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

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Floods

Filters

              - connect_staff_profiles(2)

## By Location

              - alaska(2)
              - arizona(3)
              - arkansas(1)
              - colorado(5)
              - connecticut(1)
              - delaware(1)
              - florida(1)
              - (-)illinois(2)
              - kansas(1)
              - maine(2)
              - maryland(1)
              - massachusetts(7)
              - michigan(1)
              - minnesota(1)
              - missouri(1)
              - montana(2)
              - nebraska(1)
              - new hampshire(1)
              - new jersey(1)
              - new york(6)
              - north carolina(1)
              - north dakota(1)
              - oregon(3)
              - pennsylvania(1)
              - texas(3)
              - utah(1)
              - vermont(1)
              - washington(3)
              - wisconsin(2)

## By Year

              - (-)2024(2)

staff profileAdel E Haj, Jr.

staff profileThomas Over
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 460 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 460

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                      January 16, 2014.
    Resolved, That the following named Member be, and is hereby, elected to the 
following standing committee of the House of Representatives:
    Committee on the Judiciary: Mr. Cicilline.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Declination

Filters

              - science_education(5)
              - science_faqs(5)
              - science_science(341)
              - products_data(70)
              - products_maps(16)
              - products_publications(2978)
              - products_software(4)
              - products_web_tools(7)
              - multimedia_audio(53)
              - multimedia_audio-141766(47)
              - multimedia_audio-141767(6)
              - multimedia_before_after(3)
              - multimedia_image(130)
              - multimedia_image-141769(1)
              - multimedia_image-141770(2)
              - multimedia_image-141771(106)
              - multimedia_image-141772(1)
              - multimedia_image-141774(3)
              - multimedia_image-141775(10)
              - multimedia_image-141776(7)
              - (-)multimedia_slideshow(3)
              - multimedia_video(146)
              - multimedia_video-149194(74)
              - multimedia_video-149195(32)
              - multimedia_video-149196(5)
              - multimedia_video-149197(2)
              - multimedia_video-149198(6)
              - multimedia_video-149225(6)
              - (-)documents_file(2)
              - documents_file-149206(1)
              - documents_file-149220(1)
              - news_news-149245(21)
              - news_news-149246(4)
              - news_news-149248(27)
              - news_news-149249(4)
              - news_news-149250(2)
              - news_newsletters(3)
              - news_other_news(31)
              - connect_staff_profiles(6)
              - other_basic-42(8)

## By Location

              - alabama(1)
              - georgia(1)
              - kansas(1)
              - nebraska(1)
              - oklahoma(1)
              - texas(1)

## By Year

slideshow        September 23, 2021        Release: Declines and Slow Recovery in Little Brown Bat Populations Predicted

Supporting material        July 13, 2023        Citizen Science Call-to-Action Flyer

slideshow        June 5, 2023        What’s Invasive Where You Live?

Brochures        October 17, 2019        Powell Center 2019 Seminar: NASA’S GRACE SATELLITE: WHAT IT CAN AND...

slideshow        October 24, 2022        Examples of USGS Bat Research
STATE EX REL. Robert Dale WILSON v. STATE of Louisiana

NO. 2017-KH-1798

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

November 20, 2018

Denied. Relator has previously exhausted his right to state collateral review. See State ex rel. Wilson v. State, 17-1579 (La. 11/20/18), --- So.3d ----.
**Exhibit
      32.2**




**STATEMENT
      OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF**


**KERYX
      BIOPHARMACEUTICALS, INC.**


**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 Keryx Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. (the
      “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2006 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Ronald
      C.
      Renaud, Jr ,
      Senior
      Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, Secretary and Treasurer, certify,
      pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002, that, based on 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 results of operations of the Company.




