alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
FILED 

 U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 ELEVENTH CIRCUIT 

 January 14, 2005 

 THOMAS K. KAHN 

 CLERK

[PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 02-12924

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 01-00028-CR-01-2

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

CARL M. DRURY, JR., M.D.,

Doctor,

Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Georgia

_________________________

(January 14, 2005)

Before EDMONDSON, Chief Judge, TJOFLAT, ANDERSON, BIRCH, DUBINA,

BLACK, CARNES, BARKETT, HULL, MARCUS, WILSON and PRYOR, Circuit

Judges.

BY THE COURT:
2

On February 3, 2004, we granted rehearing en banc to consider whether the

purely intrastate use of a facility of interstate commerce -- namely, a telephone --

satisfied the jurisdictional requirements of 18 U.S.C. § 1958, the federal murderfor-hire statute. See United States v. Drury, 358 F.3d 1280 (11th Cir. 2004). The

linguistic issue in the case was the meaning of the phrase “uses . . . any facility in

interstate or foreign commerce” -- specifically, whether “in interstate . . .

commerce” modified “uses” or “facility.” 

In the time since we granted rehearing en banc, Congress has amended the

statute to resolve definitively that precise question. As part of the Intelligence

Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, Pub. L. No. 108-458, 118 Stat.

3638, Congress amended § 1958 by “striking ‘facility in’ and inserting ‘facility

of.’” Id. § 6704. The new version of § 1958 thus reads, “Whoever . . . uses . . . any

facility of interstate or foreign commerce . . . .”, thereby obviating the question of

statutory construction at issue in this case for all future convictions under § 1958. 

This amendment makes clear that § 1958 now establishes federal jurisdiction

whenever any “facility of interstate commerce” is used in the commission of a

murder-for-hire offense, regardless of whether the use is interstate in nature (i.e.

the phone call was between states) or purely intrastate in nature (i.e. the phone call

was made to another telephone within the same state). 
3

In light of this development, this case no longer merits en banc review. 

Rehearing en banc is disfavored and ordinarily will not be ordered unless it is

necessary to maintain uniformity in the Court’s decisions or -- as was the case here

-- if “the proceeding involves a question of exceptional importance.” Fed. R. App.

Proc. 35(a); see also 11th Cir. R. 35-3. Simply put, this case no longer involves

such a question. We therefore VACATE the order of February 3, 2004 insofar as

it grants rehearing en banc in this case. We do not, however, reinstate the panel

opinion, and instead we REMAND the case to the panel for further consideration.
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Martin Wotton, President of visionGATEWAY, Inc. (the "Registrant"),
certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of the Registrant;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

4. The Registrant's other certifying officer 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 Registrant and we 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 Registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

(b) evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrant'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 quarterly report any change in the Registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the Registrant's most
recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the Registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and

5. The Registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
Registrant's auditors and the audit committee of Registrant's board of
directors:

(a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the Registrant'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 Registrant's internal controls over
financial reporting.

Dated:  October 19, 2006

/s/ Martin G. Wotton
------------------------------------------
Martin G. Wotton
President
(Principal Financial Officer)
Zolia V. WILLIAMS, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-3304

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

October 31, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
R. B., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. DEPT. OF CHILDREN & FAMILIES, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-3582

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

December 06, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
John L. SOILEAU, et al. v. CHURCHILL DOWNS LOUISIANA HORSERACING COMPANY, LLC, Churchill Down Louisiana Video Poker Company, LLC

John Soileau, et al. v. Churchill Downs Louisiana Horseracing Company, LLC, Churchill Down Louisiana Video Poker Company, LLC

NO. 2018-C-1349

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

November 14, 2018

Denied.
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 243 (Wednesday, December 18, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 102972]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-30039]

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

POSTAL SERVICE

Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and USPS 
Ground Advantage[supreg] Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: December 18, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
December 9, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS 
Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 978 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-722, K2025-721.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-30039 Filed 12-17-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit ____________

No. 22-50590

Summary Calendar

____________

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Paul Ross Evans, 

Defendant—Appellant.

