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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-7717

TIMOTHY A. JONES,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

C. W. MITCHELL, Superintendent, Haynesville Correctional 

Unit #17; JANE DOE; JOHN DOE,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District 

Judge. (3:11-cv-00594-JRS)

Submitted: April 26, 2012 Decided: April 30, 2012

Before GREGORY, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Timothy A. Jones, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Timothy A. Jones appeals the district court’s order 

dismissing without prejudice his civil suit because Jones did 

not return a completed in forma pauperis affidavit form and 

consent to collection of fees form and he did not pay the 

statutory filing fee. We have reviewed the record and find no 

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated 

by the district court. Jones v. Mitchell, No. 3:11-cv-00594-JRS 

(E.D. Va. Nov. 18, 2011). 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
Mikel BOLANDER, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 13-6755.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 4, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
In the Matter of DISCIPLINE OF Joseph S. ALESSANDRO.

No. D-2730.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 17, 2013.

Joseph S. Alessandro, of Bronx, New York, is suspended from the practice of law in this Court and a rule will issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.
Alonzo KEY, petitioner, v. Phillip S. MIANO, et al.

No. 13-6316.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 18, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
Kenneth D. HUMPHREY, petitioner, v. Rand BEERS, Acting Secretary of Homeland Security.

No. 13-5431.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 2, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 11 (Wednesday, January 18, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 3637]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-1103]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP93-186-004]


Carnegie Natural Gas Co.; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas 
Tariff

January 11, 1995.
    Take notice that on January 6, 1995, Carnegie Natural Gas Company 
(Carnegie), tendered for filing as part its FERC Gas Tariff, Third 
Revised Volume No. 1, the following revised tariff sheets, with a 
proposed effective date of February 1, 1995:

First Revised Sheet No. 141A
Second Revised Sheet No. 142
Second Revised Sheet No. 143
Second Revised Sheet No. 144

    Carnegie states that it is filing the above tariff sheets in 
partial compliance with the Commission's Order in Docket No. RP93-186-
000 dated December 2, 1994, which required Carnegie to file revised 
tariff language establishing quarterly as opposed to semi-annual 
Transportation Cost Rate filings to recover the costs associated with 
unassigned upstream pipeline capacity. Carnegie requests that it be 
allowed a further extension of time within which to file the balance of 
the tariff sheets, including tariff sheets reallocating stranded 
Account No. 858 costs, until Commission action on Carnegie's rehearing 
request in this proceeding.
    Carnegie states that copies of the filing were served upon all 
parties to the above-captioned proceeding.
    Any person desiring to protest said filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 825 North Capitol 
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with 385.211 of the 
Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests should be filed 
on or before January 19, 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. 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. 95-1103 Filed 1-17-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Genovevo SALINAS, petitioner, v. TEXAS.

No. 12-246.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 12, 2013.

Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as *amicus curiae* and for divided argument granted.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Leyumba WEBB, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 03-50978.

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

May 13, 2004.

Mara A. Blatt, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Robert C. Bass, Jr., Brandon Duane Gleason, Winstead, Sechrest & Minick, Austin, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before JOLLY, WIENER, and PICKERING, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM *

Leyumba Webb (‘Webb”) appeals his jury trial conviction for possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine. Webb argues that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction and that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to present evidence of standing at the hearing on his motion to suppress.

As Webb moved for a judgment of acquittal at the close of the Government’s case and at the close of the evidence, the standard of review in assessing his sufficiency challenge is “whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, *any*rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” *Jackson v. Virginia,*443 U.S. 307, 319, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979). The evidence presented at trial was sufficient for the jury to reasonably infer that Webb exercised control or dominion over the trailer in which the crack cocaine was found. *See United States v. De Leon,*170 F.3d 494, 497 (5th Cir.1999). The evidence, taken as a whole, was also sufficient to raise a reasonable inference that Webb knew of and had access to the crack cocaine. *See United States v. Onick,*889 F.2d 1425, 1430 (5th Cir.1989); *United States v. Smith,*930 F.2d 1081, 1086 (5th Cir.1991); *see also De Leon,*170 F.3d at 497 (“the sum of the evidence may be greater than the individual factors”). Accordingly, the evidence was sufficient to support Webb’s conviction. *See United*
      *260
      *States v. Mergerson, 4*F.3d 337, 349 (5th Cir.1993).

We generally do not resolve claims of ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal because the record is rarely sufficiently developed. *United States v. Haese,*162 F.3d 359, 363 (5th Cir.1998). As Webb’s counsel was not questioned under oath about his allegedly ineffective assistance and the district court did not make factual findings regarding the alleged ineffective assistance of counsel, the record is insufficient for us to consider Webb’s claim on direct appeal. *See United States v. Kizzee,*150 F.3d 497, 502-03 (5th Cir. 1998). Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is AFFIRMED without prejudice to Webb’s right to raise his ineffective assistance of counsel claim in a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. We express no view on the merits of such a motion.

