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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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

February 23, 2005

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 04-30506

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

NOLAN OSBORNE,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Louisiana

USDC No. 3:95-CR-4-B-M

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

Before BARKSDALE, GARZA, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Nolan Osborne, Louisiana prisoner number 119714, pleaded

guilty in federal court to three charges of distribution of crack

cocaine and one charge of conspiracy to possess crack cocaine

with intent to distribute. The district court sentenced him to

serve 121 months in prison and a five-year term of supervised

release. Osborne was placed on supervised release, but the

Probation Office filed a motion to revoke his supervised release

based on, inter alia, his arrest for drug-related activity. 
No. 04-30506

-2-

Osborne subsequently pleaded guilty to drug charges in state

court and received a seven-year sentence. 

Osborne has not shown that the district court erred in

denying his “writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum” wherein he

requested that the district court return him to federal custody,

revoke his supervised release, and permit him to serve his state

sentence concurrently with the remainder of his federal sentence.

The district court was not obligated to hold a hearing

pursuant to FED. R. CRIM. P. 32.1 because Osborne was not taken

into federal custody in relation to his violation of the terms of

his supervised release. Osborne has no right to concurrent

sentences, nor is he entitled to serve his sentences in any

particular facility. See Tighe v. Wall, 100 F.3d 41, 42 (5th

Cir. 1996); Saulsbury v. United States, 591 F.2d 1028, 1031, 1035

(5th Cir. 1979). To the extent that Osborne is attempting to

challenge his state convictions, we decline to consider this

argument because it was not presented to the district court. See

Leverette v. Louisville Ladder Co., 183 F.3d 339, 342 (5th Cir.

1999). 

Osborne has shown no error in the district court’s judgment. 

Accordingly, that judgment is AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF TELEMATE.NET SOFTWARE FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                      42,754,938
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,766,867
<ALLOWANCES>                                   300,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            46,739,891
<PP&E>                                       3,224,848
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,750,448
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              48,273,754
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,957,615
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        73,600
<OTHER-SE>                                  42,242,539
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                48,273,754
<SALES>                                      6,731,403
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            12,964,852
<CGS>                                        1,380,208
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,147,730
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            12,971,852
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               525,091
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,788,434
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (4,408,917)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (4,408,917)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (4,408,917)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (1.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (1.07)


</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2021 ND 201

In the Interest of L.L.D.R., a child

M.A., Mother, Petitioner and Appellant

v.

A.R., Father, Respondent and Appellee

and

North Dakota Department of 

Human Services; Burleigh County 

Human Service Zone, Respondents

and

State of North Dakota Child

Support Division, Statutory Real Party in Interest

No. 20210130

Appeal from the Juvenile Court of Burleigh County, South Central Judicial 

District, the Honorable Jason J. Hammes, Judicial Referee.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Alyssa L. Lovas, Bismarck, N.D., for petitioner and appellant; submitted on 

brief.

Kiara C. Kraus-Parr, Grand Forks, N.D., for respondent and appellee; 

submitted on brief.

FILED 

IN THE OFFICE OF THE 

CLERK OF SUPREME COURT 

NOVEMBER 17, 2021 

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
1

Interest of L.L.D.R.

No. 20210130

Per Curiam.

[¶1] M.A., the mother of L.L.D.R., appeals from a juvenile court order 

declining to terminate the parental rights of A.R., the father of L.L.D.R. The 

juvenile court found that A.R. “has not abandoned the child and it is not in the 

child’s best interest that his parental rights be terminated at this time.” On 

appeal, M.A. argues that the juvenile court erred in finding L.L.D.R. is not an 

abandoned child and that the court erred in dismissing M.A.’s petition to 

terminate A.R.’s parental rights. We conclude that the juvenile court did not 

abuse its discretion in its decision to deny termination of A.R.’s parental rights 

because M.A. did not “establish[] that denying the petition would seriously 

affect the child’s welfare.” Interest of B.H., 2018 ND 178, ¶ 6, 915 N.W.2d 668. 

Because this issue is dispositive, we decline to address other issues raised on 

appeal. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4).

[¶2] Jon J. Jensen, C.J.

Gerald W. VandeWalle

Daniel J. Crothers

Lisa Fair McEvers

Jerod E. Tufte
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 Annual Report of China Direct, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Yi (Jenny) Liu, Vice President,
Finance of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. SS. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to SS. 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; and

      2.    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
Company.

