alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-20562

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

RONNY EARL RHODES,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:16-CR-31-1

Before JOLLY, COSTA, and HO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Ronny Earl Rhodes appeals one aspect of the sentences imposed on the 

revocation of concurrent terms of supervised release of five years (Count One) 

and three years (Count Two). The revoking court sentenced him to concurrent 

prison terms of 36 months for each count. The written judgment, but not the 

oral pronouncement of the sentence, reflects that he was also sentenced to 

concurrent two-year terms of supervised release on each count. Rhodes 

 

* 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

April 26, 2019

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 18-20562 Document: 00514931865 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/26/2019
No. 18-20562

2

contends that the two-year term of supervised release on the Count Two 

revocation exceeds the maximum sentence available, and is thus illegal, 

because the prison sentence on the Count Two revocation was three years, 

leaving no time remaining for supervised release on that count. See Johnson 

v. United States, 529 U.S. 694, 705-07 (2000). 

The Government concedes that this is a clear and obvious error, but it 

argues, without merit, for letting the error stand. The record refutes the 

Government’s suggestion that the error was “invited” or provoked by the 

defense. See United States v. Salazar, 751 F.3d 326, 332 (5th Cir. 2014).

Likewise, the argument for plain-error review fails. Because the error 

appeared only in the written judgment, Rhodes had no opportunity to object to 

this aspect of the sentence at the revocation hearing. See United States v. 

Bigelow, 462 F.3d 378, 381 (5th Cir. 2006). More significantly, we review de 

novo a claim that a sentence is illegal because it exceeds the statutory 

maximum. See United States v. Hampton, 633 F.3d 334, 336 (5th Cir. 2011); 

United States v. Vera, 542 F.3d 457, 459-61 (5th Cir. 2008).

Accordingly, the conviction is AFFIRMED, but the sentence is 

VACATED IN PART, and the case is REMANDED for the district court to 

correct the written judgment to remove the two-year term of supervised release 

imposed on Count Two. See Vera, 542 F.3d at 462. 

 Case: 18-20562 Document: 00514931865 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/26/2019
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 Excaliber Enterprises, Ltd. (the "Company")
on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Stephanie Y.
Jones, acting in the capacity as the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and
I, Matthew L. Jones, acting in the capacity as the Chief Financial Officer of
the Company, certify to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:





(1)
            The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
and





(2)
            The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
      Company.








/s/ Stephanie Y.
Jones


Stephanie
Y. Jones


Chief
Executive Officer


March
30, 2009





/s/ Matthew L.
Jones


Matthew
L. Jones


Chief
Financial Officer


March
30, 2009
**Exhibit21**

J.L. Halsey Corporation

SUBSIDIARIES
| **Subsidiary**              | ** ** | **Jurisdiction of Incorporation** |
|-----------------------------|------------|-----------------------------------|
| Admiral Holdings, Inc.      |       | Nevada                            |
| Commodore Resources, Inc.   |       | Nevada                            |
| NC Holdings, Inc.           |       | Nevada                            |
| Admiral Management Company  |       | Delaware                          |
| Lyris Technologies, Inc.    |       | Delaware                          |
| Uptilt, Inc.                |       | Delaware                          |
| ClickTracks Analytics, Inc. |       | California                        |
| Hot Banana Software, Inc.   |       | Ontario, Canada                   |

 

----
#### SUTHERLAND, Respondent, v. UNION RY. CO. OF NEW YORK CITY, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

February 7, 1899.)

Action by Donald Sutherland against the Union Railway Company of New York City.

No opinion. Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1972 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.1972

                       One Hundred Ninth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
            the fourth day of January, two thousand and five

                                 An Act

 
 To direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special resource 
 study to determine the suitability and feasibility of including in the 
  National Park System certain sites in Williamson County, Tennessee, 
                   relating to the Battle of Franklin.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Franklin National Battlefield Study 
Act''.

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

    In this Act:
        (1) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of 
    the Interior.
        (2) Study area.--The term ``study area'' means the cities of 
    Brentwood, Franklin, Triune, Thompson's Station, and Spring Hill, 
    Tennessee.

SEC. 3. SPECIAL RESOURCE STUDY.

    (a) In General.--The Secretary shall conduct a special resource 
study of sites in the study area relating to the Battle of Franklin to 
determine--
        (1) the national significance of the sites; and
        (2) the suitability and feasibility of including the sites in 
    the National Park System.
    (b) Requirements.--The study conducted under subsection (a) shall 
include the analysis and recommendations of the Secretary on--
        (1) the effect on the study area of including the sites in the 
    National Park System; and
        (2) whether the sites could be included in an existing unit of 
    the National Park System or other federally designated unit in the 
    State of Tennessee.
    (c) Consultation.--In conducting the study under subsection (a), 
the Secretary shall consult with--
        (1) appropriate Federal agencies and State and local government 
    entities; and
        (2) interested groups and organizations.
    (d) Applicable Law.--The study required under subsection (a) shall 
be conducted in accordance with Public Law 91-383 (16 U.S.C. 1a-1 et 
seq.).