Date:
                August 8, 2006
            
            /s/
                Ronald C. Renaud, JrRonald
                C. Renaud, Jr
              Senior
                Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, Secretary and
                Treasurer
              (Principal
                Financial and Accounting Officer)
Wilfredo Frometa ZALDIVAR, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D18-2943

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[November 29, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-50157

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

JOSE PATRICIO IBARRA-LARA,

Defendant - Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 2:13-CR-614-1

Before JOLLY, BARKSDALE, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jose Patricio Ibarra-Lara appeals his 30-month above-advisory 

Sentencing Guidelines sentence, imposed following his guilty-plea conviction 

for illegal reentry, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Ibarra asserts the district 

court committed error when it assigned two criminal-history points because 

the illegal reentry offense was committed while Ibarra was under a criminal 

justice sentence of probation. 

* 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

December 31, 2014

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 14-50157 Document: 00512886993 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/31/2014
No. 14-50157

Because Ibarra failed to raise this objection in district court, our review 

is only for plain error. E.g., United States v. Peltier, 505 F.3d 389, 392 (5th Cir. 

2007). Under that standard, Ibarra must show a forfeited plain (clear or 

obvious) error that affected his substantial rights. Puckett v. United States,

556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009). If he does so, we have the discretion to correct the 

error, but should do so only if it seriously affects the fairness, integrity, or 

public reputation of the proceedings. Id.

As the Government concedes, the two points were assessed in error, and 

the error was clear or obvious. E.g., United States v. Blocker, 612 F.3d 413, 

416 (5th Cir. 2010). Nevertheless, the error does not warrant reversal. 

Regarding whether the error affected Ibarra’s substantial rights, 

although he was sentenced above an incorrectly calculated advisory Guidelines 

range, the court explained the above-Guidelines sentence reflected the 

seriousness of the offense. It emphasized Ibarra had returned to the United 

States despite previously serving 24-months’ imprisonment for illegal reentry

and concluded that nothing short of a 30-month sentence would prevent Ibarra 

from reoffending. (In that regard, Ibarra concedes it is unlikely the district 

court would have imposed a sentence of less than 24 months.) “[W]e are 

skeptical that [Ibarra] has met his burden of showing a reasonable probability 

that, but for the district court’s consideration of the incorrect advisory range, 

his sentence would have been lower”. United States v. Davis, 602 F.3d 643,

650 (5th Cir. 2010). In the alternative, based on the facts of this case, we 

decline to exercise our discretion to remand. E.g., id. at 650-51. 

AFFIRMED.

2

 Case: 14-50157 Document: 00512886993 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/31/2014
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18
- 6902

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. SEAN RONDELL BUNDY, a/k/a Bun Rock, a/k/a Humps , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Baltimore

. James K. Bredar , Chief District Judge. ( 1:08

- cr - 00226

- JKB

- 1 ; 1:14

- cv - 00221

- JKB )

Submitted : March 26, 2019 Decided: March 29, 2019

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge , and AGEE and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed and remanded by un published per curiam opinion

. Sean Rondell Bundy , Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Sean Rondell Bundy seeks to app eal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. Although the parties have not questioned our jurisdiction, “we have an independent obligation to verify the existence of appellate jurisdiction.” Porter v. Zook , 803 F.3d 694, 696 (4th Cir. 2015) (internal quotation marks omitted). Our jurisdiction is generally limited “ to appeals from final decisions of the district courts

. . . that end the litigation on the merits and leave nothing for the court to do but execute the j udgment.” Id. (internal alterations and quotation marks omitted). “Ordinarily, a district court order is not final until it has resolved all claims as to all parties.” Id. (emphasis and internal quotation marks omitted). “Regardless of the label given a district court decision, if it appears from the record that the district court has not adjudicated all of the issues in a case, then there is no final order.” Id.
W ith these principles in mind, we conclude that w e lack jurisdiction to hear Bundy’s appeal. Bundy’s § 2255 motion raised seven separate claims, and the district court’s memorandum and order analyzed and resolved only five of those claims. The court did not address Bundy’s sixth claim, which asserted that his guilty plea should b e set aside due to the cumulative ineffectiveness of his counsel , or his seventh claim, questioning whether, in light of Nat’l Fed. o f Indep. Bus. v. Sebelius , 132 S. Ct. 2566 (2012), 21 U.S.C. § 841 operates constitutionally . Therefore, the district cour t’s memorandum and order do not constitute a final judgment over which we have appellate jurisdiction.3 We dismiss Bundy’s appeal and remand to the district court for consideration of the two unaddressed claims. We express no opinion as to Bundy’s other claims. We 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. DISMISSED AND REMANDED
**Exhibit 32**

 

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

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

This certification isfurnished pursuant to Rule 12a-14(b0 or Rule 15d-14(b) and 18 U.S.C. Section1350.

