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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-40466

Conference Calendar

 

JOHN W. BANOS,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

L. GAIL, employee in 

the Tyler Division of 

U.S. District Court,

Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:97-CV-7

- - - - - - - - - -

August 15, 1997

Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, AND DUHÉ, CIRCUIT JUDGES.

PER CURIAM:*

The magistrate judge improperly granted John Wesley Banos,

Texas prisoner # 545431, leave to proceed on appeal in forma

pauperis (IFP). Banos has at least three strikes, pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1915(g), which bars Banos from IFP status. See Banos v.

Garner, No. 96-CV-92 (E.D. Tex. May 22, 1996) (case dismissed as

frivolous; appeal dismissed for want of prosecution); Banos v.

Bush, No. 96-CV-219 (E.D. Tex. Oct. 3, 1996)(case dismissed as
No. 97-40466

-2-

frivolous; appeal dismissed for want of prosecution); Banos v.

Shaw, No. 93-CV-45 (E.D. Tex. Apr. 23, 1993)(case dismissed as

frivolous; district court’s judgment was affirmed on appeal).

Nothing in the record indicates that the exception to the

statutory bar applies in this case. IT IS ORDERED that the

earlier order granting leave to proceed IFP is VACATED. Banos

has thirty days in which to pay the $105 filing fee. Failure to

make a timely payment will result in the dismissal of the appeal

for want of prosecution. See 5th Cir. R. 42.3.1.2.

APPEAL DISMISSED IF FULL FILING FEE NOT PAID.
# Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed July 27, 2022. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________ No. 3D21-2187 Lower Tribunal No. F96-12914

________________ 

### Steven Gamble, Appellant,
vs. 

### The State of Florida, Appellee.
An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Lody Jean, Judge. Steven Gamble, in proper person. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Kayla Heather McNab, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. Before LOGUE, HENDON and BOKOR, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed.
No. 09-9292.

#### Leon King, Petitioner v. United States.

559 U.S. 1044, 130 S. Ct. 2080,

176 L. Ed. 2d 427,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2860.

March 29, 2010.

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

Same case below, 353 Fed. Appx. 410.
No. 09-9327.

#### Leroy Parham, Petitioner v. United States.

559 U.S. 1078, 130 S. Ct. 2113,

176 L. Ed. 2d 740,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3371.

April 19, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 350 Fed. Appx. 821.
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 17

- 11047 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v. ALONSO ERNESTO VELO

- CANO , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 5:17

- CR

- 22

- 1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and SMITH, Circuit Judges

. PER CURIAM: * Alonso Ernesto Velo

- Cano appeals the 48

- month above

- guidelines sentence and 3

- year term of supervised release imposed following his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He argues that his previous conviction of a felony or an aggravated felony must be charged in the indictment and either proven to a jury or admitted as part of a guilty plea before the statutory sentence enhancements of § 1326(b) may be

* 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 March 26, 2018 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 17-11047 Document: 00514402445 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/26/2018No. 17

- 11047

2 applied. He concedes that the issue is foreclosed by Almendarez

- Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224 (1998) ; h owever, he seeks to preserve the issue for possible Supreme Court review. In Almendarez

- Torres , 523 U.S. at 239

- 47, the Supreme Court held that for purposes of a statutory sentencing enhancement, a prior conviction is not a fact that must be all eged in an indictment or found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. This court has held that subsequent Supreme Court decisions did not overrule Almendarez

- Torres

. See United States v. Wallace , 759 F.3d 486, 497 (5th Cir. 2014) (considering the effect of Alleyne v. United States , 570 U.S. 99 (2013)); United States v. Pineda

- Arrellano , 492 F.3d 624, 625

- 26 (5th Cir. 2007) (considering the effect of Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000)). Thus, Velo

- Cano’s argument is foreclosed. Accordingly, appell ant’s motion for summary disposition is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. Case: 17-11047 Document: 00514402445 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/26/2018
## UNITED STATES ARMY COUR T OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

Before SIMS, COOK, and GALLAGHER Appellate Military Judges

UNITED STATES, Appellee

v. Private E1 KEVIN M. PEARCE United States Army, Appellant

ARMY 20110107

Headquarters, United States Army A ccessions Command and Fort Knox Timothy Grammel, Military Judge Colonel Robert J. Cotell, Staff Judge Advocate

For Appellant: Lieutenant Colonel Imogene M. Jami son, JA; Major Richard E. Gorini, JA; Captain Meghan M. Poirier, JA (on brief).

For Appellee: Li eutenant Colonel Amber J. Roach, JA; Major LaJohn ne A. White, JA; Captain Daniel H. Karna, JA (on brief).

16 May 2012

-------------------------------- SUMMARY DISPOSITON

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

Per Curiam:

A military judge sitting as a special court-martial convicted appellant, pursuant to his pleas, of three specificat ions of absence without leave, in violation of

Article 86 of the Uniform Code of Mi litary Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 886 (2008) [hereinafter UCMJ]. Appellant was sentenced to a bad-conduct discharge,

confinement for eleven months , and forfeiture of $978.00 pay per mont h for eleven months. The convening au thority (CA) approved eight months of confinement, sixty-two days of co nfinement credit, and the remai nder of the adju dged sentence. 

