alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13

- 11102 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
BONIFACIO LOPEZ

- URBINA , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:13

- CR

- 84

- 1

Before CLEMENT, PRADO, and ELROD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Bonifacio Lopez

Urbina has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance
with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Lopez

- Urbina h a s not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no

* 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 R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR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 August 29, 2014

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 13-11102 Document: 00512751015 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/29/2014No. 13

- 11102

nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion fo r leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2.

2 Case: 13-11102 Document: 00512751015 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/29/2014
#### Com. v. Stevens 27

05/04/2016

26 MAL (2016)

27

. Justice WECHT did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.

Denied

Pa.Super., 135 A.3d 655
2017-0222.

#### State v. Andrews.

Lake App. No. 2016-L-048, 2016-Ohio-8517.
No. D-2468.

#### In the Matter of Disbarment of Peter Paul Mitrano.

562 U.S. 808, 131 S. Ct. 396,

178 L. Ed. 2d 262,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7854.

October 4, 2010.

Disbarment entered.

Former order, 559 U.S. 1002, 130 S. Ct. 1948, 176 L. Ed. 2d 411, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 2345.
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 21
 
                         EAGLE-PICHER INDUSTRIES, INC.
 
                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT
 
Cincinnati Industrial Machinery Sales Company [Ohio]
 
Daisy Parts, Inc. [Michigan]
 
Eagle-Picher Development Company, Inc. [Delaware]
 
     Transicoil Inc. [Pennsylvania]
 
          Transicoil (Malaysia) SDN. BHD. [Malaysia]
 
     Michigan Automotive Research Corporation (MARCO) [Michigan]
 
          EDI, Inc. [Michigan]
Eagle-Picher Espana, S.A. [Spain]
 
Eagle-Picher Europe, Inc. [Delaware]
 
     Eagle-Picher Fluid Systems Ltd [England and Wales]
 
Eagle-Picher Far East, Inc. [Delaware]
 
Eagle-Picher, Inc. [Virgin Islands]
 
Eagle-Picher Industries of Canada Limited [Canada]
 
Eagle-Picher Industries GmbH [Germany]
     Eagle-Picher Industries Materials GmbH [Germany]
 
Eagle-Picher Minerals, Inc. [Nevada]
 
     Eagle-Picher Minerals International S.A.R.L. [France]
 
          United Minerals Verwaltungs- und Beteiligungs GmbH [Germany]
 
          United Minerals GmbH & Co. KG [Germany]
 
Equipos de Acuna, S.A. de C.V. [Mexico]
 
Hillsdale Tool & Manufacturing Co. [Michigan]
 
Eagle-Picher Industries Europe GmbH [Germany]
 
EPTEC, S.A. de C.V. [Mexico]
 
Eagle-Picher Fluid Systems, Inc. [Michigan]
---------------
 
[  ] Brackets indicate state or country of incorporation and do not form part of
corporate name.
# Employee Spotlight: Jordan Willis 

/ Published Dec. 3, 2021
RICHMOND, Va., 
**Name:** Jordan A. Willis

**Organization:** Defense Logistics Agency Aviation at Cherry Point, North Carolina

**Years of Service:** 5 years

**What is your job title, and what do you do, specifically?** I am an inventory management specialist who provides support for the H-53 Sea Stallion. I work with my counterparts to meet the needs of our Fleet Readiness Center East customers by making sure they have all of the pieces and parts they need when repairing and rebuilding aircraft so that our fighting men and woman are always ready for action.

**What do you like most about your job?** My favorite part of my job, first and foremost, is supporting the warfighter by whatever means necessary. However, I wouldn’t be able to do my job without the help and comradery of all my fellow teammates. It is a pleasure to be a part of such a great group of people.

**What is your fondest memory of working for DLA Aviation?** One of my fondest memories of my time here at DLA is participating in our team building activities. I greatly enjoy these opportunities! In the past, these opportunities have consisted of us going out to lunch and or partaking in some other group activity.

**What kind(s) of training and education helps your work performance in your current role?** My on-the-job training happens daily. I find this to be a great thing. I believe that as a result, I learn something new every day. This helps me to improve upon the service that I provide to the customer. I also appreciate all the classes that have been offered to me during my time with the agency, as well as the help my coworkers and partner’s give to me every day. We are one big happy family where the education never ends.

**What was your first job?** My first job was as a cable technician when I was 16-years-old.

**What advice would you have given yourself 10 years ago?** The advice I would give to myself 10 years ago would be to buy bitcoin.

**Where do you see yourself five years from now?** Five years from now I see myself still here at DLA Aviation as a part of this great team!

**What’s your biggest pet peeve?** I have a few pet peeves: liars, people who don’t use their turn signal, and when someone tells me the end of a movie or tv show before I’ve seen it.

