alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
                                                                  EXHIBIT 10.5

(U.S. Department of Transportation Logo)

FEDERAL AVIATION
ADMINISTRATION



                            AIR CARRIER CERTIFICATE


                              This certifies that


                    FORWARD AIR INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES, INC.
                                430 AIRPORT ROAD
                          GREENVILLE, TENNESSEE 37745


has met the requirements of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as amended, and
the rules, regulations, and standards prescribed thereunder for the issuance of
this certificate and is hereby authorized to operate as an air carrier and
conduct common carriage operations in accordance with said Act and the rules,
regulations, and standards prescribed thereunder and the terms, conditions, and
limitations contained in the approved operations specifications.

This certificate is not transferable and, unless sooner surrendered, suspended,
or revoked, shall continue in effect indefinitely.

                                              By Direction of the Administrator.


Certificate number:  F63A647K                          Walter H. Bevan
                     --------                 ------------------------------
                                                         (Signature)

Effective date:  August 28, 2003                           Manager
                 ---------------              ------------------------------
                                                           (Title)

Issued at  Nashville, TN.                                    SO-03
           --------------                     ------------------------------
                                                      (Region/Office)







FAA Form 8430-18 (6-87)
Pennsylvania Rules of Juvenile Court Procedure

Rule 101. Purpose , Application, and Construction of Rules

.
[(A)] (a) Purpose. These rules are intended to provide for the just determination

of every delinquency proceeding and effectuate the purposes stated
in the Juvenile Act, 42 Pa.C.S. § 6301(b)

.

[(B)] (b) Application. These rules establish uniform practice and procedure for

courts exercising jurisdiction as provided in the Juvenile Act, 42 Pa.C.S.
§ § 6301 et seq

. , and shall be [construed] applied to secure uniformity
and simplicity in procedure, fairness in administra tion, and the elimination of unjustifiable expense and delay.

[(C) These rules shall be interpreted and construed to effectuate the

purposes stated in the Juvenile Act, 42 Pa.C.S. § 6301(b).

(D) To the extent practicable, these rules shall be construed in

consonance with the rules of statutory construction.]

(c) Construction. In the construction of the Pennsylvania Rules of

Juvenile Court Procedure, the principles set forth in Pa.R.J.A. 104

to 115 shall be observed.

[Official Note: Rule 101 adopted April 1, 2005, effective October 1, 2005.]2

Rule 1101. Purpose , Application, and Construction of Rules

.
[(A)] (a) Purpose. These rules are intended to provide for the just determination

of every dependency proceeding and effectuate the purposes stated
in the Juvenile Act, 42 Pa.C.S. § 6301(b)

. [(B)] (b) Application. These rules establish uniform practice and procedure for

co urts exercising jurisdiction as provided in the Juvenile Act, 42 Pa.C.S.
§ § 6301 et seq. , and shall be [construed] applied to secure uniformity
and simplicity in procedure, fairness in administration, and the
elimination of unjustifiable expense and delay.

[(C) These rules shall be interpreted and construed to effectuate the

purposes stated in the Juvenile Act, 42 Pa.C.S. § 6301(b).

(D) To the extent practicable, these rules shall be construed in

consonance with the rules of statutory construction.]

(c) Construction. In the construction of Pennsylvania Rules of

Juvenile Court Procedure, the principles set forth in Pa.R.J.A. 104

to 115 shall be observed.

[Official Note: Rule 1101 adopted August 21, 2006, effective February 1, 2007.

Committee Explanatory Reports:

Final Report explaining the provisions of Rule 1101 published with the Court’s Order at 36 Pa.B. 5571 (September 2, 2006).]
Jose Ernesto ESCOBEDO-ZAPATA and Jose Guadalupe Guevara-Castro, petitioners, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-8251.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA 

FORT WAYNE DIVISION 

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) 

 ) 

 v. ) CASE NO.: 1:13-CR-19-TLS 

 ) 

AYAD AL-SHAIBANI ) 

 

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 

 This matter is before the Court on the Findings and Recommendation of the United States 

Magistrate Judge [ECF No. 55], filed on June 26, 2015. The Defendant has waived objection to 

the Findings and Recommendation, and the Court, being duly advised, adopts the Findings and 

Recommendation [ECF No. 55] in its entirety and accepts the recommended disposition. Subject 

to this Court’s consideration of the Plea Agreement pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal 

Procedure 11(c), the plea of guilty to the offense charged in Count 5 of the Indictment is hereby 

accepted, and the Defendant is adjudged guilty of such offense. 

 The notice of sentencing and pre-sentence scheduling deadlines will be issued by separate 

order.

