alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

INTHEMATTEROFTHE ) No.79718-2-I

PERSONAL RESTRAINT OF: )

) DIVISION ONE

DAVID WAYNE ELMER, )

) UNPUBLISHED OPINION

Petitioner.

PER CURIAM. In 2011, David Elmer pleaded guilty to five offenses in two

separate cause numbers, Snohomish County Superior Cause Nos. 10-1-01883-7

and 11-1-00143-6. With respect to his convictions for second degree identity theft

in both causes, the court imposed sentences of 57 months of confinement to be

followed by 12 months of community custody.

In March 2019, Elmer filed this personal restraint petition alleging, among

other things, that the identity theft sentences exceed the 5-year statutory

maximum. See RCW 9.35.020(3); RCW 9A.20.021(1)(c). The State concedes

error. We accept the State’s concession and remand for the trial court to

reduce the relevant community custody terms so that Elmer’s total sentences

do not exceed the statutory maximum. RCW 9.94A.701(9) See State v. Boyd,

174 Wn.2d 470, 275 P.3d 321 (2012); see ~so State v. Winborne, 167 Wn.

App. 320, 329, 273 P.3d 454, review denied, 174 . 10 9 (2012).

Forthe court:

AAJ I

4’
No. 12-7948.

#### Mercer *v.*United States.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
No. 12-6410.

#### Poole *v.*Florida.

Dist. Ct. App. Fla., 5th Dist. Certiorari denied.
No. 12-8438.

#### Pfeiffer-El *v.*United States et al.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
#### COM. v. TOOT, D.

247 MDA 2017

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

08/29/2017

CP-01-CR-0000674-2016

(Adams)

Affirmed
No. 12-7368.

#### Ruiz *v.*United States.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certio-rari denied.
No. 12-7734.

#### Reid *v.*United States.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certio-rari denied.
|                                                                
|----------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                  
|View History: Annual                                            
|View History: Annual                                            
|View History:                                                   
|                                                                
|Maryland Natural Gas Interstate Deliveries  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                
|                                                                
|Maryland Natural Gas Interstate Deliveries  (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                                                                                                                            |           |           |           |         |         |         |         |         |         | 681,700
|1990's                                                                                                                            | 749,836   | 738,910   | 766,661   | 697,939 | 656,585 | 652,253 | 672,257 | 681,017 | 714,077 | 802,650
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 789,414   | 789,626   | 682,889   | 770,106 | 894,521 | 930,599 | 795,047 | 958,028 | 824,473 | 917,426
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 905,411   | 861,678   | 615,261   | 399,347 | 278,010 | 257,191 | 376,679 | 517,775 | 674,082 | 946,518
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 1,040,028 | 1,061,217 | 1,042,399 |         |         |         |         |         |         |        
|- = 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:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                 
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                           
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                           
|View History:                                                            
|                                                                         
|Wyoming Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                         
|                                                                         
|Wyoming Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                         

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0  | Year-1  | Year-2  | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8  | Year-9 
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------- | -------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |         |         |         |        |        |        |        | 3,897  | 4,776   | 4,055  
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 5,519   | 4,755   | 9,252   | 16,175 | 25,783 | 36,790 | 6,193  | 72,911 | 102,846 | 137,073
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 119,934 | 123,538 | 113,693 |        |        |        |        |        |         |        
|- = 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
* 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. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED April 20, 2005 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-50673 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ROBERT LEE MORRISON, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 1:00-CR-62-ALL-JRN