______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 1:07-CR-98-1

______________________________

Before Jones, Haynes, and Oldham, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Paul Ross Evans, federal prisoner # 83230-180, appeals the district 

court’s dismissal of his motion for a reduction in his sentence as an 

unauthorized motion for which it lacked jurisdiction. He also moves for the 

appointment of counsel. 

_____________________

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

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

February 23, 2023

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 22-50590 Document: 00516653683 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/23/2023
No. 22-50590

2

We review a district court’s decision to deny a motion for 

compassionate release for an abuse of discretion. United States v. Cooper, 996 

F.3d 283, 286 (5th Cir. 2021). A district court abuses its discretion when it 

“bases its decision on an error of law or a clearly erroneous assessment of the 

evidence.” United States v. Chambliss, 948 F.3d 691, 693 (5th Cir. 2020) 

(internal quotation marks and citation omitted). 

Evans does not challenge the basis of the district court’s dismissal. 

Instead, he has raised arguments not presented in the motion at issue. We 

do not consider newly raised arguments. See United States v. Thompson, 984 

F.3d 431, 432 n.1 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 141 S. Ct. 2688 (2021); Leverette v. 

Louisville Ladder Co., 183 F.3d 339, 342 (5th Cir. 1999). Moreover, Evans has 

waived the only viable appellate issue. See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 

224-25 (5th Cir. 1993).

Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. See Howard v. 

King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983); 5th Cir. R. 42.2. The 

Government’s motion for summary affirmance is DENIED. 

As he has failed to heed our earlier warning, Evans is ORDERED to 

pay a sanction of $100 to the clerk of this court, and he is BARRED from 

filing in this court or any court subject to this court’s jurisdiction a challenge 

to his conviction and sentence until the sanction is paid, unless he obtains 

leave of the court in which he seeks to file such challenge. Evans is once again 

WARNED that any repetitive or frivolous filings in this court or any court 

subject to this court’s jurisdiction may invite the imposition of further 

sanctions, including dismissal, monetary sanctions, and restrictions on his 

ability to file pleadings in this court and any court subject to this court’s 

jurisdiction.

Case: 22-50590 Document: 00516653683 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/23/2023
Order filed November 27, 2019

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-19-00891-CV

____________

In the Interest of Z.S., C.S-T., T.S-T., T.S-T., T.S-T., children

On Appeal from the 306th District Court

Galveston County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 17CP0118

ORDER

This is an accelerated appeal from a judgment in a parental-termination case. 

The notice of appeal was filed November 1, 2019. Appellant has established 

indigence or is presumed to be indigent. See Tex. R. App. P. 20.1(a). The 

reporter’s record was due within 10 days after the notice of appeal was filed. See 

Tex. R. App. P. 35.1(b); 28.4(a)(1). The record has not been filed.

Appeals in parental termination cases and child protection cases are to be 

brought to final disposition within 180 days of the date the notice of appeal is 

filed. See Tex. R. Jud. Admin. 6.2(a). The trial and appellate courts are jointly 

responsible for ensuring that the appellate record is timely filed. See Tex. R. App. 
P. 35.3(c). The trial court must direct the court reporter to immediately commence 

the preparation of the reporter’s record and must arrange for a substitute reporter, 

if necessary. See Tex. R. App. P. 28.4(b)(1). 

Because the reporter’s record has not been filed timely in this accelerated 

appeal, we issue the following order:

We order Micki Kincaide, the official court reporter, to file the record in this 

appeal on or before December 9, 2019. If Micki Kincaide does not timely file the 

record as ordered, the court may issue an order requiring her to appear at a hearing 

to show cause why the record has not been timely filed and why she should not be 

held in contempt of court for failing to file the record as ordered. Contempt of 

court is punishable by a fine and/or confinement in jail.

PER CURIAM

Panel Consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Christopher and Bourliot.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         December 17, 2024.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on December 5, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 508 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-638, K2025-637.                

Sean Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2024-29818 Filed 12-16-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
***Exhibit 21***

Subsidiaries of Providence Resources, Inc.