SO ORDERED on July 15, 2015. 

 s/ Theresa L. Springmann 

 THERESA L. SPRINGMANN 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM   document 67   filed 07/24/14   page 1 of 22

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM   document 67   filed 07/24/14   page 2 of 22

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM   document 67   filed 07/24/14   page 3 of 22

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM   document 67   filed 07/24/14   page 4 of 22

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM   document 67   filed 07/24/14   page 5 of 22

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM   document 67   filed 07/24/14   page 6 of 22

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM   document 67   filed 07/24/14   page 7 of 22

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM   document 67   filed 07/24/14   page 8 of 22

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM   document 67   filed 07/24/14   page 9 of 22

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM   document 67   filed 07/24/14   page 10 of 22

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM   document 67   filed 07/24/14   page 11 of 22

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM   document 67   filed 07/24/14   page 12 of 22

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM   document 67   filed 07/24/14   page 13 of 22

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM   document 67   filed 07/24/14   page 14 of 22

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM   document 67   filed 07/24/14   page 15 of 22

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM   document 67   filed 07/24/14   page 16 of 22

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM   document 67   filed 07/24/14   page 17 of 22

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM   document 67   filed 07/24/14   page 18 of 22

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM   document 67   filed 07/24/14   page 19 of 22

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM   document 67   filed 07/24/14   page 20 of 22

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM   document 67   filed 07/24/14   page 21 of 22

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM   document 67   filed 07/24/14   page 22 of 22
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-6416

MARVIN LOVEJOY,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 versus

RICHARD CATHCART, State Attorney; HENRY D.

MCMASTER, Attorney General for the State of

South Carolina; DAVID M. TATARSKY, General

Counsel for the South Carolina Department of

Corrections; JON OZMINT, Director, South

Carolina Department of Corrections,

 Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Anderson. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge.

(CA-04-22155-8-24BI)

Submitted: July 27, 2005 Decided: August 4, 2005

Before KING, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Marvin Lovejoy, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Marvin Lovejoy appeals the district court’s order

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm

for the reasons stated by the district court. See Lovejoy v.

Cathcart, No. CA-04-22155-8-24BI (D.S.C. Feb. 17, 2005). We

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions

are adequately presented in the materials before the court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

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      Company. |
|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                             |   |                         |   |
|----------------------------------|--------|------------------------------|--------|
| Dated:       March 16, 2009 | By:    | /s/ Li      De Hai      |   |
|                             |   |                         |   |
|                             |   |                         |   |
|                             |   | Li      De Hai               |   |
|                             |   | Chief      Financial Officer |   |
|                             |   |                         |   |

----
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 93 (Monday, May 15, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 25896]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-11875]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP95-285-000]


Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America; Notice of Proposed 
Changes in FERC Gas Tariff

May 9, 1995.
    Take notice that on May 5, 1995, Natural Gas Pipeline Company of 
America (Natural) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, 
Sixth Revised Volume No. 1, Twelfth Revised Sheet No. 14 and Tenth 
Revised Sheet No. 25, to be effective June 1, 1995.
    Natural states that the tendered tariff sheets align the rates for 
all remaining shippers on Natural's system that are not parties to any 
of its gas supply realignment (GSR) costs settlements, with the rates 
applicable to the settling shippers. The tariff sheets are proposed to 
become effective on June 1, 1995.
    Natural requests whatever waivers may be necessary to permit the 
tariff sheets as submitted herein to become effective June 1, 1995.
    Natural states that copies of the filing are being mailed to 
Natural's jurisdictional customers and interested state regulatory 
agencies.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 825 North Capitol Street NE., Washington, DC 
20426, in accordance with Sec. 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's 
Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests should be filed on 
or before May 16, 1995. Protests will be considered by the Commission 
in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve 
to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to 
become a party to the proceeding must file a motion to intervene. 
Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available 
for public inspection in the Public Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-11875 Filed 5-12-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
James Wynn THREATT, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-10343.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 24, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                            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 Universal American Financial Corp.
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Richard A. Barasch, 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 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.


/s/ Richard A. Barasch

Richard A. Barasch
Chief Executive Officer
November 14, 2002



                                       37
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 95 (Wednesday, May 17, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 26463]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-12141]



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


NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES

National Endowment for the Arts; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act 
(Public Law 92-463), as amended, notice is hereby given that a meeting 
of the Music Advisory Panel (Overview/Special Projects Section) to the 
National Council on the Arts will be held on June 6-8, 1995 from 9:00 
a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on June 6; from 9:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. on June 7; and 
from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on June 8 in Room M-14, at the Nancy Hanks 
Center, 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20506.
    Portions of this meeting will be open to the public on June 6 from 
4:30 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. for a policy discussion and guidelines review; 
from 9:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. on June 7 for a discussion of the trends, 
opportunities, and priorities throughout the various music fields; 
trends in private philanthropy regarding the music fields; and current 
Music Program funding categories. On June 8, the meeting will be open 
from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. to identify the future priorities of the 
Music Program; for a discussion of possible changes to the Music 
Program funding categories based on future priorities and probable 
reduced funding; and to identify future partnership possibilities.
    The remaining sessions of this meeting from 9:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. 
and from 5:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on June 6 are for the purpose of panel 
review, discussion, evaluation, and recommendation on applications for 
financial assistance under the National Foundation on the Arts and the 
Humanities Act of 1965, as amended, including information given in 
confidence to the agency by grant applicants. In accordance with the 
determination of the Chairman of February 8, 1994, these sessions will 
be closed to the public pursuant to subsection (c)(4), (6) and (9)(B) 
of section 552b of Title 5, United States Code.
    Any person may observe meetings, or portions thereof, of advisory 
panels which are open to the public, and may be permitted to 
participate in the panel's discussions at the discretion of the Panel 
chairman and with the approval of the full-time Federal employee in 
attendance.
    If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please 
contact the Office of Special Constituencies, National Endowment for 
the Arts, 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C., 20506, 202/
682-5532, TYY 202/682-5496, at least seven (7) days prior to the 
meeting.
    Further information with reference to this meeting can be obtained 
from Ms. Yvonne M. Sabine, Committee Management Officer, National 
Endowment for the Arts, Washington, D.C., 20506, or call 202/682-5433.

