alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 10**  **- 6402** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. TROY PELTS, a/k/a James Lee Start , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court f or the Middle District of North Carolina , at Winston

- Salem
. James A. Beaty, Jr., Chief District Judge. ( 6:92

- cr - 00305

- JAB

- 1 )

Submitted : July 21, 2011 Decided: August 3, 2011

Before MOTZ and KEENAN , Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Jud ge.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
. Troy Pelts, Appellant Pro Se. L. Patrick Auld, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Troy Pelts appeals the district court ’ s order s denying his motion filed under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) for reduction of sentence and denying his motion for an extension of time to file an appeal . We have reviewed the record and Pelts’s contentions regarding his § 3582(c)(2) motion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Pelts , No. 6:92

- cr - 00305

- JAB

- 1 (M.D.N.C. July 13, 2009)
. Because we have reviewed Pelts’s challenge to the denial of a sentence reduction on the merits, we find his appeal of the denial of the motion for an extension to be moot. United States v. Pelts , No. 6:92

- cr - 00305

- JAB

- 1 (M.D.N.C. Jan. 8, 2010). Finally, w e dispense with oral argument because the fac ts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
11 TH COURT OF APPEALS EASTLAND , TEXAS JUDGMENT
In the interest of J. R

. , D

. E

. R ., * From the 44 6 th District Court K.I.O., K.E.O., and S

. A

. O. , children, of Ector County, Trial Court No. E

- 19

- 015

- PC

. No. 11

- 20

- 00 2 1 9

- C V * March 25 , 20 2 1

* Memorandum Opinion by Bailey , C. J. (P anel consists of: Bailey , C.J., Williams , J. , and Wright, S.C.J., sitting by assignment ) (Trotter, J., not participating) This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that th ere is no error in the order s below. Therefore, in accordance with this court’s opinion, the order s of the tr ia l court are in all things affirmed.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Joseline Rivera, Appellant.

[64 NYS3d 516]

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Steven L. Barrett, J., at plea and sentence), rendered May 10, 2016, unanimously affirmed.

Although we find that defendant did not make a valid waiver of the right to appeal, we perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.

Concur—Gische, J.P., Kapnick, Oing and Moulton, JJ.
### Dor-oST-idoo-07-^ 2

< ^ 

## (^^^ O 7:x>^^-r7 Q-^^W ^ ^''^ ' /^^ y 77 ^^^ ^p^>e ^ 5S45 ^ TT/^T ^ — '^eM-''* ^
No. 10-5742.

#### Antonio Edward Battle, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 936, 131 S. Ct. 341,

178 L. Ed. 2d 222,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7354.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 370 Fed. Appx. 426.
No. 10-5529.

#### Jeffrey Wayne Wansley, Petitioner v. Ronald King, et al.

562 U.S. 927, 131 S. Ct. 314,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7583.

178 L. Ed. 2d 204,

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
# EMS Week spotlight: Richard Aldrich

/ Published May 23, 2023
COLUMBUS, Ohio, 
*Editor’s Note: May 21-27 is National Emergency Medical Technician Week. This year’s theme is “Where Emergency Care Begins.” This is a part of a series of spotlights highlighting firefighter/paramedics who serve as DLA’s first responders in emergencies.*

**Your name:** Richard Aldrich

**Job title and duty location:** Firefighter/EMT/hazardous materials technician for DLA Land and Maritime in Columbus, Ohio

**What inspired you to become a firefighter/EMT/paramedic?** Before I joined the Air Force, I felt like I could do something better than the path that I was on, but I was not sure what. I knew I did not want to be stuck in an office and I wanted to stay physically fit. I felt like I could perform well in stressful situations, and I liked the idea of the camaraderie that came with being a firefighter. I thought being an Air Force firefighter was an excellent opportunity and it checked all those boxes. 

**When did you join DLA Fire and Emergency Services and what did you do before you got here?**I joined DLA Fire and Emergency Services in February 2021. Before I started here, I was a lead firefighter/hazmat technician for Robins Air Force Base Fire and Emergency Services in Georgia. 

