief Executive Officer
| |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------

---



QuickLinks
**Boiler MA CT (Major Source)** 

Summary of major changes

1. Dioxin work practices a. Proposing work practice standards, in lieu of numeric emission limits, for dioxin/furan emissions for all subcategories 2. PM now considered a combustion

- based pollutant a. Proposing separate PM emission limits for each design

- based subcategory instead of single limits for all units firing a specific fuel 3. Total selected metals a. Proposing alternate TSM emission limits for design

- based subcategories of units firing solid fuels and process gases 4. CO CEMS a. Proposing alternate CO CEMS

- based emission limits for subcategories with CEMS data, couple with CEMS

- based monitoring 5. Emission limit changes, based on the following: a. New data b. Changes to old data based on data QA efforts c. Shifting of units between subcategories d. 99% UPL for CO instead of 99.9% 6. Subcategory changes a. Proposing separate subcategories for units designed to combust l ight or heavy liquids b. Proposing separate subcategories for k iln

-dried biomass stokers and wet biomass stokers c. Adjusting s ubcategories for s uspension burners (now a unique unit type) and dutch ovens/pile burners (these similar designs are now grouped together) 7. Monitoring changes a. Proposing the use of O 2 trim systems instead of O 2 CEMS b. Proposing 30

- day rolling averages for most parameter monitoring c. PM CEMS requirement removed for biomass units and changed to a parameter monitoring system for other large units.
**EXHIBIT 32.2**
**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**
I, Michael O’Neill, Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of Mentor Corporation (the “Company”), dohereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that to the best of my knowledge:
(1)  the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended December 31, 2007 (the“Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
(2)  information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresult of operations of the Company.
Dated:  February 6, 2008
/s/MICHAEL O’NEILL
Exhibit 31.1





CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER


PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Panna L. Sharma, certify that:


1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-K/A of Cancer Genetics, Inc. (the “ Registrant ”); and


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.








Date: April 28, 2016/s/ Panna L. SharmaPanna L. SharmaPresident, Chief Executive Officer and Director(Principal Executive Officer)
ACC CPI Safety & Health Training Through August 2011

July 2011 August 2011 Total Through August 2011

Job

Description Fully Complete Fully Complete Fully Complete InProgress

Instructor Online Instructor Online Instructor Online Started, not 

finished

Applicator 2 37 2 44 85 478 311

Helper 4 10 2 7

26 88 48

Test Scores through August 2011 100% 90-99% 70-89%

Percent achieving test scores 46% 45% 9%

Helper 4 10 2 7

26 88 48

Other 6 17 3 31 135 696 454

Supervisor 5 15 1 26 111 315 371

Total 17 79 8 108 357 1577 1184

Total Students Fully Completed 

Through August 2011

Total Students Started or Finished 

Through August 2011

1934 3118
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 10 (Thursday, January 15, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2361-2362]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-1065]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS


Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Massachusetts Advisory 
Committee

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and 
regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, that a meeting of 
the Massachusetts Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene at 
10:30 a.m and adjourn at 3:00 p.m. on

[[Page 2362]]

Thursday, February 5, 1998, at the Westborough State Hospital, Lincoln 
Room, P.O. Box 288, Lyman Street, Westborough, Massachusetts 01581. The 
purpose of the meeting is to plan for the statewide civil rights 
conference scheduled for March 1998.
    Persons desiring additional information, or planning a presentation 
to the Committee, should contact Committee Chairperson Fletcher 
Blanchard, 413-585-3909, or Ki-Taek Chun, Director of the Eastern 
Regional Office, 202-376-7533 (TDD 202-376-8116). Hearing-impaired 
persons who will attend the meeting and require the services of a sign 
language interpreter should contact the Regional Office at least ten 
(10) working days before the scheduled date of the meeting.
    The meeting will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the 
rules and regulations of the Commission.

    Dated at Washington, DC, January 8, 1998.
Carol-Lee Hurley,
Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.
[FR Doc. 98-1065 Filed 1-14-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
#### COM. v. SANCHEZ, E.

1035 EDA 2016

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

08/15/2017

CP-51-CR-0005519-2014

(Philadelphia)

Affirmed
* 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. 01-40066 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ARTURO SALINAS-MENDEZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. B-00-CR-359-1

-------------------- August 23, 2001

Before DeMOSS, PARKER, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Publi c Defender appointed to represent Arturo

Salinas-Mendez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a

brief as required by Anders v. California
, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).

Although Salinas has submitted a letter explaining his actions and

inquiring whether his sentence could be reduced, he has not
presented any arguments in support of his appeal.

Our independent review of counsel’s brief and the record

discloses no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, the motion for leave

to withdraw i s GRANTED, counsel is excused from furtherNo. 01-40066 -2-

responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. S ee 5 TH C IR

.

