alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1 The Honorable Mark W. Bennett, United St ates District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 07-1042

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Northern District of Iowa. Rene Villareal-Duran, also known as * Duran, also known as Flaco, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: December 3, 2007 Filed: December 11, 2007

___________ Before BYE, RILEY, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Rene Villareal-Duran pleaded guilty to illegal reentry following removal. See 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), (b). His offense leve l was increased by 16 levels under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b) because he had previously b een deported after a felony conviction for a crime of violence. At sentencing, the district court 1 noted Villareal-Duran was currently incarcerated on state weapons ch arges, and imposed an 87-month prison term to run consecutively to the undischarged state term. On appeal, his counsel has-2- moved to withdraw and filed a brief under Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that the sentence was too harsh and an abuse of discretion because VillarealDuran’s “prior criminal history and use of weapons”--the court’s stated reasons for sentencing him at the top of the advisory Guidelines range--were fully accounted for in the criminal history score and the 16-l evel increase, and because Villareal-Duran had already served most of his state prison sentence.

We conclude that the district court di d not abuse its discretion in sentencing Villareal-Duran at the top of the Guidelines range. See United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220, 261-62 (2005) (appellate cour ts must review sentences for unreasonableness); United States v. Haack , 403 F.3d 997, 1003 (8th Cir. 2005) (standard of review). The record reflect s that the court cons idered only relevant factors--including Villareal-Duran’s long cr iminal history and propensity for crimes involving weapons--and did not commit a clear error of judgment in weighing those factors. See Haack , 403 F.3d at 1004 (addressing how sentencing court may abuse its discretion). Further, the court did not abuse its discretion in ordering the federal sentence to be served consecutively to the state sentence. SeeU.S.S.G. § 5G1.3(c), p.s. (sentence “may be imposed to run . . . consecutively to the prior undischarged term of imprisonment”).
Having reviewed the record i ndependently under Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), we find no other nonfrivolous issu es. Accordingly, we affirm, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

______________________________
Exhibit 32-1








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 Annual Report of Bio-Stuff (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Joao Prata dos Santos, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





1.
The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78 m or 78o (d)); and2.
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of  Bio-Stuff.





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





Date: March 31, 2010





/s/ Joao Prata dos Santos


Joao Prata dos Santos


Chief Executive Officer,


Chief Financial Officer,


Principal Accounting Officer, President,


Chairman of the Board of Directors
1



### September 29

, 20 1 1

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Economic Impact Analysis for National Emissions Standards for

Hazardous Air Pollutants: Primary Aluminum Reduction Plants

FROM: Tom Walton

Economist

A E G (C439

- 02)

TO: David Putney

Environmental Enginee r

MICG ( D243

- 02 )

This document addresses the economic im pacts of National Emissions Standards for

Hazardous Air Pollutants: Primary Aluminum Reduction Plants

.

Both the magnitude of control costs needed to comply with the rule and the distribution

of these costs among affected facilities can have a role in determining how the market

will change in response to rule

. Total annualized costs for this rule are less $ 2 60 ,000 for

13 plants



### .

Because sales inform ation was not available at the plant level, U.S. Geological Survey

Mineral Commodities Summaries for Aluminum for 2010

( http://minerals.er.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/aluminum/mcs

- 2011

- alumi.pdf )

were used to obtain price and capacity utilization data to combine with cost and capacity

information to estimate cost to revenues for each plant. Because four of the plants were

idled in 2010

, two capacity utilization estimates were used. One estimate includes the

idled plants and the other only includes plants producing aluminum in 2010. All costs

and sales are in 20 10 dollars. The largest cost to revenue estimate was less than 0.02 %.

Whether these costs are absorbed by the plants or passed on by higher prices, market

impacts are expected to be quite small. See the table on page 2

.

The Small Business Administration defines a small entity for Primary Aluminum

Production (NAICS 331312 ) as one with fewer than 1000 employees. There are no small

entities in this rule

, so there is no significant impact on small business.2 FACILITY Control Cost 56% Capacity Utilization

–

Cost to Revenue 76% Capacity Utilization

– Cost to Revenue

Alcoa

- Warrick Operations $28,479 0.007% 0.005%

Noranda Aluminum $28,479 0.008% 0.006%

Alumax of South Carolina

(aka Alcoa

- Mt. Holly) $7,500 0.003% 0.002%

Century Aluminum of KY $28,479 0.009% 0.007%

Alcoa

- Massena Operations

(aka Alcoa

- Massena West) $28,479 0.018% 0.013%

Reynolds Metals Company

(aka Alcoa

- Massena East) $0 0.000% 0.000%

Alcoa

- Wenatchee $7,500 0.003% 0.002%

Intalco Aluminum $7,500 0.002% 0.002%

Rio Tinto Alcan $28,479 0.012% 0.008%

Alcoa

- Rockdale Operations $7,500 0.002% 0.002%

Alcoa

- Tennessee $28,479 0.011% 0.008%

Ormet Primary Aluminum $7,500 0.002% 0.002%

Century Aluminum of WV $28,479 0.013% 0.010%

Columbia Falls Aluminum $20,979 0.010% 0.007%
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 /s/ Christopher ClementeChristopher ClementeChairman and Chief Executive Officer /s/ Bruce J. LabovitzBruce J. LabovitzMarch 16, 2007
    Chief Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 933 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 933

          Expressing opposition to New York's Clean Slate Act.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           December 13, 2023

Mr. D'Esposito (for himself, Ms. Stefanik, Ms. Tenney, Mr. Lawler, Ms. 
 Malliotakis, Mr. LaLota, Mr. Garbarino, Mr. Williams of New York, Mr. 
Langworthy, and Mr. Molinaro) submitted the following resolution; which 
             was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
          Expressing opposition to New York's Clean Slate Act.

