alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEVEN T HC IRC U IT APRIL24, 2007 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 05- 14694 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 0 5 - 0 0 0 0 5 - CR- 5 - M CR U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f - A p p e lle e , v ersu s M A R K A N T H O N Y M U L L I N S , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe N or the rn D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( A p r i l24, 2007) B efo re B IR C H , B L A C K an d M A R C U S , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: C he tK a uf

m a n, appoi nt e d c ouns e l f orM a rk A nthony M ul l i ns , ha s f i l e d a2

m ot i on t o w i thdr a w on appe a l , s uppor t e d by abr i e f pr e pa r e d pur s ua ntt o A nde r s v. C a l i f orni a , 386 U . S . 738, 87 S . C t . 1396, 18 L . E d. 2d 493 ( 1967) . O uri nde pe nde nt r e vi e w of

the e nt i r e r e c or d r e ve a l s tha tc ouns e l ’ s a s s e s s m e ntof the r e l a t i ve m e r i tof th e ap p e a l is c o rr e c t. B e c a u s e in d e p e n d e n t e x a m in a tio n o f th e e n tir e r e c o r d r e v e a ls n o arg u ab l e i ssu es o f m eri t , co u n sel ’ s m o t i o n t o w i th d raw i s G R A N TED , a nd conv i ct i on s a nd se nt ence ar e A FFI R M ED .
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

October 23, 2014

No. 04-14-00639-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF L.A., et al children,

From the 224th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013-PA-01513

Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding

ORDER

Appellant’s first motion for extension of time to file her brief is GRANTED. Appellant’s 

brief is due on October 30, 2014.

_________________________________

Karen Angelini, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 23rd day of October, 2014.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 103 (Tuesday, May 30, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 28107]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-13088]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP95-299-000]


Viking Gas Transmission Co.; Proposed Changes in FERC Gas Tariff

May 23, 1995.
    Take notice that on May 16, 1995, Viking Gas Transmission Company 
(Viking) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, First 
Revised Volume No. 1, the following revised tariff sheet, proposed to 
be effective May 4, 1995:

Second Revised Sheet No. 72

    Viking states that the purpose of the filing is to conform its 
tariff to the requirements of Order No. 577. In particular, Viking 
proposes to modify the capacity release provisions of its tariff by: 
(1) Increasing from 30 days to one calendar month the period during 
which capacity can be released at less than the maximum rate without 
prior posting or bidding; and (2) decreasing from 30 days to 28 days 
the period during which such ``short term'' releases cannot be rolled-
over, without prior posting and bidding, at less than the maximum rate. 
Viking also notes that its existing tariff already provides for 
prearranged releases at the maximum rate, without prior posting or 
bidding.
    Viking states that copies of the filing have been mailed to all of 
its jurisdictional customers and to affected state regulatory 
commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 825 North Capitol Street NE., Washington, DC 
20426, in accordance with rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's rules 
of practice and procedure. All such motions or protests should be filed 
on or before May 31, 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 must file a motion to intervene. Copies of 
this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for 
public inspection.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-13088 Filed 5-26-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
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 on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2010 of Boeing Capital Corporation (the
Company) as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report) and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Michael
J. Cave, President of the Company, certify, that:



| | (1) |  | 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) |  | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|               |  |  |  |                          
|-------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------
|April 21, 2010 |  |  |  | /s/ MICHAEL J. CAVE      
|               |  |  |  | Michael J. Cave
President



25
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1733 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1733

 To suspend temporarily the duty on electron guns for high definition 
                       cathode ray tubes (CRTs).

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 20, 2005

 Ms. Hart (for herself and Mr. Murphy) introduced the following bill; 
         which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To suspend temporarily the duty on electron guns for high definition 
                       cathode ray tubes (CRTs).

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

SECTION 1. TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF DUTY.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.85.40      Electron guns       Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         actually used for                                                  31/2008
                         high definition
                         cathode ray tubes
                         (CRTs) (provided
                         for in subheading
                         8540.91.50)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 31.1

                            SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION

      I, Robert E. Fitzgerald, Chief Executive Officer of YDI Wireless, Inc.,
certify that:

      1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of YDI Wireless,
Inc.;

      2.   Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;

      3.   Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this 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 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 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 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 report any change in the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most
recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) 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 (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

           a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
or operation of internal control 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 control
over financial reporting.



Date: August 15, 2005                       /s/ Robert E. Fitzgerald
                                            ------------------------
                                            Robert E. Fitzgerald
                                            Chief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 12.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, Colin Patterson, certify that:

1.
      I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Olympus Pacific Minerals Inc.;


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


3.
      Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this annual 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 annual report;


4.
      The registrants other certifying officers 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 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 report is being prepared;


b.
      Evaluated the effectiveness of the Company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;


c.
      Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect the registrants internal control over financial reporting;






---





| |  | 
| |  | 

5.
      The Companys other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based upon our most recent evaluation of internal controls over financial reporting, to the Companys auditors and the audit committee of the Companys board of directors:


(a)
      All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the Company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 Companys internal control over financial reporting.




Date: December 21 2007Signed:  /Colin Patterson /Chief Executive Officer






---
#### WATZELHAM, Respondent, v. NEW YORK TELEPHONE CO., Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

June 6, 1913.)