R. 42.2.
**EXHIBIT      32**

**CERTIFICATION      OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND**

**THE      CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO**

**18      U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

| (1) | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) of                15 (d) of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. §78o(d));                and |
|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (2) | The                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the                Company. |
|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| October                10, 2008 | /s/                  Peter Katevatis                             |
|---------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                            |                                                             |
|                            | Peter                Katevatis                                   |
|                            | Chairman                of the Board and Chief Executive Officer |
|                            |                                                             |
| October                10, 2008 | /s/                  Frank D. Benick                             |
|                            |                                                             |
|                            | Frank                D. Benick                                   |
|                            | Chief                Financial Officer                           |

----
FEATHER RIVER AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT

IN RE:

RESOLUTION ADOPTING

REGULATION X RULE 10.1 0

– PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT

DETERIORATION RESOLUTION NO 2011

- 06

WHEREAS , California Health and Safety Code section 40001 authorizes the Feather

River A ir Quality Management District to adopt and enforce Rules and Regulations to achieve and maintain ambient air quality standards within the District; and

WHEREAS, California Health and Safety Code section 40702 requires a district to adopt rules and regula tions and do such acts as may be necessary or proper to execute the powers and duties granted ; and

WHEREAS, the District Board has determined that a need exists to take on responsibility for Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permitting for the benefit of

District sources ; and

WHEREAS

, amendment of this regulation is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Title 14, California Administrative Code, section 15308, as an action by a regulatory agency for the protection of the environment ; and

WHEREAS , the proposed new rule is listed in the District’s annual “Regulatory Measures List” pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 40923; and

WHEREAS, the District Board has made the findings pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 40727, of neces sity, authority, clarity, consistency, non

- duplication, and reference in regard to the proposed rule; and

WHEREAS

, these proceedings were held in a public hearing and were properly noticed pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 40725; with any evidenc e having been received concerning the proposed adoption of this Resolution and this Board having duly considered such
evidence; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the FEATHER
RIVER AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT that e ffecti ve August 1, 2011, the Board

approve s and adopts new Rule 10.10

– Prevention of Significant Deterioration to read in its entirety as set forth in Exhibit A of this resolution for inclusion into Regulation X of the Feather River Air Q uality Management Distr ict , attached hereto and made part hereof

.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the FEATHER RIVER AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT that effective August 1, 2011, the Board instructs

## Exhibit A

District Regulation X, Rule 10. 10

– Prevention of Significant Deterioration
TS-CCGL81

Attachment #2

Summary of Information on the New Chemical Substances 
TS-CCGL81 Attachment #2

Manufacturing and Processing Information on the New Chemical 

Substances – General Description
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 12

- 00479

- CV

RAVEN KENNARD APPELLANT

V.

BANK OF AMERICA, N.A

. APPELLEE

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

FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF TARRANT COUNTY

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



### MEMORANDUM OPINION 1 

### AND JUDGMENT

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

On November 18, 2013, we notified appellant that her brief had not been

filed as required by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.6(a). See Tex. R.

App. P. 38.6(a). We stated we could dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution

unless appell ant or any party desiring to continue this appeal filed with the court

on or before December 2, 2013, a motion reasonably explaining the failure to file

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.2

a brief and the need for an extension. See Tex. R. App. P. 10.5(b), 38.8(a)(1),

42.3(b). We have not received any response.

Because appellant 's brief has not been filed, we dismiss the appeal for

want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a) (1) , 42.3(b), 43.2(f).

PER CURIAM

PANEL: GARDNER, WALKER, and MCCOY, JJ.

DELIVERED: F ebruary 13 , 2014
|                                                                                          
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                          
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                            
|View History: Annual                                                                      
|View History: Annual                                                                      
|View History:                                                                             
|                                                                                          
|Indiana Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price  (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                          
|                                                                                          
|Indiana Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price  (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                          

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1960's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 0.20   | 0.21   | 0.21  
|1970's                                                                                                                            | 0.21   | 0.23   | 0.25   | 0.27   | 0.28   | 0.38   | 0.45   | 0.81   | 0.86   | 1.21  
|1980's                                                                                                                            | 1.73   | 2.18   | 2.91   | 3.21   | 3.02   | 3.11   | 2.78   | 2.52   | 2.69   | 2.17  
|1990's                                                                                                                            | 2.17   | 2.46   | 2.51   | 1.38   | 1.03   | 1.05   | 2.47   | 2.58   | 2.27   | 2.16  
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 3.69   | 4.18   | NA     | --     | --     | --     |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 5/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 6/28/2024
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>  5

<S>                                                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                 6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                             JAN-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                                  JUL-31-1999
<CASH>                                                             6,955,831
<SECURITIES>                                                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                     13,517,911
<ALLOWANCES>                                                         333,922
<INVENTORY>                                                       13,300,730
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                  35,892,279
<PP&E>                                                            28,185,684
<DEPRECIATION>                                                    14,525,477
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                    69,411,499
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                             14,047,088
<BONDS>                                                           12,943,060
<COMMON>                                                             718,284
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                      0
<PREFERRED>                                                                0
<OTHER-SE>                                                        43,044,670
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                      69,411,499
<SALES>                                                           41,366,235
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                  41,366,235
<CGS>                                                             27,296,904
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                     35,581,557
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                           0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                           0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                   429,007
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                    6,046,738
<INCOME-TAX>                                                       2,297,760
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                        0
<DISCONTINUED>                                                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                            0
<CHANGES>                                                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                                                       3,748,978
<EPS-BASIC>                                                            .56
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                            .56


</TABLE>
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-11-00494-CV

SAMUEL KADYEBO APPELLANT

V.

CJ HERITAGE APTS. APPELLEE

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

FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF TARRANT COUNTY

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

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

We have considered appellant's “Appellant's Motion To Dismiss Appeal 

With Prejudice.” It is the court=s opinion that the motion should be granted. We 

deny “Appellee’s Motion To Dismiss Appellant’s Appeal” as moot. 

We dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1), 43.2(f).

PER CURIAM

PANEL: MEIER, J.; LIVINGSTON, C.J.; and GABRIEL, J. 

DELIVERED: May 31, 2012

 

1See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
No. 12-7195.

#### Ramirez Caballerio *v.*United States.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.