 

Each of the undersigned, the Chairman of the Boardand Chief Executive Officer and the Vice President of Finance, Secretary andChief Financial Officer of Advanced Power Technology, Inc. (the “Company”),hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Company’s Form 10-Q forthe first quarter ended March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
|   |   | Dated: August 11, 2005                    |
|--------|--------|-------------------------------------------|
|   |   |                                      |
|   |   |                                      |
|   |   | /s/ PATRICK P.H. SIRETA                   |   |
|   |   | Patrick Sireta                            |
|   |   | President and Chief Executive Officer,    |
|   |   | Chairman of the Board of Directors        |
|   |   |                                      |
|   |   |                                      |
|   |   | /s/ GREG M. HAUGEN                        |   |
|   |   | Greg M. Haugen                            |
|   |   | Vice President, Finance andAdministration |
|   |   | Chief Financial Officer and Secretary     |
|   |   | (Principal Financial Officer)             |
|        |        |                                           |  |  |

 

----
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Early Warnings and Alerts

Filters

              - (-)science_science(12)
              - products_data(2)
              - products_publications(25)
              - multimedia_audio(4)
              - (-)multimedia_audio-141766(3)
              - multimedia_audio-141767(1)
              - multimedia_image(1)
              - multimedia_image-141774(1)
              - multimedia_video(28)
              - multimedia_video-149194(25)
              - multimedia_video-149195(3)
              - news_news-149245(1)
              - news_news-149248(2)
              - news_news-149249(1)
              - news_news-149250(4)
              - connect_social_media(1)
              - other_basic-42(1)

## By Location

              - arizona(1)
              - california(3)
              - oregon(1)
              - south dakota(1)
              - washington(1)

## By Year

Research        October 8, 2019        Earthquake Early Warning – Fine-Tuning for Best Alerts

Research        May 29, 2020        The Blind Zone of Earthquake Early Warning

Research        March 9, 2022        Earthquake Early Warning - Overview

Research        March 20, 2018        Volcano Hazards Preparedness Resources

Research        November 13, 2019        Earthquake Early Warning Seismic Station Adjustment Terms - Annemarie Baltay

Research        March 6, 2019        Earthquake Early Warning

Project        March 14, 2016        Earthquake Early Warning (EEW) Support

Activity        October 16, 2018        ShakeAlert

Research        October 7, 2022        Planetary Defense

Topic        February 2, 2017        Earthquake Early Warning: Vital for City Transit

Activity        September 29, 2020        Monitoring for Subduction Zone Science

Podcasts        November 18, 2019        Eyes on Earth Episode 9 – Famine Early Warning

Project        November 9, 2021        Probabilistic Forecasting of Earthquakes, Tsunamis, and Earthquake Effects in the Coastal Zone

Podcasts        August 7, 2008        Kasatochi Volcano Erupts Explosively

Podcasts        March 20, 2023        Eyes on Earth Episode 92 – EROS 50th: The Library and Science Support
##### 



(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 as of and for the period
covered by the Report.
 /s/ Marshall J. CampbellMarshall J. CampbellChief Executive OfficerMay 8, 2006
 *
    
    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 required by Section 906, has been
provided to Citizens First Bancorp, Inc. and will be retained by Citizens First Bancorp, Inc.
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
 20
Exhibit 10.1


 


	
  

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  David Evans

  
	
   

  	
  President & Chief Executive Officer

  
	
   

  	
  Crown Media
  Holdings, Inc.

  



 


 


July 9, 2004


 


Jeff Henry


9 Fairmile Lane


Cobham, Surrey


United Kingdom KT1112DL


 


Dear Jeff,


 


This will confirm our
understanding regarding settlement of your March 12, 2004 “Employment
Agreement” with Crown Media International, LLC (“Crown”) in the event of a sale
or other transaction involving our international business.


