alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR . 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED January 12, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-41129 Summary Calendar

MARCOS GONZALEZ, Petitioner-Appellant,

versus STEVE MORRIS, Warden Respondent-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:05-CV-339

Before GARWOOD, CLEMENT and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Marcos Gonzalez, federal prisoner # 65613-079, appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition. Gonzalez was convicted and sentenced in the Southern District of Texas in 1995 for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute and for attempting to conduct a financial transaction with the proceeds of an unlawful activity. Gonzalez challenges the2

constitutionality of his conviction and sentence in light of Blakely v. Washington , 542 U.S. 296 (2004), and United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220 (2005). The errors asserted by Gonzalez may not be raised in a section 2241 petition unless they arise under the savings clause of 28 U.S.C. § 2255. See Padilla v. United States , 416 F.3d 424, 426-27 (5th Cir. 2005). Because Gonzalez’s claim is not based on a retroactively applicable Supreme Court decision which establishes that he may have been convicted of a nonexistent offense, see Reyes-Requena v. United States , 243 F.3d 893, 904 (5th Cir. 2001), the district court properly dismissed his section 2241 petition. See Padilla , 416 F.3d at 427. Alternatively, Gonzalez seeks authorization to file a successive section 2255 motion. The district court did not transfer this case to this court for a determination whether a successive section 2255 motion should be allowed. See In re Epps , 127 F.3d 364, 364-65 (5th Cir. 1997). We decline to construe Gonzalez’s appeal from the dismissal of his section 2241 petition in the alternative as a motion for authorization to file a successive section 2255 application. Finally, Gonzalez argues that the denial of relief would amount to an unconstitutional suspension of habeas corpus, as prohibited by U.S. CONST . art. I, § 9, cl. 2. We have previously rejected that argument. See Wesson v. U.S. Penitentiary Beaumont,3

Tx, 305 F.3d 343, 346-47 (5th Cir. 2002). The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.
No. 11-61.

#### Tri M. Pham, Petitioner v. Texas.

565 U.S. 880, 132 S. Ct. 247,

181 L. Ed. 2d 142,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5289.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourteenth District, denied.

Same case below, 324 S.W.3d 869.
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

January 12, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-41129

Summary Calendar

MARCOS GONZALEZ,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

STEVE MORRIS, Warden

Respondent-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:05-CV-339

Before GARWOOD, CLEMENT and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Marcos Gonzalez, federal prisoner # 65613-079, appeals the

district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition.

Gonzalez was convicted and sentenced in the Southern District of

Texas in 1995 for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute

and for attempting to conduct a financial transaction with the

proceeds of an unlawful activity. Gonzalez challenges the
2

constitutionality of his conviction and sentence in light of

Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 (2004), and United States v.

Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005).

The errors asserted by Gonzalez may not be raised in a section

2241 petition unless they arise under the savings clause of 28

U.S.C. § 2255. See Padilla v. United States, 416 F.3d 424, 426-27

(5th Cir. 2005). Because Gonzalez’s claim is not based on a

retroactively applicable Supreme Court decision which establishes

that he may have been convicted of a nonexistent offense, see

Reyes-Requena v. United States, 243 F.3d 893, 904 (5th Cir. 2001),

the district court properly dismissed his section 2241 petition.

See Padilla, 416 F.3d at 427.

Alternatively, Gonzalez seeks authorization to file a

successive section 2255 motion. The district court did not

transfer this case to this court for a determination whether a

successive section 2255 motion should be allowed. See In re Epps,

127 F.3d 364, 364-65 (5th Cir. 1997). We decline to construe

Gonzalez’s appeal from the dismissal of his section 2241 petition

in the alternative as a motion for authorization to file a

successive section 2255 application. 

Finally, Gonzalez argues that the denial of relief would

amount to an unconstitutional suspension of habeas corpus, as

prohibited by U.S. CONST. art. I, § 9, cl. 2. We have previously

rejected that argument. See Wesson v. U.S. Penitentiary Beaumont,
3

Tx, 305 F.3d 343, 346-47 (5th Cir. 2002).