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.
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

30677

13-SEP-2013

08:29 AM
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1392 

To suspend temporarily the duty on methacrylamido etheleneurae monomer. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 17, 2005 

Mr. HOLT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on methacrylamido 

etheleneurae monomer. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. METHACRYLAMIDO ETHELENEURAE MON4 OMER. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

6 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

7 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

8 new heading: 
2 

•HR 1392 IH 

‘‘ 9902.06.03 Mixtures of N-[2-(2-Oxo-1- 

imidazolidinyl)ethyl]methacrylamide (CAS 

No. 3089–19–8), methacrylic acid (CAS No. 79– 

41–4), and water (CAS No. 

7732–18–5) (provided for in 

subheading 3824.90.91) ...... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2007 ’’. 

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to articles entered, or withdrawn 

3 from warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day 

4 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ
Presidential Documents

25599

Federal Register

Vol. 60, No. 91

Thursday, May 11, 1995

Title 3—

The President

Notice of May 10, 1995

Continuation of Emergency With Respect to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) and the

Bosnian Serbs

On May 30, 1992, by Executive Order No. 12808, President Bush declared

a national emergency to deal with the unusual and extraordinary threat

to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States

constituted by the actions and policies of the Governments of Serbia and

Montenegro, blocking all property and interests in property of those Governments. President Bush took additional measures to prohibit trade and other

transactions with the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro)

by Executive Orders Nos. 12810 and 12831, issued on June 5, 1992, and

January 15, 1993, respectively. On April 25, 1993, I issued Executive Order

No. 12846, blocking the property and interests in property of all commercial,

industrial, or public utility undertakings or entities organized or located

in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro), and prohibiting trade-related transactions by United States persons involving those areas

of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina controlled by Bosnian Serb

forces and the United Nations Protected Areas in the Republic of Croatia.

On October 25, 1994, because of the actions and policies of the Bosnian

Serbs, I expanded the scope of the national emergency to block the property

of the Bosnian Serb forces and the authorities in the territory that they

control within the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as the

property of any entity organized or located in, or controlled by any person

in, or resident in, those areas.

The Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and

Montenegro) has continued its actions and policies in support of groups

seizing and attempting to seize territory in the Republics of Croatia and

Bosnia and Herzegovina by force and violence, and because the Bosnian

Serbs have continued their actions and policies, including their refusal

to accept the proposed territorial settlement of the conflict in the Republic

of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the national emergency declared on May 30,

1992, and the measures adopted pursuant thereto to deal with that emergency,

must continue in effect beyond May 30, 1995. Therefore, in accordance

with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)),

I am continuing the national emergency with respect to the Federal Republic

of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) and the Bosnian Serb forces and

those areas of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina under the control

of the Bosnian Serb forces.
25600 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 91 / Thursday, May 11, 1995 / Presidential Documents

This notice shall be published in the Federal Register and transmitted

[FR Doc. 95–11867

THE WHITE HOUSE,

May 10, 1995.

to the Congress.

œ–

Filed 5–10–95; 11:50 am]

Billing code 3195–01–P
Exhibit 35.4

COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE

BANCTEC, INC.

DISCOVER CARD MASTER TRUST I

The undersigned, a duly authorized representative of BancTec, Inc. (BancTec), pursuant to Services Agreement, dated as of September 30, 2008 (as amended, restated, supplement or
otherwise modified as of the date hereof, the Services Agreement) by and between DFS Services LLC (DFS) and BancTec, Inc. (BancTec), hereby certifies that:

(a) a review of the activities of BancTec, during the period from December 1, 2008 to November 30, 2009, and of its
performance under the Services Agreement was made under my supervision; and

(b) to the best of my knowledge,
based on such review, BancTec has fulfilled all its obligations in all material respects under the Services Agreement throughout the period from December 1, 2008 to November 30, 2009.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this certificate this 25th day of February, 2010.



By:

/s/ Michael D. FallinMichael D. FallinSr. Vice President and President, Americas
----

|   | (a)    | the annual report on Form 10-K of Lucky Boy Silver Corp. for the year ended May 31, 2010, fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|--------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |                                                                                                                                                                                                 |
|   | (b)    | information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Lucky Boy Silver Corp.                                        |

| /s/ Kenneth B. Liebscher                                                                         |   |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Kenneth B. LiebscherPresident, Chief Executive Officer and Director(Principal Executive Officer) |
| Date:      March 30, 2009 |                      |                                                                                                                                                              |
|---------------------------|---------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                      |                      |                                                                                                                                                              |
|                      | /s/      Sang-Chul Kim    |
|                      | Name:                     | Sang-Chul      Kim                                                                                                                                                |
|                      | Title:                    | Chairman      and Co-Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive      Officer)                                                                                   |
| Date:      March 30, 2009 |                      |                                                                                                                                                              |
|                      | /s/      Ronald D. Ormand |
|                      | Name:                     | Ronald      D. Ormand                                                                                                                                             |
|                      | Title:                    | Co-Chief      Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Executive      Officer, Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting      Officer) |

----
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 93 (Monday, May 15, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 25891]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-11916]



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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Institute of Standards and Technology


Prospective Grant of Exclusive Patent License

AGENCY: National Institute of Standards and Technology, Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of Prospective Grant of Exclusive Patent License.