SEC. 4. REPORT.

    Not later than 3 years after the date funds are made available for 
the study, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Resources of 
the House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural 
Resources of the Senate a report that describes--
        (1) the findings of the study; and
        (2) any conclusions and recommendations of the Secretary.

SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary 
to carry out this Act.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
USDC IN/ND case 2:14-cr-00063-PPS-JEM   document 5   filed 07/25/14   page 1 of 3

USDC IN/ND case 2:14-cr-00063-PPS-JEM   document 5   filed 07/25/14   page 2 of 3

USDC IN/ND case 2:14-cr-00063-PPS-JEM   document 5   filed 07/25/14   page 3 of 3
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-50595 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ALEJANDRO ROCHA-MENDOZA, Defendant-Appellant;

____________________ Consolidated with No. 00-50631

_____________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus CATALINO GARCIA-ARREDONDO, also known as Samuel Perez-Hernandez, Defendant-Appellant;

____________________ Consolidated with No. 00-50663

_____________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus EUTIQUIO GONZALEZ-GONZALEZ, also known as Luis Ramirez, Defendant-Appellant;No. 00-50595 c/w Nos. 00-50631 & 00-50663 & 00-50701 & 00-50769

- 2 -

* 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.

** Gonzalez’s real name is David Chavez-Prado. ____________________ Consolidated with No. 00-50701

_____________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus MARTIN MORALES-HERNANDEZ, also known as Martin H. Morales, Defendant-Appellant;

____________________ Consolidated with No. 00-50769

_____________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ADRIAN DEMERIO LABRADO-ALVAREZ, also known as Adrian Labrado, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas

- - - - - - - - - - February 15, 2001 Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Alejandro Rocha-Mendoza, Catalino Garcia-Arredondo, Eutiquio Gonzalez-Gonzalez ** , Martin Morales-Hernandez, Adrian Demerio Labrado-Alvarez (collectively the Defendants) appeal theirNo. 00-50595 c/w Nos. 00-50631 & 00-50663 & 00-50701 & 00-50769

- 3 -sentences following their guilty plea convictions for illegal reentry after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. The Defendants argue that their sentences should not have exceeded the two-year maximum sentence under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). The Defendants acknowledge that their argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224 (1998), but they seek to preserve the issue for Supreme Court review in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey , 120 S. Ct. 2348 (2000). The Defendants’ argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres , 523 U.S. at 235. The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks that the judgments of the district court be affirmed and that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is granted.
AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
---

March 29, 2011

VIA EDGAR

United States Securities and Exchange Commission

|Re: | Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. (the "Company")
|--- | ----------------------------------------------
|    |                                               
|    | Annual Report on Form 40-F                    
|    |                                               
|    | Consent of Expert                             

This letter is provided in connection with the Company's Form
40-F annual report for the year ended December 31, 2010, (the Annual Report)
to be filed by the Company with the United States Securities and Exchange
Commission (the SEC).

I, Aleksandar Zivkovic, P.Eng , hereby consent to the use of my
name in connection with reference to my involvement in the preparation of the
following technical report (the "Technical Report"):

- Preliminary Assessment of the Pebble Project, Southwest Alaska dated
  February 17, 2011

and to references to the Technical Report, or portions thereof,
in the Annual Report and to the inclusion and incorporation by reference of the
information derived from the Technical Reports in the Annual Report.

I have read the Companys Annual Report and confirm that it
documents fairly and accurately represent the information that supports the
disclosure.

Yours truly,



/s/ Aleksandar Zivkovic

---

Aleksandar Zivkovic, P.Eng

Wardrop Engineering Inc.

---
---

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002

I, Ronald W. Thiessen, Chief Executive Officer of Northern
Dynasty Minerals Ltd. (the Company), hereby 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:

(i)      the
Annual Report on Form 40-F of the Company for the fiscal year ended December 31,
2005 (the Annual Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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

| | By:    | */s/
      Ronald W. Thiessen*
| | ------ | ------------------------------
| | Name:  | Ronald W. Thiessen            
| | Title: | Chief Executive Officer       
| |        |                               
| |        |                               
| | Date:  | March 31, 2006                

This written statement is being furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to the Companys Annual Report on Form
40-F. A signed original of this statement 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.

This certification accompanies this Annual Report on Form
40-F pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not,
except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the
Exchange Act). Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by
reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the
Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it
by reference.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2218 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2218

 To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to adjust the fee for 
collecting specimens for clinical diagnostic laboratory tests under the 
                           Medicare Program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 10, 2005

 Mr. English of Pennsylvania introduced the following bill; which was 
 referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to 
   the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently 
   determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such 
 provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to adjust the fee for 
collecting specimens for clinical diagnostic laboratory tests under the 
                           Medicare Program.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Medicare Laboratory Services Access 
Act of 2005''.

SEC. 2. ADJUSTMENT IN MEDICARE LABORATORY SPECIMEN COLLECTION FEE.

