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

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 13-2906

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

Juan Francisco Alamo-Santellanes, also known as Paco, also known as Jose

Rusben Alamo-Santellanes

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant

____________

 Appeal from United States District Court 

for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul

____________

 Submitted: March 7, 2014

Filed: March 13, 2014

[Unpublished]

____________

Before WOLLMAN, MURPHY, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Juan Alamo-Santellanes directly appeals the sentence imposed by the district

court after he pleaded guilty to a drug offense. His counsel has moved to withdraw, 1

The Honorable Patrick J. Schiltz, United States District Judge for the District 1

of Minnesota.
and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that

Alamo-Santellanes’s statutory-minimum prison term is substantively unreasonable.

After careful review, we conclude that Alamo-Santellanes’s challenge to his

sentence fails because the district court lacked authority to impose a sentence below

the statutory minimum. See United States v. Watts, 553 F.3d 603, 604 (8th Cir. 2009)

(per curiam) (district courts lack authority to reduce sentences below

congressionally-mandated statutory minimums); United States v. Gregg, 451 F.3d

930, 937 (8th Cir. 2006) (United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), does not

relate to statutorily imposed sentences). Having reviewed the record independently

in accordance with Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous

issues. Therefore, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, subject to counsel

informing Alamo-Santellanes about procedures for seeking rehearing or filing a

petition for certiorari. The judgment is affirmed.

______________________________

-2-
# C_2015056EN.01001802.xml

| 16.2.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 56/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.2.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 56/18

---

Order of the General Court of 21 November 2014 — Kinnarps v OHIM (MAKING LIFE BETTER AT WORK)

(Case T-697/13) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark MAKING LIFE BETTER AT WORK - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctiveness - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Action in part manifestly unfounded in law and in part manifestly inadmissible))

(2015/C 056/25)

Language of the case: Swedish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Kinnarps AB (Kinnarp, Sweden) (represented by: M. Wahlin, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: G. Melander and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 28 October 2013 (Case R 2272/2012-2) concerning an application for registration of the word sign MAKING LIFE BETTER AT WORK as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed.

| 2. | Kinnarps AB is ordered to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Kinnarps AB is ordered to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 93, 29.3.2014.

1

---
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 May 27, 2014

s0519

Order 

Clerk

May 27, 2014

148356 & (14)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 148356

COA: 316725

Wayne CC: 07-024398-FC

SEAN DARNELL DANIELS, Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 29, 2013 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D). The 

motion to expand the record and for an evidentiary hearing is DENIED.
No. 10-11059.

#### Howell Way Woltz, Petitioner v. United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina.

565 U.S. 864, 132 S. Ct. 208,

181 L. Ed. 2d 112,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6909.

October 3, 2011.

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

Same case below, 427 Fed. Appx. 271.
No. 10-10433.

#### Daniel E. Rucker, Petitioner v. San Bernardino County, California, et al.

565 U.S. 836, 132 S. Ct. 142,

181 L. Ed. 2d 61,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6342.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, Fourth Appellate District, Division Two, denied.
ARTIS CHARLES HARRELL Pro se - TDC# 1334295

W.C. McConnell Unit



### 3001 S. Emily Dr. Beeville, Texas 78102

December 4, 2015

COURT OF APPEALS, FIRST DISTRICT 

### c/o Clerk of Court 301 Fannin Street Houston, Texas 77002

RE: Case No: 01-15-00731-CV T.C. Case No. 2014-63129
Status of Mandamus FILEDIN 

## 1STCOURTOFAPPEALS HOUSTON,TEXAS 

# DEC102015

CLER

Dear Clerk of Court: 

### I received notice from this court that the court filed my petition for writ of mandamus on August 31, 2015. However, I 

## have not received anything regarding the statue. Please inform me in writing of the status of my petition because the trial court has set the case for trial on May 2, 2016. I need this issue resolved prior to trial. 