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

SUMMARY: This is notice in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 209(c)(1) and 37 
CFR 404.7(a)(1)(i) that the National Institute of Standards and 
Technology (``NIST''), U.S. Department of Commerce, is contemplating 
the grant of an exclusive license to practice the invention embodied in 
U.S. Patent Serial Number 08/360,963, titled, ``Strut Structure and 
Rigid Joint Therefor'' to Technical Instrument Company, having a place 
of business in San Jose, California. The patent rights in this 
invention have been assigned to the United States of America.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bruce E. Mattson, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 
Technology Development and Small Business Program, Building 221, Room 
B-256, Gaithersburg, MD 20852.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The prospective exclusive license will be 
royalty-bearing and will comply with the terms and conditions of 35 
U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. The prospective exclusive license may be 
granted unless, within sixty days from the date of this published 
Notice, NIST receives written evidence and argument which establish 
that the grant of the license would not be consistent with the 
requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7.
    U.S. Patent Serial Number 08/360,963 is a system of mechanical 
joints and clamps for assembling lightweight struts into a rigid 
structure.
    NIST may enter into a Cooperative Research and Development 
Agreement (``CRADA'') to perform further research on the invention for 
purposes of commercialization. The CRADA may be conducted by NIST 
without any additional charge to any party that licenses the patent. 
NIST may grant the licensee an option to negotiate for royalty-free 
exclusive licenses to any jointly owned inventions which arise from the 
CRADA as well as an option to negotiate for exclusive royalty-bearing 
licenses for NIST employee inventions which arise from the CRADA.
    The availability of the invention for licensing was published in 
the Federal Register, Vol. 60, No. 55 (60 FR 15126, March 22, 1995). A 
copy of the patent application may be obtained from NIST at the 
foregoing address.

    Dated: May 9, 1995.
Samuel Kramer,
Associate Director.
[FR Doc. 95-11916 Filed 5-12-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-13-M
Kevin JONES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-4985

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 10, 2019 Rehearing Denied June 14, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Salvador Nicola NEGRETE, petitioner, v. Greg LEWIS, Acting Warden.

No. 12-8440.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 1, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Case 4:17-cv-00719-HSG Document 6 Filed 02/13/17 Page 1 of 4
Case 4:17-cv-00719-HSG Document 6 Filed 02/13/17 Page 2 of 4
Case 4:17-cv-00719-HSG Document 6 Filed 02/13/17 Page 3 of 4
Case 4:17-cv-00719-HSG Document 6 Filed 02/13/17 Page 4 of 4
<PAGE>

                                                                  Exhibit 32(b)



                             TXU US Holdings Company
                       Certificate Pursuant to Section 906
                         of Sarbanes - Oxley Act of 2002
                              CERTIFICATION OF CFO


      The undersigned, Kirk R. Oliver, Executive Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer of TXU US Holdings Company (the "Company"), DOES HEREBY
CERTIFY that:

  1.  The Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30,
      2004 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)
      or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

  2.  Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the
      Company.

      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has caused this instrument to be
executed this 12th day of August, 2004.







                                            /s/  Kirk R. Oliver
                                      ----------------------------------------
                                      Name:   Kirk R. Oliver
                                      Title:  Executive Vice President and
                                              Chief Financial Officer







A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to TXU US Holdings Company and will be retained by TXU US Holdings
Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED June 20, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-41702 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ALICIA LOZOYA-TORRES, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 1:04-CR-632-ALL

-------------------- Before STEWART, DENNIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Alicia Lozoya-Torres (Lozoya) appeals the 46-month sentence she received following her guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. She argues that the district court erred in sentencing her under the mandatory version of the Sentencing Guidelines, that the sentencing provisions in § 1326 are unconstitutional, and that the district court erred by ordering her to cooperate in the collection of a DNA sample as a condition of supervised release.No. 04-41702 -2- The Government urges that Lozoya’s challenge to her sentence imposed under a mandatory version of the guidelines is barred by the waiver-of-appeal provision in her plea agreement. Lozoya counters that the appeal-waiver provision is invalid because her plea agreement was accepted before the issuance of United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220 (2005). This court has recently rejected that precise argument. United States v. Burns , 433 F.3d 442, 450-51 (5th Cir. 2005). The appeal-waiver provision is enforceable and bars her complaint that she was sentenced under the formerly mandatory guidelines scheme. Lozoya’s constitutional challenge is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998). Although Lozoya contends that Almendarez-Torres was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule Almendarez-Torres in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that Almendarez-Torres remains binding. See United States v. Garza-Lopez , 410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 298 (2005). Lozoya properly concedes that her argument is foreclosed in light of Almendarez-Torres and circuit precedent, but she raises it here to preserve it for further review. Lozoya’s challenge to the special condition of supervised release that she cooperate in the collection of a DNA sample, even if not barred by the waiver-of-appeal provision, is not ripe for review on direct appeal. See United States v. Riascos-Cuenu ,No. 04-41702 -3- 428 F.3d 1100, 1101-02 (5th Cir. 2005), petition for cert. filed (Jan. 9, 2006) (No. 05-8662). That claim is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. See id. at 1102. JUDGMENT AFFIRMED; APPEAL DISMISSED IN PART.