 


While your Employment Agreement
may be assumed by a buyer of Crown’s international assets, we realize that you
may elect not to continue employment with that buyer.  Accordingly, Crown Media Holdings, Inc. has agreed to the
following if there is transaction involving Crown Media International, LLC or
Crown Entertainment Limited which affects your position:


 


If, as a part of the
transaction, your Employment Agreement is assumed by a buyer of one of these
entities but, after due consultation with me or the then-current Chief
Executive Officer of Crown Media Holdings you do not elect to be employed by
the buyer, then you will have the right to terminate your Employment Agreement
by written notice.  Such termination
will be effective on the date which is the later of 45 days after the effective
date of the transaction or 45 days after our receipt of your notice.  Within 15 days of the effective date of your
termination of the Employment Agreement, we will pay you the present value of
the remaining salary and bonuses which would have been payable to you under
Paragraphs 3(a) and (b) of your Employment Agreement.  This payment, however, will be offset by any amounts you receive
from a buyer in discharge or settlement of the Employment Agreement.  Also, the provisions of clauses 5 (a) and
7(b) of your Employment Agreement shall survive any termination thereof
(provided that clause 7(b) will apply only to individuals who are employees of
Crown Media Holdings, Inc. or its then-current subsidiaries at the time of the
solicitation.


 


	
  

  
	
   

  
	
  12700 Ventura Boulevard, Studio City, CA 91604

  Ph: 818.755.2670 Fx: 818.755.2674

  davidevans@hallmarkchannel.com

  



 


 

















 


In the event your Employment
Agreement is not assumed by a buyer or the Crown operations with which you are
associated are not actually sold and you remain with Crown, you will be
eligible for the same “Retention Bonus” as that which has been extended to
other senior employees of the international operations.  The amount of this bonus, however, will be
offset by any other special bonuses which the Crown Media Holdings, Inc. Board
of Directors may award you in connection with the international transaction.


 


This agreement is in
recognition of your extraordinary contributions to the growth and success of
Crown’s UK and EMEA operations and your efforts in assisting us in finding an
appropriate buyer which can capitalize on this success.


 


	
   

  	
  Sincerely,

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  /s/ David
  Evans

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  David Evans
Zeffery LUNDY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D18-2008

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

October 10, 2018

Zeffery Lundy, Milton, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Allan R. Geesey, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

Per Curiam.

Appellant Zeffery Lundy appeals the circuit court's order denying his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.801 motion for correction of jail credit. He contends that he is entitled to an additional 238 days of credit on his sentence for violation of probation.

Absent from his motion were the required allegations on whether he waived any county jail credit at the time of the sentencing and, if so, the number of days waived. *See* Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.801(c)(5). Instead of allowing appellant leave to amend to cure this deficiency, the trial court attached appellant's plea form and denied the motion on its merits. The court found appellant waived any claim to additional jail credit. However, a jail credit waiver must be specific, voluntary, and clear from the face of the record. *See, e.g.* , *Wolter v. State* , 219 So.3d 852, 853 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017). The plea form here did not satisfy this requirement.

Because appellant's motion was facially insufficient, the circuit court should have stricken it and given appellant leave to amend within sixty days. *See, e.g.* , *Lopez v. State* , 248 So.3d 1204, 1205 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) (citations omitted). Accordingly, we reverse and remand for the circuit court to enter an order striking the motion as facially insufficient and granting appellant sixty days to amend it to provide the information specified in rule 3.801(c) and this opinion.

*567*Reversed and remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.*

Levine, Forst and Kuntz, JJ., concur.
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 244 (Thursday, December 19, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 103895]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-30185]

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

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 19, 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 12, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 1052 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-809, K2025-808.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-30185 Filed 12-18-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officer of Challenger Powerboats, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that:

The Quarterly Report for the quarter ended June 30, 2007 (the Form 10-QSB) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

|                                | 
|------------------------------- | 
|Date: August 20, 2007          
|                               
|                               
|/s/ Laurie Phillips             | 
|Laurie Phillips                
|Chief Executive Officer and    
|Interim Chief Financial Officer