## Thank you for your immediate assistance. Sincerely,

Artis Charles Harrell•si o o w

t M Q cp en U)

a tn rt rj
o 03 OJ fD O rD O < «-«•&.H > a o ntn 3 ^ ~ o too o ojJ o ^ o> (T Ul(D fl>

- PI 3 t-3 hro »-* XK 0) [ft O H -J • CO h-1 o C3 33



### $ S :H
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF COYNE INTERNATIONAL ENTERPRISES CORP. AND
SUBSIDIARIES FOR THE QUARTER ENDED APRIL 30, 1999.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>        0001066242
<NAME>       COYNE INTERNATIONAL ENTERPRISES CORP

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-1999
<CASH>                                         623,336
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               14,997,145
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  7,630,448
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            51,341,609
<PP&E>                                      92,801,591
<DEPRECIATION>                              46,779,544
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             120,213,320
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       30,943,675
<BONDS>                                     95,560,104
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  4,806,200
<COMMON>                                           769
<OTHER-SE>                                (12,237,931)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               120,213,320
<SALES>                                      2,546,540
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            36,567,137
<CGS>                                        1,689,261
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               34,574,830
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,620,801
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (628,494)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (172,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (456,949)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (456,494)
<EPS-BASIC>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
**Exhibit23****Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements of Jo-Ann Stores, Inc.listed below of our reports dated April 2, 2007, with respect to the consolidated financialstatements of Jo-Ann Stores, Inc., Jo-Ann Stores, Inc. management’s assessment of theeffectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, and the effectiveness of internalcontrol over financial reporting of Jo-Ann Stores, Inc. included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K)for the year ended February 3, 2007.     Form Registration Number       S-8 033-60177 1994 Executive Incentive PlanS-8 333-10093 1994 Executive Incentive PlanS-8 333-72445 1998 Incentive Compensation PlanS-8 333-128157 1998 Incentive Compensation PlanS-8 333-11653 Employees’ Savings and Profit-Sharing PlanS-8 033-60179 1990 Employees Stock Option and Stock Appreciation Rights Plan
EXHIBIT 32.01



Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to

18 U.S.C. Section 1350

And Securities Exchange Act Rule 13a-14(b)



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Concur Technologies, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, S. Steven Singh, as President, Chief Executive Officer, and Chairman of
the Board of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and Securities Exchange Act Rule 13a-14(b), that:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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: February 13, 2004



By

/s/ S. Steven SinghS. Steven Singh President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board




This certification accompanies
this report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed to be filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
No. 11-5332.

#### Troy Anthony Norvell, Petitioner v. California.

565 U.S. 902, 132 S. Ct. 298,

181 L. Ed. 2d 181,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5405.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, Sixth Appellate District, denied.
EXHIBIT  21.1

                 SUBSIDIARIES OF ENERGY CORPORATION OF AMERICAN
                                ON JUNE 30, 2004


     NAME OF SUBSIDIARY                 STATE OF INCORPORATION

A&W, LLC                                    West Virginia
Allegheny & Western Energy Corporation      West Virginia
ECA Alliance, LLC                           West Virginia
ECA Holdings, L.P.                          Texas
ECA Partners, L.L.C.                        West Virginia
Eastern American Energy Corporation         West Virginia
Eastern Exploration Corporation             West Virginia
Eastern Marketing Corporation               West Virginia
Eastern Pipeline Corporation                West Virginia
Westech Energy Corporation                  Colorado
Westech Energy New Zealand                  New Zealand
Westech Energy New Zealand, LLC             Colorado


                                        1
<PAGE>
No. 10-381.

#### Clarence L. Vance, Petitioner v. Illinois.

562 U.S. 1172, 131 S. Ct. 983,

178 L. Ed. 2d 811,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 137.

January 10, 2011.

Petition for rehearing denied.

Former decision, 562 U.S. 1005, 131 S. Ct. 534, 178 L. Ed. 2d 375, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 8552.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 139 (Tuesday, July 21, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 39116]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-19381]


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

RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD


Agency Forms Submitted for OMB Review

AGENCY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 
U.S.C. Chapter 35), the Railroad Retirement Board (RRB) has submitted 
the following proposal(s) for the collection of information to the 
Office of Management and Budget for review and approval.

SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL(S):
    (1) Collection title: Pay Rate Report.
    (2) Form(s) submitted: UI-1e.
    (3) OMB Number: 3220-0097.
    (4) Expiration date of current OMB clearance: 9/30/1998.
    (5) Type of request: Revision of a currently approved collection.
    (6) Respondents: Individuals or households.
    (7) Estimated annual number of respondents: 750.
    (8) Total annual responses: 750.
    (9) Total annual reporting hours: 63.
    (10) Collection description: Under the Railroad Unemployment 
Insurance Act. The daily benefit rate for unemployment and sickness 
benefits depends on the employee's last daily rate of pay. The report 
obtains information from the employee and verification from the 
employer of the claimed rate of pay for use in determining whether an 
increase in the daily benefit rate is due.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR COMMENTS: Copies of the form and supporting 
documents can be obtained from Chuck Mierzwa, the agency clearance 
officer (312-751-3363). Comments regarding the information collection 
should be addressed to Ronald J. Hodapp, Railroad Retirement Board, 844 
North Rush Street, Chicago, Illinois 60611-2092 and the OMB reviewer, 
Laura Oliven (202) 395-7316), Office of Management and Budget, Room 
10230, New Executive Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20503.
Chuck Mierzwa,
Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. 98-19381 Filed 7-20-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7905-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 134 (Tuesday, July 14, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 37880]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18712]


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

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

[FEMA-1219-DR]


Pennsylvania; Amendment to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster for the 
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, (FEMA-1219-DR), dated June 8, 1998, and 
related determinations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 25, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Madge Dale, Response and Recovery 
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, 
(202) 646-3260.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster for the 
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, is hereby amended to include Categories A 
and B under the Public Assistance program in those areas determined to 
have been adversely affected by the catastrophe declared a major 
disaster by the President in his declaration of June 8, 1998:

    The counties of Allegheny, Beaver, Berks, Somerset and Wyoming 
Counties for Categories A and B under the Public Assistance program 
(already designated for Individual Assistance and Hazard 
Mitigation).

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) 
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 83.537, Community 
Disaster Loans; 83.538, Cora Brown Fund Program; 83.539, Crisis 
Counseling; 83.540, Disaster Legal Services Program; 83.541, 
Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 83.542, Fire Suppression 
Assistance; 83.543, Individual and Family Grant (IFG) Program; 
83.544, Public Assistance Grants; 83.545, Disaster Housing Program; 
83.548, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program)
Lacy E. Suiter,
Executive Associate Director, Response and Recovery Directorate.
[FR Doc. 98-18712 Filed 7-13-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6718-02-P
No. 10-11062.

#### Alfonzo Bernard Richardson, Petitioner v. A. J. Padula, Warden.

565 U.S. 865, 132 S. Ct. 209,

181 L. Ed. 2d 112,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6854.

October 3, 2011.

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

Same case below, 411 Fed. Appx. 632.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-6205

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

DEONZA LAMAR CARMICHAEL,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, 

District Judge. (5:08-cr-00229-FL-2; 5:12-cv-00288-FL)

Submitted: May 28, 2015 Decided: June 4, 2015

Before KING and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Deonza Lamar Carmichael, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer P. 

May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North 

Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Deonza Lamar Carmichael appeals the district court’s order 

denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. We have 

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, 

we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United 

States v. Carmichael, No. 5:08-cr-00229-FL-2; 5:12-cv-00288-FL 

(E.D.N.C. Feb. 6, 2014); see also United States v. Foote, 

__F.3d__, 2015 WL 1883538 (4th Cir. Apr. 27, 2015), petition for 

cert. filed (May 12, 2015) (No. 14-9792). We deny Carmichael’s 

motion for appointment of counsel and dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 

presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
# C_2015294EN.01000901.xml

| 7.9.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 294/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.9.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 294/9