    Dated: May 11, 1995.
Yvonne M. Sabine,
Director, Office of Council and Panel Operations, National Endowment 
for the Arts.
[FR Doc. 95-12141 Filed 5-16-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7537-01-M
USDC IN/ND case 2:14-cr-00012-JVB-JEM   document 1   filed 02/07/14   page 1 of 1
##### 



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 Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report of Maxtor Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-Q/A for the period ended April 2, 2005, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Duston M. Williams, Executive Vice
President, Finance and 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 (Section 906),
that:  (1)
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); 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/ Duston M. Williams
Duston M. WilliamsExecutive Vice President,
Finance and Chief Financial Officer Date: June 9, 2005 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 the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7901

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

WALTER G. BROWN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Columbia. Cameron McGowan Currie, Senior 

District Judge. (3:08-cr-00590-CMC-11)

Submitted: May 16, 2016 Decided: May 25, 2016

Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Walter G. Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Julius Ness Richardson, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for 

Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Walter G. Brown appeals the district court’s order denying 

his motion for a sentence reduction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 

§ 3582(c)(2) (2012). Generally, we review an order denying a 

§ 3582(c)(2) motion for abuse of discretion. See United States 

v. Munn, 595 F.3d 183, 186 (4th Cir. 2010). We review de novo, 

however, a district court’s determination of the scope of its 

authority under § 3582(c)(2). United States v. Williams, 808 

F.3d 253, 256 (4th Cir. 2015). Based on our review of the 

record and relevant legal authorities, we conclude that the 

district court did not err in determining that it lacked 

authority to grant Brown’s motion for a sentence reduction. 

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. 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.

AFFIRMED
#### Gregory CAMPBELL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. M.C. MARTINEZ, Associate Warden, Federal Medical Center-Fort Worth; J. Mills, Doctor, Federal Medical Center-Fort Worth; J. Barry, Doctor, Federal Medical Center-Fort Worth; L. Huber, Doctor, Federal Medical Center-Fort Worth; P. Trinkle, Doctor, Federal Medical Center-Fort Worth, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 03-10678.

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

May 4, 2004.

Gregory Campbell, Fort Worth, TX, pro se.

*238William J. Andersen, Assistant US Attorney, Fort Worth, TX, for DefendantsAppellees.

Before SMITH, DEMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.*

Gregory Campbell, federal prisoner #62978-065, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his civil rights action brought pursuant to *Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics,*408 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971). He asserts that the defendants were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs by failing to treat his end-stage liver disease and cirrhosis with antiviral medications, a biopsy, or a liver transplant. Campbell’s disagreement with the course of treatment is insufficient to give rise to a constitutional violation. *See Varnado v. Lynaugh,*920 F.2d 320, 321 (5th Cir.1991). Campbell has also not established that the defendants’ actions show deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs. *See Farmer v. Brennan,*511 U.S. 825, 847, 114 S.Ct. 1970, 128 L.Ed.2d 811 (1994).

The district court concluded it lacked the authority to grant Campbell a compassionate release. Campbell does not challenge this ruling, and this court need not address the issue. *See Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner,*813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir.1987). Because Campbell has not shown that the district court erred in dismissing his civil rights action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. *See Calhoun v. Hargrove,*312 F.3d 730, 733 (5th Cir.2002).

Campbell asserts that the district court abused its discretion in denying his motion for a preliminary injunction. He has not shown that the district court abused its discretion in denying the motion. *See Black Fire Fighters Ass’n v. City of Dallas, 9*05 F.2d 63, 65 (5th Cir.1990). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

*

 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.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

ALYSSA RENE SHAW,

Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

,

Appellee. §

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 23

- 00089

- C R

Appeal from the

38 5 th Judicial District Court

of Midland County, Texas

(TC #CR54796)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes the appeal should be

dismissed. We therefore dismiss the appeal. We further order this decision be certified below for

observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 26TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023.

G INA M. PALAFOX, Justice

Before Rodriguez , C.J., Palafox, and Soto, JJ.