alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Leticia Llaguno RODRIGUEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 10-50300.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 24, 2011.*

Filed June 8, 2011.

Mark R. Rehe, Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

*794James Fife, Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: PREGERSON, THOMAS, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Leticia Llaguno Rodriguez appeals from the 42-month sentence imposed following her guilty-plea conviction for being a deported alien found in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Rodriguez contends that the district court erred when it applied a 16-level enhancement, under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2, because her prior conviction for lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14 years of age, in violation of Cal.Penal Code § 288(a), does not qualify as a crime of violence. She contends that *United States v. Medina-Villa,*567 F.3d 507, 511-16 (9th Cir.2009), holding that a violation of CaLPenal Code § 288(a) is categorically a crime of violence, is inconsistent with *Estrada-Espinoza v. Mukasey,*546 F.3d 1147 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc). This contention lacks merit. *See United States v. Farmer,*627 F.3d 416, 421-22 (9th Cir. 2010). Accordingly, we decline Rodriguez’s invitation that we seek en banc review of this issue.

Rodriguez also contends that *Nijhawan v. Holder,*557 U.S. 29, 129 S.Ct. 2294, 174 L.Ed.2d 22 (2009), effectively overruled *Medinar-Villa.*This contention fails.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
##### 



Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Section 906
Certification of Chief Executive and Chief Financial Officers
  1.
    
    This Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 August 7, 2007
    
    By
    
    /s/ Norman L. LoweryNorman L. Lowery, Vice Chairman & CEOAugust 7, 2007
    
    By
    
    /s/ Michael A. CartyMichael A. Carty, Treasurer & CFO
  19
* 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

July 15, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-41472 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaint iffAppellee,

versus

HECTOR RAUL GARZA,

DefendantAppellant.

------------------------------------------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. L-02-CR-374-ALL

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

Before DAVIS, STEWART and DENNIS, Circuit Judges:

PER CURIAM: *

Hector Raul Garza appeals his conditional guilty-plea conviction for possession with intent

to distribute less than 50 kilograms of marihuana. Garza contends that the district court erred in

denying his motion to suppress. He argues that the Border Patrol agents’ activation of their vehicle’s-2-

overhead lights after his vehicle stopped constituted a seizure under the Fourth Amendment that was

not supported by reasonable suspicion.

The Government contends that Garza has waived this issue by failing to raise it before the

district court. Garza’s motion to suppress before the district court contended that “the roving patrol

stop of [his] vehicle was done without reasonable suspicion

. . . .” The district court addressed only

whether Garza voluntarily stopped his vehicle in its decision on the motion.

Motions to suppress must be made before trial. F E D

. R. C RIM

. P. 12(b)(3). The failure to

make such a motion constitutes a waiver and bars a defendant from raising the objection on appeal.

See F ED . R. C RIM . P. 12(f) (2001); United States v. Chavez-Valencia , 116 F.3d 127, 129 (5th Cir.

1997). Likewise, the failure to raise a particular issue in a suppression motion operates as a waiver

unless the district court grants relief for good cause shown. See United States v. Carreon-Palacio

,

267 F.3d 381, 389 (5th Cir. 2001); United States v. Harrelson , 705 F.2d 733, 738 (5th Cir. 1983).

Because Garza did not adequately raise the issue of whether the activation of the overhead lights on

the Border Patrol vehicle after Garza stopped his vehicle constituted a sei zure in his motion to

suppress before the district court, he has waived this argument. See United States v. Medina , 887

F.2d 528, 533 (5th Cir. 1989); Harrelson

, 705 F.2d at 738. Accordingly, the judgment of the district

court is AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>

THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM BIOMUNE
SYSTEMS, INC. JUNE 30, 1998 FINANCIAL STATMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                          54,909
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,810,732
<ALLOWANCES>                                    80,500
<INVENTORY>                                    713,397
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,078,058
<PP&E>                                         198,523
<DEPRECIATION>                                 121,123
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,676,570
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,483,024
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  1,891,830
<COMMON>                                         1,041
<OTHER-SE>                                     300,675
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               (3,676,570)
<SALES>                                      1,372,751
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,372,751
<CGS>                                          753,591
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,514,468
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (87,573)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (87,573)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (87,573)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.02)
        