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 9 July 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo — Spain) — María José Regojo Dans v Consejo de Estado

(Case C-177/14) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Social policy - Directive 1999/70/EC - Framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP - Clauses 3 and 4 - Principle of non-discrimination - ‘Non-permanent staff’ - Refusal to grant a three-yearly length-of-service increment - Objective grounds))

(2015/C 294/11)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Referring court

Tribunal Supremo

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: María José Regojo Dans

Applicant:

Defendant: Consejo de Estado

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | The concept of a ‘fixed-term worker’, within the meaning of clause 3(1) of the framework agreement on fixed-term work, concluded on 18 March 1999, which is set out in the Annex to Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP, must be interpreted as applying to a worker such as the applicant in the main proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The concept of a ‘fixed-term worker’, within the meaning of clause 3(1) of the framework agreement on fixed-term work, concluded on 18 March 1999, which is set out in the Annex to Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP, must be interpreted as applying to a worker such as the applicant in the main proceedings.

| 2. | Clause 4(1) of the framework agreement on fixed-term work must be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which excludes, without justification on objective grounds, non-permanent staff from the right to receive a three-yearly length-of-service increment granted, inter alia, to career civil servants when, as regards the receipt of that increment, those two categories of workers are in comparable situations, a matter which is for the referring court to ascertain. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Clause 4(1) of the framework agreement on fixed-term work must be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which excludes, without justification on objective grounds, non-permanent staff from the right to receive a three-yearly length-of-service increment granted, inter alia, to career civil servants when, as regards the receipt of that increment, those two categories of workers are in comparable situations, a matter which is for the referring court to ascertain.

---

(1)  OJ C 253, 4.8.2014.

1

---
```
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 17 (Tuesday, January 27, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 3944]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-1910]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board
[STB Finance Docket No. 33539]

The Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company--Trackage 
Rights Exemption--Southern Pacific Transportation Company

    Southern Pacific Transportation Company (SPT) has agreed to grant 
overhead trackage rights to The Burlington Northern and Santa Fe 
Railway Company (BNSF) over SPT's line between Caldwell, TX, in the 
vicinity of SPT's Ennis Subdivision milepost 30.8, and Placedo, TX, in 
the vicinity of SPT's Victoria Subdivision milepost 14.2, a distance of 
approximately 152.7 miles.1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The trackage rights are limited to southbound movements and 
are provided solely to facilitate directional operations between 
Houston, TX, and Placedo. In addition, the trackage rights will 
continue only so long as SPT continues to operate directionally 
between Houston and Placedo.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The transaction was scheduled to be consummated on January 19, 
1998. The purpose of the trackage rights is improve the operating 
efficiencies of SPT and BNSF.
    As a condition to this exemption, any employees affected by the 
trackage rights will be protected by the conditions imposed in Norfolk 
and Western Ry. Co.--Trackage Rights--BN, 354 I.C.C. 605 (1978), as 
modified in Mendocino Coast Ry., Inc.--Lease and Operate, 360 I.C.C. 
653 (1980).
    This notice is filed under 49 CFR 1180.2(d)(7). If it contains 
false or misleading information, the exemption is void ab initio. 
Petitions to revoke the exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) may be filed 
at any time. The filing of a petition to revoke will not automatically 
stay the transaction.
    An original and 10 copies of all pleadings, referring to STB 
Finance Docket No. 33539, must be filed with the Surface Transportation 
Board, Office of the Secretary, Case Control Unit, 1925 K Street, N.W., 
Washington, DC 20423-0001. In addition, a copy of each pleading must be 
served on Michael E. Roper, Esq., The Burlington Northern and Santa Fe 
Railway Company, 3017 Lou Menk Drive, P.O. Box 961039, Fort Worth, TX 
76161-0039.

    Decided: January 20, 1998.

    By the Board, David M. Konschnik, Director, Office of 
Proceedings.
Vernon A. Williams,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-1910 Filed 1-26-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915-00-P
```