**What are some of your passions outside of work?** I enjoy sport shooting, hunting and just getting together and hanging out with good people.

**What’s the most thrilling/adventurous thing you have ever done?** Quitting my job at 31 to go to college.

**Who is the most influential person in your life... past or present?** My supervisor, John LaManna. He’s basically my mentor, plus he approves my leave-requests.

**If you could start your life over again, what would you do differently?** I wouldn’t, because all my life choices have led me to where I am and who I am today. (Ok, I would change not buying bitcoin)

**What type of music do you most enjoy?** I like 90’s alternative/rock and mostly listen to that and Alkaline trio and Lucero.
Exhibit 10.1

                                                            November 1, 2005


Mr. Gary Granoff
Elk Associates Funding Corp.
747 Third Avenue
New York, NY 10017

Dear Gary:

We are pleased to confirm that we hold available a line of credit for Elk
Associates Funding Corp. in the amount of $16,000,000.

Credit availability under this line is subject to the receipt of and continuing
satisfaction with current financial and other information which current
information is to be furnished by you to the Bank as we may, from time to time,
require.

The line of credit expires on January 31, 2006.

As in the past, the line of credit may be withdrawn at the Bank's sole
discretion at any time.

If you have any questions, please call me.

                                               Very truly yours,

                                               /s/ Robert J. Fainelli

                                               Robert J. Fainelli
                                               First Vice President


ISRAEL DISCOUNT BANK OF NEW YORK o MEMBER FDIC
511 FIFTH AVE. NEW YORK, NY 10017-4997 o TEL: (212) 551-8500
II

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2391

To repeal the prohibitions against political recommendations relating to

Federal employment, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

AUGUST 15 (legislative day, AUGUST 11), 1994

Mr. SIMON (for himself, Mr. PRYOR, Mr. DECONCINI, Mr. METZENBAUM, and

Mr. REID) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs

A BILL

To repeal the prohibitions against political recommendations

relating to Federal employment, and for other purposes.

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

3 SECTION 1. REPEAL OF PROHIBITIONS AGAINST POLITI4 CAL RECOMMENDATIONS RELATING TO FED5 ERAL EMPLOYMENT.

6 (a) FEDERAL EMPLOYMENT.—(1) Section 3303 of

7 title 5, United States Code, is repealed.

8 (2)(A) The table of sections for chapter 33 of title

9 5, United States Code, is amended by striking out the item

10 relating to section 3303.
2

S 2391 IS

1 (B) Section 2302(b)(2) of title 5, United States Code,

2 is amended to read as follows:

3 ‘‘(2) solicit or consider any recommendation or

4 statement, oral or written, with respect to any indi5 vidual who requests or is under consideration for

6 any personnel action unless such recommendation or

7 statement is based on the personal knowledge or

8 records of the person furnishing it and consists of—

9 ‘‘(A) an evaluation of the work perform10 ance, ability, aptitude, or general qualifications

11 of such individual; or

12 ‘‘(B) an evaluation of the character, loy13 alty, or suitability of such individual;’’.

Æ
No. 09-11440.

#### Tyrone Wallace, Petitioner v. Richard Tull.

562 U.S. 804, 131 S. Ct. 198,

178 L. Ed. 2d 5,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7819.

October 4, 2010.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied, and petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit dismissed. See Rule 39.8. As petitioner has repeatedly abused this Court’s process, the Clerk is directed not to accept any further petitions in noncriminal matters from petitioner unless the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) is paid and petition submitted in compliance with Rule 33.1. See Martin v. District of *6Columbia Court of Appeals, 506 U.S. 1, 113 S. Ct. 397, 121 L. Ed. 2d 305 (1992) (per curiam).
#### Matthew J. Ryan, Appellant, et al., Plaintiff, v Powers & Santola, LLP, et al., Respondents.

Submitted January 23, 2017;

decided March 28, 2017

Motion for reargument of motion for leave to appeal denied *[see*28 NY3d 1068 (2016)]. Motion for poor person relief dismissed as academic.
#### In the Matter of Zindel Lebovic, Appellant, v Shira Lebovic, Respondent.

[48 NYS3d 616]

Appeal by the father from two orders of the Family Court, Queens County (Julie Stanton, Ct. Atty. Ref.), both dated October 15, 2015. The first order, without a hearing, granted the mother’s motion to dismiss the father’s petition to modify an order of visitation, and the second order dismissed the father’s petition.