**Describe your typical shift in 2-3 sentences.** One of the best things about this job is that there is no typical shift. Although there are some elements that are typically accomplished, it is never the same. 

**Is there a moment you’ve encountered on duty that stands out?** I have been in this field since 2012, and there are tons of moments that I have encountered on duty that stand out. Some are good, and some are not, but that is just a part of the job. 

**What’s the hardest part of your job and why?** Knowing that you could potentially have someone’s life in your hands and be in a situation that you might not be as experienced in as you would like to be before you are expected to act flawlessly.  

**What do you like most about your job and why?** Helping people out on what is usually one of the worst days of their lives. Saving a life or the life of someone’s loved one is a great feeling. 

**How do you unwind after a shift?** I like to spend time with my wife and my daughter and enjoy watching her learn new things every day. Outside of that, I like to golf when I can.
**EXHIBIT 23.1****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-3 Nos.333-139625,333-138679, Form S-4 Nos. 333-133513, 333-133513, 333-133513, 333-133513 and Form S-8Nos. 333-139625 and 333-138680 and related Prospectuses of EPIX Pharmaceuticals, Inc. of our reportdated April 9, 2007, with respect to the financial statements of EPIX Pharmaceuticals, Inc., EPIXPharmaceuticals, Inc. management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control overfinancial reporting, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of EPIXPharmaceuticals, Inc., included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31,2006./s/ Ernst & Young LLP                              Boston, Massachusetts
Page 2 of 3

modeling. T he exponential models contained in the EPA BMDS was developed in conjunction with the Netherlands' National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) to be consistent with the exponential models contained in the

RIVM's Proast software.

The EPA BMDS exponential model includes a family of nested exponential models from which an optimal model (based on statistical and model criteria) can be determined. The exponential models provide flexibility and permit dose raised to a power and allowin g for asymptotic values. The flexibility of the nested models is reflected by the number of parameters considered in the models. The models also have the feature to model lognormally distributed data. The nested exponential models therefore provide impr oved model fitting for all kinds of datasets. Because of the flexibility and advantages of the EPA BMDS exponential models, the formetanate data were reanalyzed with this software. A comparison of the EPA BMDS and the R

- based program is summarized in

the table below.

Table 1. Results of BMD Exponential Modeling for Brain & RBC ChE in PND17

Males Treated with Formetanate (Ginger Moser Data)

Model Compartment BMD Results a (mg/kg/day)

BMD 10 BMDL 10

EPA BMDS Brain 0.097

0.097

0.059

0.059 0.085 Model 2 (AIC =

- 4.44) b

0.085 Model 3 (AIC =

- 4.44) b

0.051 Model 4 (AIC =

- 27.7) c

0.051 Model 5 (AIC =

- 27.7) c

R

- based Program Brain 0.0309 (0.017; 0.056) c 0.0188

EPA BMDS RBC 0.078

0.078

0.047

0.047 0.062 Model 2 (AIC =

- 164 ) b

0.062 Model 3 (AIC =

- 164 ) b

0.037 Model 4 (AIC =

- 178 ) c
0.037 Model 5 (AIC =

- 178 ) c

R

- based Program RBC 0.0134 (0.005; 0.034) d 0.0060

a Benchmark response ( BMR ) = 10%.

b Unacceptable p value (<0.1)

c Best fitting model selected based on AIC, p values and residual analyses.

d Lower and upper confidence interval on the BMD.Page 3 of 3

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the analyses, there is less uncertainty associated with the results of the EPA

BMDS model as reflected by the smaller BMD 10 /BMDL 10 ratios (1.3x) compa red with

the R

- based program (2.2x). The upper confidence interval (0.034 mg/kg) of the BMD 10 estimates from the R

- based program was comparable to the BMD 10 estimate obtained from the EPA BMDS runs (0.047 mg/kg), which provides support for the BMD 10 estim ates from the EPA BMDS runs. Although the R