-------------------- Before JONES, SMITH, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Robert Lee Morrison, federal prisoner # 04133-180, appeals the district court’s denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion to reduce his sentence based on Amendment 599 to the United States Sentencing Guidelines. Morrison pleaded guilty to possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), and possession of a firearm by a felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).No. 04-50673 -2- Morrison argues that a sentence enhancement for possession of a weapon constituted impermissible double counting in violation of Amendment 599. Morrison further contends that his sentence is unconstitutional under Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000), and Blakely v. Washington , 124 S. Ct. 2531 (2004). In light of Blakely and the Supreme Court’s recent decision in United States v. Booker , 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005) , Morrison has filed a motion seeking the recall of this court’s mandate affirming Morrison’s direct criminal appeal (No. 00- 51218). Morrison further requests that his case be remanded for resentencing. Amendment 599, which amended the commentary to U.S.S.G. § 2K2.4, applies to convictions under 18 U.S.C. § 844(h) and 18 U.S.C. §§ 924(c) and 929(a). Morrison pleaded guilty to violating 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), and his guideline sentencing range was computed under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1, based upon his drug conviction. Accordingly, Amendment 599 does not apply to Morrison’s sentence. Morrison’s Apprendi , Blakely , and Booker arguments are not cognizable in the context of a 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion. See United States v. Shaw , 30 F.3d 26, 29 (5th Cir. 1994).
AFFIRMED; MOTION TO RECALL MANDATE DENIED.
# C_2010048EN.01000201.xml

| 26.2.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 48/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.2.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 48/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5726 — Deutsche Bank/SAL. Oppenheim)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2010/C 48/02

On 29 January 2010, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in German and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32010M5726. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32010M5726. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
No. 12-8172.

#### Bush *v.*United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia et al.

C. A. llth Cir. Certiorari denied.
*December 27, 2017*

2017-Ohio-9245.]

2017-0945.

#### ARCP RL Portfolio VII, L.L.C. v. Tuscarawas Cty. Bd. of Revision.

Board of Tax Appeals, No. 2016-922. On joint motion to remand. Motion granted. Cause remanded to the Board of Tax Appeals.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LEANDRO LEONEL GONZALEZ,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

C. VALENCIA, Correctional Sergeant;

GOYTIA, Correctional Officer,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 20

- 16808

D.C. No. 2:19

- cv

- 00338

- KJM

- DB

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Kimberly J. Mueller, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted August 17, 2022 * *

Before: S.R. THOMAS, PAEZ, and LEE, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Leonardo Leonel Gonzalez appeals pro se from the

district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging sexual

assault by prison officials. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We

review de novo the district court ’ s dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Resnick v.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

AUG 25 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 20

- 16808

Hayes

, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000). We affi rm.

The district court properly dismissed Gonzalez’s action because Gonzalez

failed to allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim. See Bearchild v. Cobban

,

947 F.3d 1130, 1144

- 45 (9th Cir. 2020) (setting forth the elements for a claim of

sexual assault by a correctional officer); Jordan v. Gardner , 986 F.2d 1521, 1525,

1526 (9th Cir. 1993) (en banc) (the Eighth Amendment prohibits “only the

unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain” ; “momentary discomfort caused by the

search procedures” does not meet the “constitutional standard for a finding of

pain” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)); see also Hebbe v. Pliler

,

627 F.3d 338, 341

- 42 (9th Cir. 2010) (although pro se pleadings are construed

liberally, a plaintiff must allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim).

AFFIRMED.
REGULATORY EVALUATION

Directorate Identifier: __2011________-NM-____195______-AD

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific 

requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of 

transportation?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, February 19, 2021.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, February 19, 2021

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A21D0196. SAMANTHA KASTNER f/k/a SAMANTHA KASTNER-GANDY v. KEVIN 

GANDY.

Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby DENIED.

LC NUMBERS:

2010248058
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ricardo Ramos, Appellant.

[768 NYS2d 645]

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Rosenwasser, J.), rendered July 3, 2001, convicting him of assault in the first 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 *756assigned 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]). Altman, J.P., S. Miller, McGinity, Adams and Mastro, JJ., concur.
No. 11-11102.

#### Garey *v.*United States,

*ante,*p. 1041. Petition for rehearing denied.

Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
II

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 152

To amend the Mount Rushmore Commemorative Coin Act to conform to

the intent of Congress.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 21 (legislative day, JANUARY 5), 1993

Mr. PRESSLER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

A BILL

To amend the Mount Rushmore Commemorative Coin Act

to conform to the intent of Congress.