The district court’s judgment is 

AFFIRMED.
DLM 4000.25, Volume 2, November 26, 2019

Change 13

AP3.20-1 APPENDIX 3.20

AP3.20. APPENDIX 3.20

LOGISTICS REASSIGNMENT DUE-IN 

RECONCILIATION REQUEST

FIELD LEGEND

RECORD

POSITION(S) ENTRY AND INSTRUCTIONS

Document Identifier

Code

1-3 Enter DIC DLE.

Routing Identifier 

Code (TO)

4-6 Enter RIC of the losing item manager (LIM)

to which this transaction is being forwarded.

Blank 7 Leave blank.

National Stock 

Number

8-22 Enter NSN of the item.

Unit of Issue 23-24 Enter UI of item.

Quantity (Due-In) 25-29 Enter open quantity due-in, preceding 

significant digits with zeros.1

Various Fields 30-50 Perpetuate from the DIC DDX or DFX 

memorandum due-in.

Call/Order Number 51-54 Enter legacy four-position call/order number

associated with the PIIN, if applicable; 

otherwise, leave blank.

Quantity (Received) 55-59 Enter DIC D4X or D6X memorandum 

receipt quantity reported to the gaining item 

manager (GIM). Zero fill if none received. 

Leave blank if data not available.

Blank 60-66 Leave blank.

Routing Identifier 

Code (Storage 

Activity)

67-69 Enter RIC of the storage activity to which 

the item is due-in. 

Blank 70 Leave blank.

Supply Condition 71 Enter supply condition code of the item 

due-in.

1 See Appendix AP3 - Formats Introduction, Paragraph AP3.3.1.
DLM 4000.25, Volume 2, November 26, 2019

Change 13

AP3.20-2 APPENDIX 3.20

FIELD LEGEND

RECORD

POSITION(S) ENTRY AND INSTRUCTIONS

Date

(Estimated Delivery)

72-76 Enter estimated delivery date of delinquent 

due-in (i.e., last two digits of the calendar 

year in record positions 72-73 and the 

ordinal day of calendar year in record 

positions 74-76). If not available, leave 

blank.

Routing Identifier 

Code (FROM)

77-79 Enter RIC of the GIM preparing this 

transaction.

Blank 80 Leave blank.
A/D-12

OVERTIME AND SHIFT ASSIGNMENT RECORD

EXCEPTIONS: S – SICK LEAVE

A – ANNUAL LEAVE

M – MILITARY LEAVE 

(Civilian)

H – Holiday Leave

I – Administrative Leave

V – Leave Without Pay (Authorized LWOP)

C – Compensatory Leave

L – Loan to Another Shop

J – Court/Excused Leave (Jury Duty)

U – Absent Without Leave (AWOL)

W – Overtime Worked

D – Overtime Declined

G – Overtime Assigned (Employee Absent)

P – Overtime Paid but Not Worked (M, J etc)

E – Overtime Charged While Employee on Leave

TRADE RATING SHOP MONTH YEAR 2 nd SHIFT: RED

3 rd SHIFT: GREEN

TOTAL 

MONTHLY 

EARNED

OT

HRS NAMES

ACCUMLTD

EARNED

OVERTIME 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
RECORD YOUR

VOICE FOR LOVED 

ONES WHILE

YOU STILL CAN.

Terrie, Age 52 

North Carolina

Smoking causes immediate damage to your body.

For Terrie, it gave her throat cancer. You can quit. 

For free help, call 1-800-QUIT-NOW.

#CDCTips
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 135 (Wednesday, July 15, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 38164]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18790]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. GT98-79-000]


Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline Company; Notice of Filing

July 9, 1998.
    Take notice that on July 1, 1998, Williston Basin Interstate 
Pipeline Company (Williston Basin), tendered for filing as part of its 
FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1, the following revised 
tariff sheets to become effective July 1, 1998:

Ninth Revised Sheet No. 775
Thirteenth Revised Sheet No. 776
Fifteenth Revised Sheet No. 777
Fourthteenth Revised Sheet No. 825
Twelfth Revised Sheet No. 826
Seventeenth Revised Sheet No. 827
Twelfth Revised Sheet No. 828
Nineteenth Revised Sheet No. 829
Eighteenth Revised Sheet No. 830
Twenty-fourth Revised Sheet No. 831
Twenty-fourth Revised Sheet No. 833

    Williston Basin states that the revised tariff sheets are being 
filed simply to update and clarify its Master Receipt/Delivery Point 
List.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C., in 
accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's Rules 
and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed as provided 
in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-18790 Filed 7-14-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### In the Matter of 15 West 55th St. Property LLC et al., Petitioners, v James D’Auguste et al., Respondents.