- based programs BMDL 10 of 0.006 mg/kg for RBC is a conservative estimate, the EPA BMDS software provides a more precise estimate for this lower limit and is therefore the more appropriate estimate for use

in risk assessment.
Order entered April 26, 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas** No. 05 - 12 - 00466 - CV IN THE INTEREST OF J .W.C., A CHILD On Appeal from the 256th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF - 08 - 21693 - Z 

### O RDER Before Chief Justice Wright and Justice s Lang

- Miers and Lewis Appellant’s April 8, 2013 motion for rehearing is DENIED
. /s/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE
# What the holidays mean to me: Deborah Winston

/ Published Dec. 14, 2020
RICHMOND, VA, 
*During the month of December, DLA Aviation Public Affairs will be running a special series of stories titled "What the holidays mean to me." The purpose is to spotlight members of the DLA Aviation workforce during the holidays.*

**Name:** Deborah Winston

**Organization:** DLA Aviation Richmond

**What is your job title, and what do you do, specifically?** I am the director of the Office of Equal Employment Opportunity and Diversity where I oversee the daily EEOD operations.

**What do the holidays mean to you?**There is something magical in the air during the holidays. The world seems to pause and the joy in the air is penetrating. The whole world seems to be in a festive spirit. I love that even in the madness of purchasing presents, I just feel happy, knowing this holiday will usher in a time of relaxation and being present in the moment. This could mean watching Christmas movies with family, reminiscing while listening to old holiday music, talking and laughing with family, sitting quietly in front of a lighted Christmas tree or the smells of holiday cooking. There is such a sense of peacefulness.

**What are your fondest holiday memories?**My grandmother, who is many years deceased now, loved the holiday season, particularly a brightly lit tree.  I would have the pleasure of putting up her tree each year. When I was finished, she could not wait to come into the room to sit in her favorite chair and just marvel at the beauty of the twinkling lights and multitude of colored ornaments. The look of joy and happiness on her face from the simple gesture will forever warm my heart. The simple things we take for granted can sometimes bring so much joy to others.

**What is your favorite holiday tradition?** My children and now my grandchildren decide on a project they would like to do, which they believe would make a difference to someone. One year, my nine-year-old daughter made sweet potato pies and took them to a neighborhood church that fed people in need. I will never forget the gratitude the workers showed, but more importantly, this act of kindness set in motion the desire to help others, something she continues to cultivate even 20 years later.

**Name your favorite holiday song and why it’s your favorite:**My favorite holiday song is “Silent Night” by the Temptations. I love the words and the Temptations sing it beautifully.
# Modernization efforts, innovative technology solutions earn Conrad spot in DLA Hall of Fame

/ Published June 18, 2019

A key leader in initiatives that modernized the Defense Logistics Agency’s processes and drove efficiencies through innovative technology is being inducted into the DLA Hall of Fame June 26.

Lora Conrad’s career began as a GS-5 secretary in 1981. After entering DLA’s Supply Intern Program in 1984, she helped implement the Weapons System Support System, an information technology program that enabled DLA to make a more deliberate, customer-focused approach toward readiness. 

In the 1990s, Conrad led the program that transferred more than 1 million consumable items from the services to DLA. Conrad then became a process integrator for the agency’s Enterprise Business System. She helped define business requirements for EBS’ business intelligence application and established requirements for the system’s change status tracking tool that added transparency to a convoluted process, according to her nomination packet. 

As deputy executive director of materiel policy, process and assessment, Conrad created a DLA-wide human capital strategy to develop key logistics personnel as mandated by the Defense Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act. 

“This effort still yields dividends today as it continues professionalizing our logistics workforce, improving customer outcomes through increased knowledge of the acquisition process, and reinforcing the agency’s alignment and commitment to the services,” reads her nomination packet. 

Conrad also headed implementation of the Comprehensive Inventory Management Improvement Plan at DoD’s Supply Chain Integration Office. The plan required integration across DoD and DLA and led to efficiencies across DoD’s $99 billion inventory. She culminated her DLA career as a senior IT program manager, implementing process improvements to more efficiently process requests for new capabilities and enhancements to existing IT systems.