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

3 SECTION 1. DISTRIBUTION OF SURCHARGES.

4 Section 8 of the Mount Rushmore Commemorative

5 Coin Act (31 U.S.C. 5112 note) is amended by striking

6 paragraphs (1) and (2) and inserting the following:

7 ‘‘(1) the first $18,750,000 shall be promptly

8 paid by the Secretary to the Society to assist the So9 ciety’s efforts to improve, enlarge, and renovate the

10 Mount Rushmore National Memorial; and
2

•S 152 IS

1 ‘‘(2) the remainder shall be returned to the

2 United States Treasury for purposes of reducing the

3 national debt.’’.

4 SEC. 2. RETROACTIVE EFFECT.

5 The amendments made by section 1 shall be deemed

6 to have the same effective date as the Mount Rushmore

7 Commemorative Coin Act. Any surcharges paid into the

8 United States Treasury prior to the date of enactment of

9 this Act in connection with the issuance of coins under

10 the Mount Rushmore Commemorative Coin Act (which

11 amounts have not been otherwise obligated) shall be redis12 tributed by the Secretary of the Treasury in accordance

13 with the amendments made by section 1.

Æ
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 91 (Tuesday, May 12, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 26219]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-12532]



[[Page 26219]]

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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION


Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, Subcommittee Meeting on 
Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena; Notice of Meeting

    The ACRS Subcommittee on Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena will hold a 
meeting on June 2, 1998, Room T-2B3, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 
Maryland.
    Portions of the meeting will be closed to public attendance to 
discuss General Electric Company proprietary information pursuant to 5 
U.S.C. 552b(c)(4).
    The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows:
Tuesday, June 2, 1998--8:30 a.m. until the conclusion of business

    The Subcommittee will review the General Electric Company extended 
power uprate plan for operating BWRs, and the lead-plant (Monticello 
Nuclear Generating Plant) power uprate application. The purpose of this 
meeting is to gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, 
and to formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for 
deliberation by the full Committee.
    Oral statements may be presented by members of the public with the 
concurrence of the Subcommittee Chairman; written statements will be 
accepted and made available to the Committee. Electronic recordings 
will be permitted only during those portions of the meeting that are 
open to the public, and questions may be asked only by members of the 
Subcommittee, its consultants, and staff. Persons desiring to make oral 
statements should notify the cognizant ACRS staff engineer named below 
five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate 
arrangements can be made.
    During the initial portion of the meeting, the Subcommittee, along 
with any of its consultants who may be present, may exchange 
preliminary views regarding matters to be considered during the balance 
of the meeting.
    The Subcommittee will then hear presentations by and hold 
discussions with representatives of the General Electric Company, the 
Northern States Power Company, the NRC staff, their consultants, and 
other interested persons regarding this review.
    Further information regarding topics to be discussed, whether the 
meeting has been canceled or rescheduled, the scheduling of sessions 
which are open to the public, the Chairman's ruling on requests for the 
opportunity to present oral statements and the time allotted therefor, 
can be obtained by contacting the cognizant ACRS staff engineer, Mr. 
Paul A. Boehnert (telephone 301/415-8065) between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 
p.m. (EDT). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to 
contact the above named individual one or two working days prior to the 
meeting to be advised of any potential changes to the agenda, etc., 
that may have occurred.

    Dated: May 6, 1998.
Sam Duraiswamy,
Chief, Nuclear Reactors Branch.
[FR Doc. 98-12532 Filed 5-11-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
BE Resources Inc.: Exhibit 10.29 - Filed by newsfilecorp.com











Exhibit 10.29 


Employment Arrangement with Mr. Jon Pereira 


Mr. Pereira does not have a written employment agreement and is not paid a salary. He is only reimbursed for out of pocket expenses.
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 Miller Industries, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending October 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Angelo Napolitano,
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 Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:
  (1)
              The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section
      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.
  Dated:
      January 10, 2011/s/ Angelo NapolitanoAngelo
      Napolitano
                    Chief
      Executive Officer and
                    Chief
      Financial Officer
 
 A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 or other document
authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
by Section 906, has been provided to Miller Industries, Inc. and will be
returned by Miller Industries, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.