    (a) In General.--Section 1833(h) of the Social Security Act (42 
U.S.C. 1395l(h)) is amended--
                    (1) in paragraph (3)(A), by inserting ``in the 
                amount specified in paragraph (8)'' after ``a nominal 
                fee''; and
                    (2) by adding at the end the following new 
                paragraph:
            ``(8) The amount specified in this paragraph, for the 
        nominal fee under paragraph (3)(A) for tests performed in--
                    ``(A) 2006, is $5.78; or
                    ``(B) a subsequent year, is the amount specified in 
                this paragraph for tests performed in the preceding 
                year adjusted by the annual percentage increase or 
                decrease in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban 
                Consumers (United States city average).''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) shall 
apply to fees for tests performed on or after January 1, 2006.
                                 <all>
```
United States District Court

Northern District of Indiana

South Bend Division Case No.3:16-cv-634

Complaint and Jury Demand | Page 1 of 5

Plaintiff

150 

46204

Defendant

Complaint and Jury Demand

 

The Claim

1 42 u.s.c. 

12101— 1990 — 29

u.s.c. 794 — 1973

The Parties

2

3 42 u.s.c. 12111 4

4 am llc

5 am 42 u.s.c. 12111 5 a

6 am 

am 

Jurisdiction

7. 28 u.s.c. 1331

USDC IN/ND case 3:16-cv-00634-JD document 1 filed 09/21/16 page 1 of 5
Case No. 3:16-cv-634

Complaint and Jury Demand | Page 2 of 5

Venue

8. 28 u.s.c. 1391 2

28 u.s.c. 94 2

9. am 

eeoc Proceeding

10

15 2016

11 eeoc 23 2016

a

12 30 2016

13 90 

Background

14 am 8 2003

15

16 23 2015

17 30 2015

18

USDC IN/ND case 3:16-cv-00634-JD document 1 filed 09/21/16 page 2 of 5
Case No. 3:16-cv-634

Complaint and Jury Demand | Page 3 of 5

19 am

20

21 am

22 am

24 2015 2015

23

am 2015

24

2015

5 2015

25

26

27

28 am 

USDC IN/ND case 3:16-cv-00634-JD document 1 filed 09/21/16 page 3 of 5
Case No. 3:16-cv-634

Complaint and Jury Demand | Page 4 of 5

29

2016

am

30 9 2016 am

2015

31 16 2016

32

33

34 am 

35 am 

36

37 am 

38 am 

1973

39 am

40

am 

USDC IN/ND case 3:16-cv-00634-JD document 1 filed 09/21/16 page 4 of 5
Case No. 3:16-cv-634

Complaint and Jury Demand | Page 5 of 5

Relief Requested

a am 

b am 

1973

am 

d

e

f

g

Date: 21 2016

24238-53

Jones Obenchain, llp 

600 Ke yBank Building

202 S. Michigan St.

Post Office Box 4577

South Bend, IN 46634 -4577

574.233.1194 | 574.233.8957 fax

jgh@jone sobenchain.com

Jury Demand

| 24238-53

USDC IN/ND case 3:16-cv-00634-JD document 1 filed 09/21/16 page 5 of 5
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 Daybreak Mines, Inc., (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending February 28, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert N. Martin, President and Chief Executive Officer of Daybreak Mines, Inc. Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(1)

The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



(2)

The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



Date:  June 14, 2005



By /s/  ROBERT N. MARTIN

Robert N. Martin, President and Chief Executive Officer
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Commerce

###### National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

          - 50 CFR Part 665
          - [RTID 0648-XB172]

# AGENCY:

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

# ACTION:

Notification of lobster harvest guideline.

# SUMMARY:

NMFS establishes the annual harvest guideline for the commercial lobster fishery in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands (NWHI) for calendar year 2021 at zero lobsters.

# DATES:

June 17, 2021.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mark R. Fox, NMFS PIR Sustainable Fisheries, tel 808-725-5171.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

NMFS manages the NWHI commercial lobster fishery under the Fishery Ecosystem Plan for the Hawaiian Archipelago. The regulations at 50 CFR 665.252(b) require NMFS to publish an annual harvest guideline for lobster Permit Area 1, comprised of Federal waters around the NWHI.

                    Regulations governing the Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument in the NWHI prohibit the unpermitted removal of monument resources (50 CFR 404.7), and establish a zero annual harvest guideline for lobsters (50 CFR 404.10(a)). Accordingly, NMFS establishes the                           ( print page 32240)                        harvest guideline for the NWHI commercial lobster fishery for calendar year 2021 at zero lobsters. Harvest of NWHI lobster resources is not allowed.                

Authority:16 U.S.C. 1801*et seq.*

Dated: June 14, 2021.

Jennifer M. Wallace,

Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 2021-12824 Filed 6-16-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
Exhibit 13.2



Certification



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)



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), the undersigned officer of NTT DoCoMo, Inc., a Japanese corporation (the Company), hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that:



The Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended March 31, 2005 (the
Report) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.



Date: June 27, 2005



/s/    YOSHIAKI UGAKIYoshiaki UgakiExecutive Vice President and ChiefFinancial Officer