                                  /s/ Yi (Jenny) Liu
                                  -------------------------------
                                  Yi (Jenny) Liu, Vice President, Finance and
                                  principal financial and accounting officer

April 2, 2007

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
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
F.R., a juvenile, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D17-1981

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed May 9, 2018

Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Howard K. Blumberg, Special Assistant Public Defender, and Jessica Vega, Certified Legal Intern, for appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Eric J. Eves, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before SALTER, EMAS and LINDSEY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Articles 

#           Measured oxygen fugacities of the Angra dos Reis achondrite as a function of temperature      

      January 1, 1977    

Measurements of the oxygen fugacity (ƒO2) as a function of temperature (T) were made on an interior bulk sample of the cumulate achondrite, Angra dos Reis. Data clustered between theƒO2-T relationship of the iron-wüstite assemblage and 1.2 log atm units above iron-wüstite. Interpretation of the data indicates that, throughout most of the cooling history of the meteorite, ƒO2 values were defined by equilibria involving iron-bearing species at values close to the ƒO2 of the assemblage iron-wüstite. Measured ƒO2 data are compatible with crystallization and cooling at pressures greater than 50 bars.

## Citation Information
Exhibit 10.4


 





PROMISSORY NOTE


 


	$ 48,421.05	Date: February 24, 2012







 





FOR VALUE RECEIVED, VelaTel Global Communications,
Inc. (“Borrower”) promises to pay to the order of Viking Retirement Assets Custodian, FBO Kenneth Hobbs IRA (“Lender”)
the sum of Forty-Eight Thousand Four-Hundred Four Hundred Twenty-One and 05/100 U.S. Dollars (“Principal Amount”),
together with interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the date hereof.


 


From the Principal Amount, Lender shall
deduct prior to disbursement 5% of the Principal Amount as a loan set-up fee and as compensation for Lender’s due diligence
in connection with this Note (“Holdback”). The Holdback shall nonetheless be included in the Principal Amount upon
which interest shall accrue. The amount Lender shall disburse to Borrower is $46,000.00.


 


The entire Principal Amount, together
with all interest accrued and unpaid, shall be due and payable on the first anniversary from the date hereof (“Maturity
Date”). Borrower may prepay this Note in whole or in part prior to the Maturity Date without penalty. Any partial payments
shall be applied first to costs of collection incident to any event of default, then to interest accrued but unpaid, then to reduction
of the Principal Amount. All interest on this Note shall be computed on the basis of a 360-day year comprised of twelve 30-day
months.


 


Should this Note be placed in the hands
of an attorney for collection, Borrower promises to pay such reasonable attorney fees and other costs of collection as Lender may
incur, whether or not suit is brought. Borrower hereby waives demand, presentment, notice of dishonor, diligence in collecting,
grace and notice of protest.


 


Contemporaneously with the execution
of this Note, Borrower is maker on a Note with Isaac Organization, Inc. (“Isaac Note”). The Isaac Note provides that
Borrower and Isaac agree to add a conversion feature granting Isaac an option to convert all or a portion of the balance of principal
and interest due under the Isaac Note to shares of Borrower’s Series A common stock (“Shares”). The details of
the conversion feature will be agreed to between the Parties when Borrower has additional authorized Shares available for issuance.
Upon such amendment or substitution of the Isaac Note, Borrower agrees to amend or substitute this Note with a Note containing
identical conversion features to the amended or substituted Isaac Note.


 


VELATEL GLOBAL COMMUNICATIONS, INC.


 


 


 


By: /s/ George Alvarez                                


George Alvarez, its Chief Executive Officer
Jessica SOTO O/B/O J.S.P., Appellant, v. Yosdany RODRIGUEZ, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-231

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed November 17, 2017

Kristine A. Shrode of Legal Aid Service of Collier County, Naples, for Appellant.

No appearance for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

KELLY, CRENSHAW, and MORRIS, JJ., Concur.
# L_2004344EN.01000401.xml

| 20.11.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 344/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.11.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 344/4

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1988/2004

of 18 November 2004

repealing Regulation (EC) No 1501/2004 of 24 August 2004 prohibiting fishing for northern prawn by vessels flying the flag of Sweden

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 of 12 October 1993 establishing a control system applicable to the common fisheries policy (1), and in particular Article 21(3) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/2004 (2) prohibits fishing for northern prawn in Norwegian waters south of 62° 00’ N by vessels flying the flag of Sweden or registered in Sweden. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/2004 (2) prohibits fishing for northern prawn in Norwegian waters south of 62° 00’ N by vessels flying the flag of Sweden or registered in Sweden.

| (2) | Following a transfer of fishing opportunities, the quota available for Sweden is no longer exhausted. Consequently, fishing for northern prawn in Norwegian waters south of 62° 00’ N by vessels flying the flag of Sweden or registered in Sweden should be authorised. Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/2004 should therefore be repealed, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Following a transfer of fishing opportunities, the quota available for Sweden is no longer exhausted. Consequently, fishing for northern prawn in Norwegian waters south of 62° 00’ N by vessels flying the flag of Sweden or registered in Sweden should be authorised. Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/2004 should therefore be repealed,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/2004 is hereby repealed.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

It shall apply from 1 October 2004.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 18 November 2004.