This case is before us court for review pursuant to Article 66, UCMJ.

 We note that the CA inexplicably waived “automatic forfeiture of two-thirds pay

and allowances” for the bene fit of appellant’s spouse, yet approv ed the adjudged forfeiture of $978.00 pay pe r month for 11 m onths, thereby prev enting any funds

(continued . . .)PEARCE – ARMY 20110107

2 Appellant alleges, and the go vernment concedes, that th ere is no evidence that a letter from appellant’s previous company commander, enclosure 8 to appellant’s Rule for Courts-Martial [her einafter R.C.M.] 1105 matters , was submitted to the CA prior to his taking initial action in a ppellant’s case as is required by R.C.M. 1107(b)(3)(A)(iii) and United States v. Wheelus , 49 M.J. 283, 287 (C .A.A.F. 1998). We agree, and will return this case for a new reco mmendation and action.

CONCLUSION

The convening authority’s action, dated 16 June 2011, is set aside. The record of trial is returned to The Judge Advocate General for a new staff judge

advocate recommendation and initial action by the same or a different convening authority in accordance with Article 60(c)-(e), UCMJ.

FOR THE COURT:

MALCOLM H. SQUIRES, JR.

Clerk of Court

(. . . continued) from being paid to ap pellant’s spouse. In light of our dispos ition of this case, however, we need not addre ss this ambiguity. MALCOLM H. SQUIRES, JR.

Clerk of Court FOR THE COURT:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>         5
<MULTIPLIER>      1,000

<S>                                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                  JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                    DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                                    28,772
<SECURITIES>                                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                            861,511
<ALLOWANCES>                                              30,226
<INVENTORY>                                              430,773
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                       1,393,978
<PP&E>                                                 1,716,682
<DEPRECIATION>                                           577,498
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                         3,669,089
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                  1,841,213
<BONDS>                                                1,550,772
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                          0
<PREFERRED>                                                    0
<COMMON>                                                     720
<OTHER-SE>                                             (610,503)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                           3,669,089
<SALES>                                                6,007,509
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                       6,007,509
<CGS>                                                  4,481,915
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                          4,481,915
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                          27,254
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          14,212
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       192,216
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                          236,788
<INCOME-TAX>                                             116,928
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                      119,860
<DISCONTINUED>                                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         (23,637)
<CHANGES>                                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                              96,223
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                               1.30
<EPS-DILUTED>                                               1.26


</TABLE>
DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD

January 19, 2024

TO: Katherine R. Herrera, Acting Technical Director

FROM: D. Gutowski, Resident Inspector

SUBJECT: Los Alamos Activity Report for the Week Ending January 19, 2024

Staff Activity: The Board’s Executive Director of Operations, M. Buhler, accompanied by staff 

member P. Migliorini, was on site Tuesday and Wednesday for a familiarization visit. The visit 

started at the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Building where Triad personnel led her 

through Wings 3, 5, and 9 while discussing current missions and risk reduction efforts. Senior 

leadership from the Environmental Management field office and N3B then led a tour of Area G 

which primarily covered the corrugated metal pipe excavation site and cutting activities in Dome 

375. They also discussed organizational interfaces in the transuranic waste mission and the 

recent progress involving N3B training issues. Next was a visit to Triad’s RANT Shipping 

Facility where Triad and N3B personnel discussed waste shipments and how they share the 

facility’s capabilities. On Wednesday, Ms. Buhler went to Technical Area 55. Triad personnel 

discussed safe glovebox operations and training for the growing workforce in a cold lab. An

exterior walk around the Plutonium Facility pointed out key safety systems such as fire pumps, 

instrument air, and the uninterruptible power supply. In the Plutonium Facility, the tour included 

entries into rooms associated with pit production, an overview of the heat source and plutonium 

disposition missions, and a visit to the basement focused on safety systems like the ventilation 

system. Ms. Buhler also met with both the NNSA and Environmental Management field office 

managers. 

Plutonium Facility–Safety Basis: On Tuesday, the NNSA Field Office provided Triad with 

formal comments on a safety basis submittal that proposed limitations on fires inside certain 

gloveboxes to avoid the scenario where an internal glovebox fire actuates the fire suppression 

system, and damage to the glovebox allows water ingress and potential moderation of fissile 

material. This is a long-standing issue (see 3/21/2014 report) as many gloveboxes do not have 

criticality safety evaluations that account for flooding of the glovebox. These boxes must either 

be analyzed to show they are safe if moderated by flooding or flooding must be incredible. 

Seismic Hazard Analysis: On Thursday, Triad personnel briefed NNSA Field Office and DOE 

headquarters subject matter experts on progress collecting data to support the new site 

probabilistic seismic hazard analysis.
No. 09-9184.