Action by Ruth Watzelham, an *1150infant, etc., against the New York Telephone Company.-

No opinion. Motion denied, without costs. See, also, 153 App. Div. 913, 137 N. Y. Supp. 1148.
# United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 18-3481

___________________________ United States of America

Plaintiff Appellee

v. Jose Farias-Valdovinos Defendant Appellant

____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City

____________ Submitted: March 3, 2020 Filed: May 18, 2020 [Unpublished]

____________ Before SHEPHERD, KELLY, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges.

____________ PER CURIAM. Jose Farias-Valdovinos appeals from his sentence after pleading guilty, pursuant to a plea agreement containing an appeal waiver, to aiding and abetting the possession with intent to distribute a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C), and846 and 18 U.S.C. § 2. After varying downward, the district court 1 sentenced him

120 months imprisonment. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we affirm and dismiss in part the appeal. On appeal, Farias-Valdovinos’s counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that Farias-Valdovinos’s sentence was substantively unreasonable and that the appeal waiver in his plea agreement should not be enforced. After independently reviewing the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we ordered supplemental briefing on whether sufficient evidence supported Farias-Valdovinos’s guilty plea and whether that claim survives his appeal waiver. After considering the parties’ supplemental filings, we conclude that Farias-Valdovinos’s argument that his sentence is substantively unreasonable is barred by the appeal waiver and must be dismissed. However, we find that the appeal waiver does not prevent us from considering his argument that his guilty plea was not knowing or voluntary because there was an insufficient factual basis underlying the plea. See United States v. Haubrich, 744 F.3d 554, 558 (8th Cir. 2014). Because Farias-Valdovinos failed to challenge the factual basis underlying the plea before the district court, we review this issue for plain error. See United States v. Frook, 616 F.3d 773, 776 (8th Cir. 2010). Following careful review of the record, we conclude that the district court did not plainly err in finding that there was a sufficient factual basis for the plea and in accepting Farias-Valdovinos’s guilty plea. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court and dismiss in part the appeal.

______________________________

1 The Honorable Gary A. Fenner, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. -2-
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 Annual Report of Baron Energy Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended July 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Michael Maguire, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and Principal Accounting 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 results of operations of the Company.
|   

/s/ Michael MaguireMichael Maguire, President & Director(Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer,Principal Accounting Officer)October 9, 2008

1

---
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA

No. 15-0464

Filed February 10, 2016

STATE OF IOWA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

vs.

JAMES CHARLES NULL,

Defendant-Appellant.

________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Floyd County, Peter B. Newell,

District Associate Judge.

The defendant challenges his conviction for failure to comply with the sex 

offender registry, second or subsequent offense. AFFIRMED.

David A. Kuehner of Eggert, Erb, Mulcahy & Kuehner, P.L.L.C., Charles 

City, for appellant.

Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Mary A. Triick, Assistant Attorney 

General, for appellee.

Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Bower and McDonald, JJ.
2

MCDONALD, Judge.

The defendant James Null was convicted of failure to comply with the sex 

offender registry, second or subsequent offense, in violation of Iowa Code 

sections 692A.2, 692A.3, and 692A.7(1) (2013), and sentenced as a habitual 

offender pursuant to Iowa Code sections 902.8 and 902.9. On appeal, he 

contends his trial counsel provided constitutionally deficient representation by 

failing to interpose certain objections to the jury instructions. On de novo review, 

we conclude the defendant’s claims are without merit. The defendant makes 

only conclusory claims of prejudice insufficient to satisfy the prejudice component 

of a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. See State v. Tate, 710 N.W.2d 

237, 241 (Iowa 2006). We independently conclude that Null has failed to 

establish prejudice, that is a “reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s 

unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.” 

Collins v. State, 588 N.W.2d 399, 402 (Iowa 1998); see also State v. Ambrose, 

861 N.W.2d 550, 556 (Iowa 2015) (applying Strickland prejudice standard to 

claim of instructional error). Null’s conviction is affirmed without further opinion. 

See Iowa R. 21.26(1)(a), (c), and (e).

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Robert G. Gargus, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of Applied Micro Circuits Corporation; and

2. Based on my knowledge, this 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 report.



/S/ ROBERT G. GARGUSRobert G. Gargus,Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer


Dated: November 15, 2012
US.96704294.01

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA 

SOUTH BEND DIVISION 

ROXANN WYATT, ) 

 ) 

 Plaintiff, ) 

 ) 

 v. ) CAUSE NO. 3:15-cv-00346-JD-CAN 

 ) 

SALVATION ARMY, ) 

 ) 

 Defendant. ) 

CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT PURSUANT TO RULE 7.1 

Defendant, The Salvation Army, is a non-governmental corporate party to this 

action. Its parent company is The Salvation Army (international). No publicly held company or 

investment fund holds a 10-percent or more ownership interest in Defendant’s stock. 

Respectfully submitted, 

FAEGRE BAKER DANIELS LLP 

By: s/Toni M. Everton 

Edward E. Hollis (#19402-49) 

Toni M. Everton (#23916-49) 

300 North Meridian Street, Suite 2700 

Indianapolis, IN 46204 

Telephone: (317) 237-0300 

Facsimile: (317) 237-1000 

Email: edward.hollis@faegrebd.com 

 toni.everton@faegrebd.com 

Attorneys for Defendant 

USDC IN/ND case 3:15-cv-00346-JD-MGG document 5 filed 08/26/15 page 1 of 2
 US.96704294.01 -2-

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on August 26, 2015, a copy of the foregoing was filed 

electronically. Notice of this filing will be sent to the following parties by operation of the 

Court’s electronic filing system. Parties may access this filing through the Court’s system. 

Kent Hull 

Indiana Legal Services, Inc. 

401 E. Colfax Avenue, Suite 116 

South Bend, IN 46617 

Kent.hull@ilsi.net 

s/Toni M. Everton 

USDC IN/ND case 3:15-cv-00346-JD-MGG document 5 filed 08/26/15 page 2 of 2