For the Commission

Jörgen HOLMQUIST

Director-General for Fisheries

---

(1)  
  OJ L 261, 20.10.1993, p. 1. Regulation as last modified by Regulation (EC) No 1954/2003 (OJ L 289, 7.11.2003, p. 13).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 275, 25.8.2004, p. 13.

2

---
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3675 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3675

    To expand the HUBZone program for communities affected by base 
            realignment and closure, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           December 12, 2012

Ms. Collins (for herself and Ms. Snowe) introduced the following bill; 
 which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Small Business 
                          and Entrepreneurship

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To expand the HUBZone program for communities affected by base 
            realignment and closure, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``HUBZone Expansion Act of 2012''.

SEC. 2. EXPANDING HUBZONE PROGRAM FOR COMMUNITIES AFFECTED BY BASE 
              REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE.

    Section 3(p)(4)(D) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 
632(p)(4)(D)) is amended--
            (1) in clause (iv), by striking the period at the end and 
        inserting ``; and'';
            (2) by redesignating clauses (i), (ii), (iii), and (iv) as 
        subclauses (I), (II), (III), and (IV), respectively;
            (3) in the matter preceding subclause (I), as so 
        redesignated, by striking ``means lands within'' and inserting 
        the following: ``means--
                            ``(i) lands within''; and
            (4) by adding at the end the following:
                            ``(ii) a geographic area that--
                                    ``(I) is--
                                            ``(aa) the municipality in 
                                        which the military installation 
                                        is located;
                                            ``(bb) the county in which 
                                        the military installation is 
                                        located; or
                                            ``(cc)(AA) the census tract 
                                        in which the military 
                                        installation is located; or
                                            ``(BB) the census tract in 
                                        which the military installation 
                                        is located and a census tract 
                                        contiguous to that census 
                                        tract; and
                                    ``(II) has a total population of 
                                not more than 50,000, as determined 
                                with reference to the most recent 
                                decennial census;''.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                           CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO
                               18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                    ss. 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB/A of SulphCo,
Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly period ending March 31, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
Rudolf W. Gunnerman, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Pat Lacy,
Controller, Treasurer, and Principal Financial and Accounting Officer of the
Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of his
knowledge, that:

         (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
Company.


/s/ Rudolf W. Gunnerman
-------------------------------
Rudolf W. Gunnerman
Chief Executive Officer

June 11, 2004

/s/ Pat Lacy
-------------------------------
Pat Lacy
Controller, Treasurer, and Principal Financial
and Accounting Officer

June 11, 2004


         This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of ss.
18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-18-0000719

30-SEP-2019

07:53 AM
John PITCHER and Reid Moore, Jr., Appellants, v. David J. ZAPPITELL, Zappitell & Kapral, P.A., and Zappitell Law Firm, P.L., Appellees.

No. 4D17-3202

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[May 17, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Renaud DUBUISSON, Appellant, v. Julie JONES, Appellee.

No. 1D16-2274

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 3, 2018

Renaud Dubuisson, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Jennifer J. Moore, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee; Kenneth Steely, General Counsel, Department of Corrections, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

AFFIRMED .

Wolf, Winokur, and Jay, JJ., concur.
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Articles 

#           Mount St. Helens at 40      

      May 15, 2020    

No abstract available. 

## Citation Information

## Related Content

                  -              Connect           

#### Jon Major

##### Scientist-in-Charge

Cascades Volcano Observatory

jjmajor@usgs.gov

360-993-8927

## Related Content

#### Jon Major

##### Scientist-in-Charge

Cascades Volcano Observatory

jjmajor@usgs.gov

360-993-8927

### Study Area

### Contact

#### USGS Volcano Science Center

1300 SE Cardinal CourtVancouver, WA38683United States

360-993-8900

### Explore Search

                  - United States
                  - mount st. helens
                  - Washington

View All **