#### Donald Stankowski, Petitioner v. Jerry E. Abramson, et al.

559 U.S. 1095, 130 S. Ct. 2375,

176 L. Ed. 2d 772,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3582,

April 26, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
---

PROMISSORY NOTE

|EXECUTED BY:        | NEXTDIGITAL CORP.        
|------------------- | -------------------------
|                    | (the "Borrower")         
|                    |                          
|IN FAVOUR OF:       | NORPAC TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
|                    | (the "Lender")           
|                    |                          
|PRINCIPAL AMOUNT:   | $75,000 (U.S.)           
|                    |                          
|DATE OF EXECUTION:  | November 20, 2006        
|                    |                          
|PLACE OF EXECUTION: | Vancouver, BC, Canada    

FOR VALUE RECEIVED the Borrower hereby promises to pay
to or to the order of the Lender on November 20, 2008, the principal sum of
$75,000 (U.S.), together with interest thereon at the rate of 8% per annum,
calculated and compounded annually, both before and after maturity from the date
hereof.

The Borrower waives presentment, demand, notice, protest and
notice of dishonour and all other demands and notices in connection with the
delivery, acceptance, performance, default or enforcement of this Promissory
Note.

The Borrower agrees this Promissory Note may be negotiated,
assigned, discounted, or pledged by the Lender and in every case payment will be
made to the holder of this Promissory Note instead of the Lender upon notice
being given by the holder to the undersigned, and no holder of this Promissory
Note will be affected by the state of accounts between the undersigned and the
Lender or by any equities existing between the undersigned and the Lender and
will be deemed to be a holder in due course and for the value of the Promissory
Note held by him.

DATED at Vancouver, BC this 20th day of November, 2006.

NEXTDIGITAL CORP.by its authorized signatory:

/s/ Daniel S.
Bland________________________________Daniel S. Bland, President

---
No. 09-7817.

#### Calvin Lewis, Petitioner v. Gail Lewis, Warden.

559 U.S. 943, 130 S. Ct. 1509,

176 L. Ed. 2d 120,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 1337.

February 22, 2010.

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

Same case below, 326 Fed. Appx. 420.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 7
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS AND STATEMENTS OF INCOME AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY 
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   OTHER
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                           741,985
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                      11,514
<MORTGAGE>                                      97,322
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                 903,745
<CASH>                                           6,679
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                                   0
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                         204,979
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,752,533
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                881,112
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                              3,840
<POLICY-OTHER>                                       0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                                0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                 85,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,500
<OTHER-SE>                                     351,394
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,752,533
<PREMIUMS>                                           0
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                             42,485
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                             (1,491)
<OTHER-INCOME>                                  49,459
<BENEFITS>                                      96,968
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                      5,148
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                          (26,406)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 10,353
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,279
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              5,074 
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,074
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                       0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                  0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                    0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                   0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                     0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                      0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0
        







</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly report of Panda Ethanol, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Form
10-Q), I, Michael Trentel, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

(1) The Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                    |  |  |  |                                      
|------------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------------------
|Dated: May 15, 2007 |  |  |  | /S/ MICHAEL TRENTEL                  
|                    |  |  |  | Michael Trentel                      
|                    |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Panda Ethanol, Inc.
and will be retained by Panda Ethanol, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

The foregoing certification
is being furnished as an exhibit to the Form 10-Q pursuant to Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K and Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United
States Code) and, accordingly, is not being filed as part of the Form 10-Q for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before
or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.
No. 09-8419.

#### Earl Tinsley, Petitioner v. Florida, et al.

559 U.S. 995, 130 S. Ct. 1745,

176 L. Ed. 2d 218,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2331.

March 8, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
# C_2017346EN.01000202.xml

| 14.10.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 346/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.10.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 346/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8622 — Unibail-Rodamco/Commerz Real Investmentgesellschaft/CGI Metropole)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2017/C 346/04)

On 6 October 2017, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

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

—

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

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8622. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8622. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
No. 09-9330.

#### Lamar Edison, Petitioner v. Arcola Washington-Adduci, Warden.

559 U.S. 1044, 130 S. Ct. 2082,

176 L. Ed. 2d 428,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2863.

March 29, 2010.

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

Same case below, 349 Fed. Appx. 953.
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to the incorporation by referencein Registration Statements No. 333-49138, 033-22977, 33-22977, and 33-89930 onForms S-8 of MAIR Holdings, Inc. (formerly known as Mesaba Holdings, Inc.) andsubsidiaries (the “Company”) of our report dated June 18, 2004, relatingto the consolidated financial statements of the Company as of March 31,2004 and 2003 and for each of the two years in the period ended March 31, 2004,which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatoryparagraph relating to the application of procedures relating to certaindisclosures of consolidated financial statement amounts related to the fiscal2002 consolidated financial statements that were audited by other auditors whohave ceased operations and for which we have expressed no opinion or other formof assurance other than with respect to such disclosures appearing in thisAnnual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended March 31,2004.

 

DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

 

Minneapolis, Minnesota

June 29, 2004

 

----
STEAM ELECTRIC CBI REPLACEMENT PAGE

EPA

- HQ

- OW

- 200 9-0 819

DCN: SE020 8 9 A 4

THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN REMOVED BECAUSE IT

CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS I NFORMATION

(CBI) PER 40 CFR PART 2, SUBPART B.