</TABLE>
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Columbia Plateau Conservation Research Center: Pendleton, OR
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    Related TopicsSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Pacific West Area Pendleton, Oregon Columbia Plateau Conservation Research Center





- ARS News & Events
- AgResearch Magazine
- Image Gallery
- News
- Agronomy
- CQESTR
- Hydrology
- NWR Biomass Research Center
- Soil Chemistry
- Soil Ecology
- Soil Microbiology

Newsheadline bar **Local ARS News** USDA research center to add new positions in NE Oregon. Jun 27, 2019 ...................................................................................................... PENDLETON Merkley, Walden back federal research station. May 19, 2015 ...................................................................................................... No-till Farming Prevents Erosion, Study Shows. Apr 8, 2011 ...................................................................................................... Long taking over as research leader. Feb 28, 2004   ARS News Articles  ARS Scientists Help Improve Soil Carbon CalculationsJul 03, 2014Study Shows No-Till's Benefits for Pacific Northwest Wheat GrowersMar 08, 2011ARS Explores Ways to Keep Carbon in the SoilDec 02, 2009


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________ 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff(s)

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant(s)

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

To: (Defendant’s name and address)

A lawsuit has been filed against you.

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you

are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.

P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney,

whose name and address are:

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. 

You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

CLERK OF COURT

Date:

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil Action No.

PROOF OF SERVICE

(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))

This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)

was received by me on (date) .

’ I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)

on (date) ; or

’ I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name)

, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,

on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or

’ I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is

 designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)

on (date) ; or

’ I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or

’ Other (specify):

.

My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ .

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.

Date:

Server’s signature

Printed name and title

Server’s address

Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                          12,090
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 6,374
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     48,746
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        235,504
<ALLOWANCE>                                      2,987
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 311,565
<DEPOSITS>                                     266,353
<SHORT-TERM>                                     8,901
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              3,099
<LONG-TERM>                                     10,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,000
<OTHER-SE>                                      22,212
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 311,565
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 15,101
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                1,895
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   150
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                17,146
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               5,297
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,109
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           11,037
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      575
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   1
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  9,832
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,024
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       3,024
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,955
<EPS-BASIC>                                       2.26
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.26
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    8.70
<LOANS-NON>                                        462
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                    61
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                    523
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 2,499
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      204
<RECOVERIES>                                       117
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                2,987
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             2,987
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 2341

AN ACT

To amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater 

Study and Facilities Act to authorize the Secretary of 

the Interior to participate in the design, planning, and 

construction of a project to reclaim and reuse wastewater 

within and outside of the service area of the City of 

Austin Water and Wastewater Utility, Texas.
2

•HR 2341 EH 

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

3 SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF AUSTIN, TEXAS, WASTE4 WATER RECLAMATION AND REUSE PROJECT. 

5 (a) AUTHORIZATION OF PROJECT.—The Reclamation 

6 Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act 

7 (Public Law 102–575, title XVI; 43 U.S.C. 390h et seq.) 

8 is amended by adding at the end the following: 

9 ‘‘SEC. 1636. AUSTIN, TEXAS, WATER RECLAMATION AND 

10 REUSE PROJECT. 

11 ‘‘(a) AUTHORIZATION.—The Secretary, in coopera12 tion with the City of Austin Water and Wastewater Util13 ity, Texas, is authorized to participate in the planning (in14 cluding an appraisal and feasibility study), design, and 

15 construction of, and land acquisition for, a project to re16 claim and reuse wastewater, including degraded ground17 waters, within and outside of the service area of the City 

18 of Austin Water and Wastewater Utility, Texas. 

19 ‘‘(b) COST SHARE.—The Federal share of the cost 

20 of the project authorized by this section shall not exceed 

21 25 percent of the total cost of the project. 