Whereas the Clean Slate Act was signed into law November 16, 2023, by New York 
        Governor Kathy Hochul;
Whereas this legislation will automatically seal from public view the criminal 
        records of eligible misdemeanors after 3 years and certain felonies 
        after 8 years following the individual's release from incarceration or 
        the imposition of sentence as long as they do not have additional 
        subsequent charges;
Whereas the Clean Slate Act will prohibit many New Yorkers from conducting a 
        comprehensive background check on someone they want to hire to work in 
        their home or at their business;
Whereas the Clean Slate Act will only empower criminals at the expense of New 
        York State law abiding citizens;
Whereas, in 2022, New York City experienced a 22-percent increase in overall 
        major crime compared with 2021;
Whereas one of the government's most important responsibilities is keeping its 
        citizens safe and upholding justice;
Whereas New York has a history of soft-on-crime laws such as cashless bail, 
        eliminating the dangerousness standard, and other harmful policies;
Whereas all employers should be able to access information necessary to make 
        informed hiring decisions for their businesses;
Whereas the New York Police Department already faces budget cuts and hiring 
        freezes, making it even more difficult to combat crime in New York City; 
        and
Whereas New York State should be doing everything in its power to tackle crime 
        and prioritize the public safety of all residents: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) disapproves of the Clean Slate Act; and
            (2) urges New York State to prioritize policies that 
        prevent crime, support law enforcement officers, and keep all 
        New Yorkers safe.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32.1




CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF


PIONEER POWER SOLUTIONS, INC. PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




This certification is furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350) and accompanies the Annual Report on Form 10-K (the “Form 10-K”) for the year ended December 31, 2010 of Pioneer Power Solutions, Inc. (the “Company”).  I, Nathan J. Mazurek, the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify that, based on my knowledge:





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





(2)
The information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for the periods covered in this report.




Date: March 31, 2011
/s/ Nathan J. MazurekNathan J. Mazurek

Chief Executive Officer
Eliana GARCIA, Appellant, v. OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC, Appellee.

Case No. 2D16-5628

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed October 13, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
----

|   | (1) | The      Report 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 Report fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the      Corporation. |
|--------|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |   /s/ Dan      Mondor                                                             |   |
|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Name:      Dan Mondor                                                                       |
|   | Title:  President      and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive  Officer) |

----
EXHIBIT 31.2RULE 13a-14(a) / 15d-14(a) CERTIFICATIONI, Daniel D. Viren, certify that:1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of R. G. Barry Corporation for thequarterly period ended December 30, 2006; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;b) [Reserved]c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based upon such evaluation; andd) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; andb) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.     Date: February 12, 2007 /s/ Daniel D. Viren Printed Name: Daniel D. Viren    Title: Senior Vice President – Finance, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary    (Principal Financial Officer)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summarry financial information extracted from
Sterling Drilling Fund 1984-2's second quarter 1997 10Q and
is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial
statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           8,308
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 8,308
<PP&E>                                       5,628,217
<DEPRECIATION>                              (5,448,095)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 188,430
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           88,632
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      99,798<F1>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   188,430
<SALES>                                         70,669<F2>
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                70,669
<CGS>                                           54,530
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   54,530
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    16,139
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.86<F3>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Other-Se includes total partners' equity.
<F2>Sales includes $254 of interest income.
<F3>The limited partners share of net income was divided by the total
number of limited partner units of 6,448.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
## S IXTH 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
Case No. 6D2 3

- 1557 Lower Tribunal No. 20 15

- CF

- 000495

_____________________________
R IDGH G ENESIS A CHILLE , Appellant
,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee

.

_____________________________ Appeal from the Circuit Court for Osceola County

. T om Young , Judge.

July 16, 2024

PER CURIAM

.

AFFIRMED

.

STARGEL and SMITH , JJ., and LAMBERT, B.D., Associate Judge, c oncur.

David J. Joffe, of Joffe Law, P.A., Ft. Lauderdale, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Richard A. Pallas, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach , for Appellee.

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF TIMELY FILE D
Ottis Lee HAM, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-2246

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed November 3, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-03-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-29-1998
<CASH>                                         108,624
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   54,194
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     65,875
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               243,072
<PP&E>                                         358,160
<DEPRECIATION>                                 176,279
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 430,607
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           58,279
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           561
<OTHER-SE>                                     372,328
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   430,607
<SALES>                                         87,448
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                87,448
<CGS>                                           41,498
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   68,714
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 19,871
<INCOME-TAX>                                     6,359
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    13,512
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .49
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .45
        

</TABLE>
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit ____________

No. 23-40488

Summary Calendar

____________

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Javier Ramon Guerra, 

Defendant—Appellant.

______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:18-CR-204-12

______________________________

Before Elrod, Oldham, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

The attorney appointed to represent Javier Ramon Guerra 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). Guerra has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s 

brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur 

_____________________

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

May 6, 2024

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 23-40488 Document: 48-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/06/2024
No. 23-40488

2

with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for 

appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is 

GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and 

the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

Case: 23-40488 Document: 48-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/06/2024