*Read more about the DLA Hall of Fame and previous inductees on the DLA Hall of Fame website.*
No. 10-5720.

#### Debra Robertson, Petitioner v. Cree, Incorporated.

562 U.S. 824, 131 S. Ct. 386,

178 L. Ed. 2d 21,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6274.

October 4, 2010.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied. Petitioner is allowed until October 25, 2010, within which to pay the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) and to submit a petition in compliance with Rule 33.1 of the Rules of this Court.

Same case below, 385 Fed. Appx. 307.
No. 10-5890.

#### Thomas Moore, Petitioner v. Franklin J. Tennis, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution at Rockview, et al.

562 U.S. 940, 131 S. Ct. 356,

178 L. Ed. 2d 230,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7420,

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Joey Colon, Appellant.

[50 NYS3d 37]

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Troy K. Webber, J.), rendered April 23, 2015, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to a term of seven years, unanimously affirmed.

Although we do not find that defendant made a valid waiver of his right to appeal, we find that the court properly denied defendant’s suppression motion. During a lawful traffic stop, the police had, at least, a founded suspicion of criminality warranting an inquiry into whether defendant had any weapons *(see generally People v Garcia,*20 NY3d 317, 324 [2012]). The officer’s suspicions were based on a combination of defendant’s suspicious hand movements directed at his waistband, which is a place closely associated with weapons, and the fact that, when directed to get out of the car, he turned his back toward the officer, which could reasonably be interpreted as an effort to hide something. The possibility of innocent explanations for each of defendant’s actions, viewed in isolation, does not undermine the finding of founded suspicion.

Concur — Sweeny, J.P., Mazzarelli, Moskowitz and Kahn, JJ.
No. 12-8525.

#### Santos *v.*Florida.

Sup. Ct. Fla. Certiorari denied.
#### Guidance Endodontics, LLC, Appellant, v Olshan Grundman, Frome Rosensweig and Wolosky, LLP, Respondent.

[66 NYS3d 604]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles E. Ramos, J.), entered November 3, 2016, which granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiff’s claims in this legal malpractice action are barred by the doctrine of collateral estoppel *(see Buechel v Bain,*97 NY2d 295, 303-304 [2001], *cert denied*535 US 1096 [2002]; CPLR 3211 [a] [5]). There is an identity of issues necessarily decided in plaintiff’s related malpractice action against defendant’s cocounsel in New Mexico and decisive of this action, and plaintiff does not dispute that it vigorously contested cocoun-sel’s successful motions for summary judgment dismissing the New Mexico action.

*509We note also that the complaint fails to state a cause of action (CPLR 3211 [a] [7]). The allegations not only are sheer speculation but also are precluded by plaintiffs settlement of the underlying action for reasons other than defendant’s alleged malpractice *(see Rodriguez v Fredericks,*213 AD2d 176, 178 [1st Dept 1995], *lv denied*85 NY2d 812 [1995]).

We have considered plaintiff’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing.

Concur—Renwick, J.P., Richter, Manzanet-Daniels, Kahn and Kern, JJ.
# Networking at the speed of ‘just right’

/ Published Jan. 24, 2020
Richmond, Va., 
How quickly can you get to know your co-workers? The Defense Logistics Agency Aviation’s Strategic Acquisition Programs Directorate clocked it at around three minutes during its speed networking event Jan. 15 in the Frank B. Lotts Conference Center on Defense Supply Center Richmond, Virginia.

A total of 50 attendees from the “A” directorate gathered to discuss the “ins and outs” of their respective roles at DLA Aviation. Strategic Acquisition Programs Deputy Director Randall Dortch planned and executed the event.

“Each employee had three minutes to talk to one another and then switch, so that all 50 employees had time to talk to each other,” Dortch said. “We haven’t tried it before, and we hope it was an enjoyable event for everyone.”

Ahead of the networking event, Customer Liaison Specialist Mary Wright, Industrial Product-Support Vendor team, said she was looking forward to it.