[48 NYS3d 600]

The above-named petitioners having presented an application to this Court praying for an order, pursuant to article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules, now, upon reading and filing the papers in said procéeding, and due deliberation having been had thereon, it is unanimously ordered that the application be and the same hereby is denied and the petition dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

Concur — Acosta, J.P., Renwick, Manzanet-Daniels, Webber and Gesmer, JJ.
No. 10-329.

#### Orjiakor Isiogu, et al., Petitioners v. Michigan Bell Telephone Company, dba AT&T Michigan.

562 U.S. 1198, 131 S. Ct. 1062,

178 L. Ed. 2d 862,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 1049.

January 24, 2011.

Motion of petitioners to dispense with printing the joint appendix granted.

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

Same case below, 597 F.3d 370.
116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3005 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 13308 Midland Road in Poway, California, 

as the ‘‘Ray Chavez Post Office Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 3005 EH

1 SECTION 1. RAY CHAVEZ POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

3 Postal Service located at 13308 Midland Road in Poway, 

4 California, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Ray 

5 Chavez Post Office Building’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

8 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

9 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Ray Chavez Post Of10 fice Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 30, 

2020. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3005 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postfice Building’’. Poway, California, as the ‘‘Ray Chavez Post Of- al Service located at 13308 Midland Road in
No. 10-10333.

#### Alex Dale Thomas, Petitioner v. California.

565 U.S. 834, 132 S. Ct. 136,

181 L. Ed. 2d 56,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5340.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of California denied.

Same case below, 51 Cal. 4th 449, 121 Cal. Rptr. 3d 521, 247 P.3d 886.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 126 (Wednesday, July 1, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 36037]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-17530]


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

UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY


Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations

AGENCY: United States Information Agency.
    Republican FR 98-160400 Published @ Page 33123 in the Federal 
Register of June 17, 1998 is republished in its entirety.
    This notice is hereby given of the following determinations: 
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985, 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978 
(43 FR 13359, March 29, 1978), and Delegation Order No. 85-5 of June 
27, 1985 (50 FR 27393, July 2, 1985). I hereby determine that the 
fragment of the Dead Scroll, Psalms Tehillim, to be included in the 
exhibit ``A Living Memorial to the Holocaust'' at the Museum of Jewish 
Heritage in New York, imported from abroad for temporary exhibition 
without profit within the United States, is of cultural significance. 
This object is imported pursuant to a loan agreement with the foreign 
lenders. I also determine that the exhibition or display of this object 
for ``A Living Memorial to the Holocaust'' at the Museum of Jewish 
Heritage in New York beginning in July 1998 is in the national 
interest. The action of the United States in this matter and the 
immunity based on the application of the provisions of the law involved 
does not imply any view of the United States concerning the ownership 
of this exhibition object. Further, it is not based upon and does not 
represent any change in the position of the United States regarding the 
status of Jerusalem or the territories occupied by Israel since 1967. 
See letter of September 22, 1978, of President Jimmy Carter, attached 
to the Camp David Accords, reprinted in 78 Dept of State Bulletin 11 
(October 1978); Statement of September 1, 1982 of President Ronald 
Reagan, reprinted 82 Dept of State Bulletin 23, (September 1982).
    Public Notice of these Determinations is ordered to be published in 
the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A copy of this list may be obtained by 
contacting Ms. Jacqueline Caldwell, Assistant General Counsel, at (202) 
619-6982. The address is, U.S. Information Agency, 301--4th Street, 
S.W., Room 700, Washington, D.C. 20547-0001.