22 ‘‘(c) LIMITATION.—The Secretary shall not provide 

23 funds for the operation and maintenance of the project 

24 authorized by this section. 
3

•HR 2341 EH 

1 ‘‘(d) SUNSET OF AUTHORITY.—The authority of the 

2 Secretary to carry out any provisions of this section shall 

3 terminate 10 years after the date of the enactment of this 

4 section.’’. 

5 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of contents 

6 in section 2 of Public Law 102–575 (106 Stat. 4600) is 

7 amended by adding at the end of the items relating to 

8 chapter XVI the following:

‘‘Sec. 1636. Austin, Texas, water reclamation and reuse project.’’.

Passed the House of Representatives April 25, 2006. 

Attest:

Clerk. 
109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 2341

AN ACT

To amend the Reclamation Wastewater and 

Austin Water and Wastewater Utility, Texas.and outside of the service area of the City of project to reclaim and reuse wastewater within the design, planning, and construction of a ize the Secretary of the Interior to participate in Groundwater Study and Facilities Act to author-
Exhibit 32
                                                                      ----------

                             COMMERCE BANCORP, INC.

                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant  to Section  906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002  (Section  1350 of
Chapter  63 of Title 18 of the  United  States  Code),  each of the  undersigned
officers of Commerce  Bancorp,  Inc. (the  "Company"),  does hereby certify with
respect to the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period ended
June 30, 2003 (the "Report") 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 operation of the Company.


Date: August 8, 2003                                 /s/    Vernon W. Hill, II
                                                     -------------------------
                                                     Vernon W. Hill, II
                                                     Chief Executive Officer

Date: August 8, 2003                                 /s/   Douglas J. Pauls
                                                     ----------------------
                                                     Douglas J. Pauls
                                                     Chief Financial Officer

<PAGE>
Exhibit 32.2

                      Statement of Chief Financial Officer
         Pursuant to Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code


Pursuant to Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code, the undersigned,
Henry P. Herms,  the Vice  President - Finance  and Chief  Financial  Officer of
CopyTele, Inc., hereby certifies that:

1.       The Company's Form 10-Q Quarterly Report for the period ended April 30,
         2004 (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/ Henry P. Herms
                                              --------------------------------
                                                  Henry P. Herms
                                                  Vice President - Finance and
June 1, 2004                                      Chief Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 124 (Thursday, July 1, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 35141]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-14022]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

POSTAL SERVICE


Product Change--Priority Mail and First-Class Package Service 
Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal Service<SUP>TM</SUP>.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: July 1, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
June 14, 2021, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS 
Request to Add Priority Mail & First-Class Package Service Contract 196 
to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at www.prc.gov, 
Docket Nos. MC2021-102, CP2021-105.

Sean Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2021-14022 Filed 6-30-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
N OTE : This order is nonprecedential

. 

# United States **Court of Appeals**  **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________
WESTROCK VIRGINIA CO RPORATION, Plaintiff

- Appellant

v.

UNITED STATES, Defendant

- Appellee

______________________

2018

- 1877

______________________ Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims in No. 1:15

- cv

- 00355

- LKG, Judge Lydia Kay Griggsby.

______________________
ON PETITION FOR REHEARI NG EN BANC

______________________

Before P ROST , Chief Judge

, N EWMAN , L OURIE , D YK , M OORE , O’M ALLEY , R EYNA , W ALLACH , T ARANTO , C HEN , H UGHES , and S TOLL , Circuit Judges

. P ER C URIAM

. O R D E R
Appellant Westrock Virginia Corporation filed a combined petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc. A response to the petition was invited by the court and filed by Appellee United States. The petition was referred to theWESTROCK VIRGINIA CO RPORATION v. U NITED STATES 2

panel that heard the ap peal, and thereafter the petition for rehearing en banc was referred to the circuit judges who are in regular active service.
Upon consideration thereof,

I T I S O RDERED T HAT : (1) The petition for panel rehearing is granted for the limited purpose of substitut ing the attached revised opinion for the previously issued opinion. See accompanying order.
(2) The petition for rehearing en banc is denied.
(3) The mandate of the court will issue on December 2 6

, 2019.

F OR THE C OURT

November 4, 2019 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner Date Peter R. Marksteiner Clerk of Court