*893Ordered that the orders are affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The Family Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in dismissing the father’s petition to modify an order of visitation to grant him increased visitation with the subject children. A party seeking to modify a prior visitation order must show that there has been a sufficient change in circumstances since the entry of the order of visitation such that modification is warranted to further the children’s best interests *(see Matter of Licato v Jornet,*146 AD3d 787 [2017]; *Matter of Coull v Rottman,*131 AD3d 964 [2015]; *Matter of Diaz v Garcia,*119 AD3d 682 [2014]). The party seeking modification is not automatically entitled to a hearing, but must make an evidentiary showing sufficient to warrant a hearing *(see Matter of Besen v Besen,*127 AD3d 1076 [2015]; *Whitehead v Whitehead,*122 AD3d 921 [2014]; *Matter of Getreu v Bossert,*82 AD3d 1098 [2011]). The father failed to make such an evidentiary showing. The Family Court’s determination had a sound and substantial basis in the record, and should not be set aside *(see Matter of Licato v Jornet,*146 AD3d at 787; *Matter of McDaniel v McDaniel,*140 AD3d 1167 [2016]; *Matter of Fekete-Markovits v Markovits,*140 AD3d 1061 [2016]).

Mastro, J.P., Chambers, Miller and Barros, JJ., concur.
No. 10-5759.

#### Abdur Rahman Kantamanto, Petitioner v. Lorenzo North.

562 U.S. 966, 131 S. Ct. 466,

178 L. Ed. 2d 296,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7966,

October 12, 2010.

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

Same case below, 375 Fed. Appx. 163.
# C_2013377EN.01002401.xml

| 21.12.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 377/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.12.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 377/24

---

Action brought on 2 July 2013 — ZZ v Commission

(Case F-65/13)

2013/C 377/56

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: L. Mansullo, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Application for annulment of the rejection of the applicant’s claim addressed to the Commission seeking payment by the Commission of the sum of EUR 10 000 on account of the harm purportedly suffered by the applicant as a result of a letter informing him, inter alia, that the Commission had set off his applications for costs, which the Commission had been ordered to pay, against sums owed by the applicant to the Commission.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision, whatever the form in which it was adopted, rejecting the claim for compensation of 20 June 2012 contained in the note of 20 June 2012; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision, whatever the form in which it was adopted, rejecting the claim for compensation of 20 June 2012 contained in the note of 20 June 2012;

| — | Annul the note of 27 August 2012 bearing, at the top right hand corner of the first of the three pages comprising the note, the reference ‘Ref.Ares (2012)1003126 — 27 August 2012’, which was received by the applicant on 9 October 2012; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the note of 27 August 2012 bearing, at the top right hand corner of the first of the three pages comprising the note, the reference ‘Ref.Ares (2012)1003126 — 27 August 2012’, which was received by the applicant on 9 October 2012;

| — | In so far as necessary, annul the decision, whatever the form in which it was adopted, rejecting the complaint of 24 October 2012; |
| --- | --- |

—

In so far as necessary, annul the decision, whatever the form in which it was adopted, rejecting the complaint of 24 October 2012;

| — | In so far as necessary, annul the note of 11 February 2013, bearing the reference HR.D.2/MB/ac 170184, written in Italian, consisting of two sheet of paper typed on one side, received by the applicant on 22 March 2013; |
| --- | --- |

—

In so far as necessary, annul the note of 11 February 2013, bearing the reference HR.D.2/MB/ac 170184, written in Italian, consisting of two sheet of paper typed on one side, received by the applicant on 22 March 2013;

| — | Order the Commission to pay to the applicant the sum of EUR 10 000, together with interest at the rate of 10 % per annum and annual capitalisation with effect from 21 June 2012 until actual payment of that sum; |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Commission to pay to the applicant the sum of EUR 10 000, together with interest at the rate of 10 % per annum and annual capitalisation with effect from 21 June 2012 until actual payment of that sum;

| — | Order the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Commission to pay the costs.

---
No. D-2547.

#### In the Matter of Discipline of Marvin Deon Wilson, Sr.

562 U.S. 815, 131 S. Ct. 406,

178 L. Ed. 2d 271,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7571.

October 4, 2010.

Marvin Deon Wilson, Sr., of Homestead, Florida, is suspended from the practice of law in this Court and a rule will issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.
No. 09-11202.

#### Pirouz Sedaghaty, Petitioner v. United States District Court for the District of Oregon, et al.

562 U.S. 867, 131 S. Ct. 390,

178 L. Ed. 2d 95,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6662.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
# Distribution kicks off Holiday Spirit Week with tree lighting ceremony

/ Published Dec. 16, 2019
NEW CUMBERLAND, Pa., 
Surrounded by Defense Logistics Agency Distribution headquarters personnel, Navy Rear Adml. Kevin Jones, commanding officer, DLA Distribution, provided the five second count down before the tree lighting, held in the lobby of the headquarters building Monday, Dec. 9.

The tree lighting event sparked the beginning of activities planned for Distribution’s “Holiday Spirit Week” taking place Dec. 9 through 13. 

Other festivities planned for the week included a visit from a few of Santa’s special elves and an “ugly sweater contest.”