    Dated: June 25, 1998.
Les Jin,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 98-17530 Filed 6-30-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8230-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 135 (Wednesday, July 15, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 38161]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18806]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP98-341-000]


Northern Natural Gas Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC 
Gas Tariff

July 9, 1998.
    Take notice that on July 2, 1998, Northern Natural Gas Company 
(Northern), tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Fifth 
Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, proposed to be 
effective August 2. 1998:

Fourth Revised Sheet No. 201
First Revised Sheet No. 304
First Revised Sheet No. 305

    Northern states that the above-referenced tariff sheets amend the 
General Terms and Conditions of Northern's Tariff to allow Northern to 
acquire and hold interruptible contractual rights on other pipelines 
for transportation and storage capacity for operational support.
    Northern further states that copies of the filing have been mailed 
to each of its customers and interested State Commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's 
Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed as 
provided in Section 154.210 of the Commission Regulations. Protests 
will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate 
action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to 
the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a 
motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-18806 Filed 7-14-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
No. 10-10748.

#### Henry Cruz Barraza, aka Henry Geo Barraza, aka Henry Cruz-Barraza, aka Henry Garcia, aka Henry Geovavay Barraza, aka Henry Geovarray Cruz Barraza, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 847, 132 S. Ct. 167,

181 L. Ed. 2d 80,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6382.

October 3, 2011.

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

Same case below, 414 Fed. Appx. 663.
## PUBLISH

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-2794

D.C. Docket No. 94-1646-CIV-T-24C
WEST AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, a foreign corporation, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus BAND & DESENBERG, a Florida Partnership, Defendant-Appellant, MARILYN PARKHURST, MARLENE GREEN, SHARON REILLY, SUSAN ANDERSON, Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida (April 17, 1998) Before CARNES, Circuit Judge, CLARK and CAMPBELL*, Senior Circuit Judges.
CLARK, Senior Circuit Judge:

*Honorable Levin H. Campbell, Senior U.S. Ci rcuit Judge for the First Circuit, sitting by designation.1 Deni Associates of Florida, Inc. v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Ins. Co., So.2d (1998).

2 Id . at . 2 

### This is an appeal from the district court’s order granting the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment in an insurance declaratory judgment action. The district court’s order, published at 925 F.Supp. 758 (M.D. Fla.1996), contains a concise presentation of the facts and an ex cellent discussion of the law, but noted that Florida law was not settled on the interpreta tion of an absolute pollution exclusion. Since the district court’s opinion was issu ed, the Florida Supreme Court decided Deni Associates of Florida, Inc. v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Ins. Co. , 1 

### and ruled that two pollution exclusion clauses nearly identical to the pollution exclusion clause in this case presented no ambiguities. 2 

### Based on that opinion, we hold that the pollution exclusion clause at issue here is not am biguous, and AFFIRM the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the plaintiff.
Exhibit 32.1

STATEMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER UNDER 18 U.S.C. § 1350

I, Ashutosh Roy, the chief
executive officer of eGain Communications Corporation (the Company), certify for the purposes of section 1350 of chapter 63 of title 18 of the United States Code that, to my knowledge,

(i) the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2008 (the Report), fully complies with the
requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and

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



/s/ Ashutosh RoyAshutosh RoyNovember 14, 2008


A signed original of this written statement required by 18 U.S.C. § 1350 has been provided to eGain
Communications Corporation and will be retained by eGain Communications Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
**Certification** ****
  
  I, Barry
Goldstein, certify that:
  1.  I have
reviewed this Form 10-KSB of DCAP Group, Inc.;
  2.  Based on
my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material
fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading
with respect to the period covered by this report;
  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 small business issuer as of, and
for, the periods presented in this report;
  4.  The small
business issuer’s other certifying officers 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)) for the small business issuer and
have:
  a.
    Designed
      such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
      controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure
      that material information relating to the small business issuer, including
      its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
      entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
      prepared;
  b.
    Evaluated
      the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosure controls and
      procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
      effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of
      the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;
      and
  c.
    Disclosed
      in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internal control
      over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s
      most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer’s fourth fiscal
      quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or
      is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer’s
      internal control over financial reporting;
and
  5.  The small
business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
small business issuer’s auditors and the audit committee of the small business
issuer’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
  
 a.
    All
      significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
      operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
      reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer’s ability
      to record, process, summarize and report financial information;
      and
  b.
    Any
      fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
      employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer’s
      internal control over financial reporting.
  Date:
March 30, 2005
  /s/ Barry
B. Goldstein
 
 Barry B.
Goldstein
 Chief
Executive Officer and
 Chief
Financial Officer