“I’m excited! I’ll get to know my co-workers on a personal level. There are a lot of people I haven’t met before because I’ve been on a rotational [job], so this is a good event for me to get to know these folks,” said Wright.

In addition to discussing the projects they are currently working on, attendees also spoke briefly about what they liked about their jobs and what their goals are in two, five and 10 years.

Stephen Minus, program manager for bearing reform program, Boeing and GE’s Technical, Engineering and Logistical Services and Supplies, said though he and his team members have different roles, they often come together to collaborate on various projects. “I kind of know everybody; I’ve worked here since the late 1980s,” he said. “But this just helps us get to know each other not only on a work level but also on a personal level.”

Strategic Acquisition Programs Director Chris Davis, who developed the idea for the event and supervised its creation, said, “With as much work as we do together, I think it’s important that they know who we’re working with.”

The speed networking event was voluntary and it was modeled after a speed mentoring event for leaders, he said.

Davis explained the driving force behind the networking version. “I was assigning some work to an individual and I asked them to connect with someone; they had no idea who that person was, and they sat three aisles away from each other on the same floor!”

Davis said speed networking is equally important as a work-tool and a community-building tool. “The closer-knit your groups are, and the more they understand who they’re working with, the better they work together. It’s much easier to work with someone if you know a little bit about them and can put yourself in their shoes.”
No. 10-5398.

#### Gene Shannon, Petitioner v. Robert P. Houston, Director, Nebraska Department of Correctional Services.

562 U.S. 919, 131 S. Ct. 290,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7301.

178 L. Ed. 2d 190,

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Gregory Lake, Appellant.

[767 NYS2d 693]

Carpinello, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Chemung County (Buckley, J.), rendered July 23, 2001, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted promoting prison contraband in the first degree.

On June 14, 2000, defendant, an inmate, was found in posses*893sion of a plexiglass shank. Following an investigation by the State Police and referral to the District Attorney, defendant was indicted by a grand jury on December 20, 2000 on one count of promoting prison contraband in the first degree. After unsuccessfully moving to dismiss the indictment on due process grounds, defendant entered a plea of guilty to the lesser charge of attempted promoting prison contraband in the first degree and was sentenced, as a second felony offender, to a prison term of I1⁄2 to 3 years, to run consecutively with the sentence he was then serving.

Defendant now appeals, contending that his due process rights were violated as a result of County Court’s failure to dismiss the indictment based on a six-month preindictment delay. We disagree. The Court of Appeals has firmly established that claims of preindictment prosecutorial delay are to be analyzed according to the factors advanced in *People v Taranovich*(37 NY2d 442, 445 [1975]). Applying these factors, we find no reason to conclude that defendant’s due process rights were violated.

Although the People have not explained why the indictment was not sought sooner, we note that “similar delays have been found to be within constitutional parameters” *(People v Cog-gins,*308 AD2d 635, 365 [2003] [91/2-month delay]; *see e.g. People v Staton,*297 AD2d 876 [2002], *lv denied*99 NY2d 565 [2002] [six-month delay]; *People v Chiovaro,*279 AD2d 806 [2001] , *lv denied*96 NY2d 827 [2001] [six-month delay]; *People v Allah,*264 AD2d 902 [1999] [nine-month delay]). Considering the seriousness of the crime, involving the safety and security of a correctional facility, the fact that defendant was already incarcerated *(see People v Richardson,*298 AD2d 711, 712 [2002] ; *People v Diaz,*277 AD2d 723, 724-725 [2000], *lv denied*96 NY2d 758 [2001]), and that defendant has not shown any prejudice *(see People v Andrade,*301 AD2d 797, 798 [2003]; *People v Allah, supra*at 903), we conclude that defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment was properly denied and the judgment of conviction is, therefore, affirmed.

Cardona, PJ., Mercure, Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
No. 10-6003.

#### Karriece Quontrel Davis, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 943, 131 S. Ct. 365,

178 L. Ed. 2d 235,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7339,

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.

Same case below, 370 Fed. Appx. 974.