During the tree lighting ceremony, Jones wished everyone a wonderful holiday season, reminded them to be safe in all they do, and thanked them for their hard work in support to the warfighter.

Participants then sang holiday carols and enjoyed cookies and punch.
No. 10-342.

#### Walter E. Kozachuk, Petitioner v. Medpointe Healthcare, Inc.

562 U.S. 1005, 131 S. Ct. 529,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8628.

178 L. Ed. 2d 374,

November 1, 2010.

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

Same case below, 373 Fed. Appx. 62.
EXHIBIT
        23.1
 
 Consent
        of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
 
 
 
 
 
 
 CONSENT
        OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
 
 
 The
        Board
        of Directors and Stockholders
 LaserCard
        Corporation:
 
 We
        consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on
        Form
        S-3 (No. 333-112172) and the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos.
        333-113690, 333-89473, 333-23091, 333-39493, 333-54018, 333-54026, 333-71548,
        333-122840, 333-122841, 333-132558, and 333-132559) of LaserCard
        Corporation and subsidiaries (formerly Drexler Technology Corporation and
        subsidiaries) of our reports dated May 15, 2006, relating to the
        consolidated balance sheets of LaserCard Corporation and subsidiaries,
        as of March 31, 2006 and 2005, and the related consolidated statements of
        operations, stockholders' equity and comprehensive income (loss), and cash
        flows
        of LaserCard Corporation and subsidiaries for the fiscal years then
        ended, management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control
        over financial reporting, and the effectiveness of internal control over
        financial reporting of LaserCard Corporation and subsidiaries, included in
        this
        Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended March 31,
        2006.
 
 We
        also
        consent to the incorporation by reference of our report on financial statement
        schedule dated May 15, 2006, which appears in this Annual Report on Form
        10-K.
 
 /s/
        Odenberg, Ullakko, Muranishi & Co. LLP
 San
        Francisco, California
 June
        14,
        2006
     93
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Marlon Sanders, Appellant.

[47 NYS3d 914]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Buchter, J.), rendered August 25, 2010, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is based, in part, upon matter appearing on the record and, in part, on matter outside the record, and thus constitutes a “mixed claim” of ineffective assistance *(People v Maxwell,*89 AD3d 1108, 1109 [2011]). In this case, it is not evident from the matter appearing on the record that the defendant was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel *(see People v Marryshow,*135 AD3d 964, 965 [2016]; *cf. People v Crump,*53 NY2d 824, 825 [1981]; *People v Brown,*45 NY2d 852 [1978]). Accordingly, a CPL 440.10 proceeding is the appropriate forum for reviewing the defendant’s claim in its entirety *(see People v Marryshow,*135 AD3d at 965; *People v Maxwell,*89 AD3d at 1109; *cf. People v Maldonado,*116 AD3d 980 [2014]).

The defendant’s valid waiver of his right to appeal precludes appellate review of his contention that the sentence imposed was excessive *(see People v Lopez,*6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]; *847
      *People v Palladino,*140 AD3d 1194, 1195 [2016]; *People v Edmunson,*109 AD3d 621, 622 [2013]; *People v Ropiza,*100 AD3d 935, 936 [2012]).

Mastro, J.P., Chambers, Maltese and Duffy, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 121 (Wednesday, June 24, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 34362]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-16702]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Export Administration


Transportation and Related Equipment Technical Advisory 
Committee; Notice of Closed Meeting

    A meeting of the Transportation and Related Equipment Technical 
Advisory Committee will be held July 9, 1998, 9:00 a.m., in the Herbert 
C. Hoover Building, Room 1617M-2, 14th Street between Pennsylvania and 
Constitution Avenues, NW, Washington, DC. The Committee advises the 
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Export Administration with 
respect to technical questions that affect the level of export controls 
applicable to transportation and related equipment or technology. The 
Committee will meet only in Executive Session to discuss matters 
properly classified under Executive Order 12958, dealing with the U.S. 
export control program and strategic criteria related thereto.
    The Assistant Secretary for Administration, with the concurrence of 
the delegate of the General Counsel, formally determined on December 
16, 1996, pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee 
Act, as amended, that the series of meetings or portions of meetings of 
the Committee and of any Subcommittees thereof, dealing with the 
classified materials listed in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(1) shall be exempt from 
the provisions relating to public meetings found in section 10(a)(1) 
and (a)(3), of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. The remaining series 
of meetings or portions thereof will be open to the public.
    A copy of the Notice of Determination to close meetings or portions 
of meetings of the Committee is available for public inspection and 
copying in the Central Reference and Records Inspection Facility, Room 
6020, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC. For further 
information, call (202) 482-2583.

    Dated: June 18, 1998.
Lee Ann Carpenter,
Director, Technical Advisory Committee Unit.
[FR Doc. 98-16702 Filed 6-23-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-33-M