** **

** **

** **

| ** **              | ** ** | **Providence Resources, Inc.**                              | ** **                                                      | ** **                                               |
|-------------------------|------------|-------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------|
| ** **              | ** ** | ** **                                                  | ** **                                                      | ** **                                               | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** |
| ** **              | ** ** | ** **                                                  | **PRE Exploration, LLC** (formerly Providence Exploration, LLC) | ** **                                               |   | ** ** |
| ** **              | ** ** | ** **                                                  | ** **                                                      | ** **                                               | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** |
| ** **              | ** ** | ** **                                                  | ** **                                                      | ** **                                               | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** |
| **PDX Drilling I, LLC** | ** ** | **PRT Holdings, LLC**

(formerly Providence Resources, LLC) | ** **                                                      | **Comanche County Pipeline, LLC** 

(90% ownership) |

** **

** **

** **

 

----
STATE EX REL. Henry Earl CUNNINGHAM v. STATE of Louisiana

No. 2017-KH-1313

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

September 14, 2018

PER CURIAM:

Denied. The application was not timely filed in the district court, and relator fails to carry his burden to show that an exception applies. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8 ; *State ex rel. Glover v. State* , 93-2330 (La. 9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189. In addition, relator's sentencing claim is not cognizable on collateral review. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.3 ; *State ex rel. Melinie v. State* , 93-1380 (La. 1/12/96), 665 So.2d 1172 ; *see also* *State v. Cotton* , 09-2397 (La. 10/15/10), 45 So.3d 1030.

*459Relator has now fully litigated his application for post-conviction relief in state court. Similar to federal habeas relief, *see* 28 U.S.C. § 2244, Louisiana post-conviction procedure envisions the filing of a successive application only under the narrow circumstances provided in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4 and within the limitations period as set out in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8. Notably, the Legislature in 2013 La. Acts 251 amended that article to make the procedural bars against successive filings mandatory. Relator's claims have now been fully litigated in accord with La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.6, and this denial is final. Hereafter, unless he can show that one of the narrow exceptions authorizing the filing of a successive application applies, relator has exhausted his right to state collateral review. The district court is ordered to record a minute entry consistent with this per curiam.
Exhibit 23

            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Registration Statement No.
000-50237 of VSB Bancorp, Inc. (the "Company") on Form S-8 of our report dated
March 8, 2004, (February 22, 2005 as to Note 20) (which report expresses an
unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to the
restatement described in Note 20), appearing in the Annual Report on Form
10-KSB/A of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2003 and to the
reference to us as experts in auditing and accounting in this Registration
Statement.


/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

New York, New York
March 3, 2005
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 242 (Tuesday, December 17, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 102183]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-29762]

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

POSTAL SERVICE

Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and USPS 
Ground Advantage[supreg] Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: December 17, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
December 3, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS 
Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 873 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-596, K2025-595.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-29762 Filed 12-16-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
**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 Creative Vistas, Inc. (the "Company")
      on
      Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities
      and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Heung Hung Lee, Chief
      Financial 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
      to
      the best of my knowledge:







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.




*By:*
              */s/
                Heung Hung Lee**Heung
                    Hung Lee*
                  *Chief
                    Financial Officer*December 22, 2005
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 Quarterly Report of Arvana Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Zahir Dhanani, 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; 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/ Zahir Dhanani


Zahir Dhanani


Chief Executive Officer


May 15, 2011
Jason TRICHE, Wife, Melissa Triche, Individually and on Behalf of Their Minor Child, Payton N. Triche v. TURNER INDUSTRIES GROUP, LLC and/or Turner Industries, LLC, Ace American Insurance Company/The Ace Group, Steadfast Insurance Company, Kyle David Joekel, Terry Smith, and Brian Smith

2018-CC-0606

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 15, 2018

Denied.
ADRIA L. WILLIAMS, former 

wife,

Appellant,

v.

DAVID E. RADFORD, former 

husband,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D13-4873

_____________________________/

Opinion filed July 21, 2014.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Escambia County.

Thomas R. Santurri, Judge.

Lanell Williams-Yulee, Tampa, for Appellant.

Caryn A. Van Matre of Caryn A. Van Matre, P.A., Pensacola, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

WOLF, PADOVANO, and RAY, JJ., CONCUR.