alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 20-60645

Summary Calendar

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Jimmie Terrell Harrison, 

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 3:18-CR-98-1

Before Barksdale, Graves, and Oldham, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Jimmie Terrell Harrison, federal prisoner # 20912-043, pleaded guilty

to possession, with intent to distribute, more than 50 grams of 

methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). He was sentenced 

to, inter alia, 240-months’ imprisonment, a term below the advisory 

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited 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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

May 25, 2021

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 20-60645 Document: 00515875239 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/25/2021
No. 20-60645

2

Sentencing Guidelines range. Harrison, proceeding pro se, challenges the 

district court’s denial of his motion for a sentence reduction (seeking 

compassionate release) pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A), asserting the 

court failed to consider all of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)sentencing factors. (To 

the extent Harrison claims he is being subjected to a cruel and unusual 

punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment and that COVID-19 has 

stopped all programming, vocational training, other needed treatment, and 

employment within the prison, we need not reach these claims, because the 

court properly disposed of the sentence-reduction motion after considering 

the § 3553(a) factors.)

A district court’s denying a § 3582(c)(1)(A) motion is reviewed for an 

abuse of discretion. United States v. Chambliss, 948 F.3d 691, 693 (5th Cir. 

2020). A district court may reduce a defendant’s sentence, after considering 

the applicable § 3553(a) factors, if “extraordinary and compelling reasons 

warrant such a reduction”. 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). 

Despite Harrison’s assertions to the contrary, the court properly 

considered the applicable § 3553(a) factors. It explicitly considered: the 

seriousness of Harrison’s offense; his criminal history, including a prior 

felony conviction for the sale of a controlled substance; the need to promote 

respect for the law; the need to provide just punishment; and the need for 

specific and general deterrence. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(1), (2). Moreover, 

the court noted: Harrison received a below-Guidelines sentence; he had 

served less than ten percent of his sentence; and he was in possession of a 

dangerous firearm at the time of his arrest. Because the court did not rely on 

an impermissible, or fail to consider a relevant, sentencing factor, it did not 

abuse its discretion in denying the motion. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 

38, 51 (2007); United States v. Jones, 980 F.3d 1098, 1114 (6th Cir. 2020).

AFFIRMED. 

Case: 20-60645 Document: 00515875239 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/25/2021
---

D E  V I S S E R  G R A Y  L L
PCHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS

401 - 905 West Pender Street Vancouver, BC Canada V6C 1L6

Tel: (604) 687-5447 Fax: (604) 687-6737

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
(the Company)

Dear Sirs

We consent to the use of our report on the financial statements
of the Company, as at and for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006, dated
March 16, 2007 and included in this annual report on Form 40-F.

Yours very truly,

De Visser Gray LLP

Chartered Accountants

Vancouver, Canada April 2, 2007

---
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2369 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to provide for the Purple Heart 

to be awarded to prisoners of war who die in captivity under circumstances not otherwise establishing eligibility for the Purple Heart. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 16, 2005 

Mr. FILNER (for himself and Mr. MCNULTY) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to provide for the 

Purple Heart to be awarded to prisoners of war who 

die in captivity under circumstances not otherwise establishing eligibility for the Purple Heart. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Honor Our Fallen 

5 Prisoners of War Act’’. 
2 

•HR 2369 IH 

1 SEC. 2. AWARD OF PURPLE HEART FOR PRISONERS OF 

2 WAR WHO DIE IN CAPTIVITY. 

3 (a) PERSONS NOT OTHERWISE ELIGIBLE FOR THE

4 PURPLE HEART.—Chapter 57 of title 10, United States 

5 Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 

6 section: 

7 ‘‘§ 1135. Purple Heart: members who die while pris8 oners of war that are not otherwise eligi9 ble under the circumstances causing 

10 death 

11 ‘‘(a) For purposes of the award of the Purple Heart, 

12 the Secretary concerned shall treat a member of the armed 

13 forces described in subsection (b) in the same manner as 

14 a member who is killed or wounded in action as the result 

15 of an act of an enemy of the United States. 

16 ‘‘(b) A member described in this subsection is a mem17 ber who dies in captivity under circumstances establishing 

18 eligibility for the prisoner-of-war medal under section 

19 1128 of this title but not under circumstances establishing 

20 eligibility for the Purple Heart. 

21 ‘‘(c) This section applies to members of the armed 

22 forces who die on or after December 7, 1941. In the case 

23 of a member who dies as described in subsection (b) on 

24 or after December 7, 1941, and before the date of the 

25 enactment of this section, the Secretary concerned shall 

26 award the Purple Heart under subsection (a) in each case 
3 

•HR 2369 IH 

1 which is known to the Secretary before the date of the 

2 enactment of this section or for which an application is 

3 made to the Secretary in such manner as the Secretary 

4 requires.’’. 

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

6 at the beginning of such chapter is amended by adding 

7 at the end the following new item: 

‘‘1135. Purple Heart: members who die while prisoners of war that are not otherwise eligible under the circumstances causing death.’’. 

Æ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>                <C>            <C>   
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS              6-MOS          9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>         JUN-30-1998        JUN-30-1998    JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>              SEP-30-1997        DEC-31-1997    MAR-31-1998  
<CASH>                              0                709              0
<SECURITIES>                        0                  0              0  
<RECEIVABLES>                    2422               2427          10117
<ALLOWANCES>                     (123)               (97)         (1339)
<INVENTORY>                     11327              13064           8378
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                13793              16377          17491
<PP&E>                          14400              13835          13846
<DEPRECIATION>                  (5247)             (5361)         (5592)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  31195              32958          33712
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           11857              15522          13964
<BONDS>                          6761               6761           6761
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>               0                  0              0
<PREFERRED>                         9                  9              9
<COMMON>                         1041               1041           1031
<OTHER-SE>                      11232               9331          11584
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    31195              32958          33712
<SALES>                           418               3026          16003
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                  418               3026          16003
<CGS>                             364               2523          10353 
<TOTAL-COSTS>                     364               2523          10353     
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                 2006               4114           6795
<LOSS-PROVISION>                    0                  0              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                241                483            696
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 (2193)             (4094)         (1841)
<INCOME-TAX>                        0                  0              0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             (2193)             (4094)         (1841)
<DISCONTINUED>                      0                  0              0         
<EXTRAORDINARY>                     0                  0              0
<CHANGES>                           0                  0              0
<NET-INCOME>                    (2193)             (4094)         (1841)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                   (0.02)             (0.04)         (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                   (0.02)             (0.04)         (0.01)
        

</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of Esther Shapiro, Petitioner, v Community School District No. 13 et al., Respondents.

Proceeding pursuant to Executive Law § 298 to review an order of the State Division of Human Rights, dated August 17, 1984, which dismissed petitioner’s complaint on the ground that there was no probable cause to believe that respondents had engaged in an unlawful discriminatory practice. *

Order confirmed and proceeding dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

Despite having been given a full opportunity to present her case, petitioner failed to produce sufficient evidence to substantiate her allegations that respondents’ decision to terminate her from her position as a vocal music teacher, and to deny her a certificate of completion of probation, was actuated by a discriminatory motive or intent *(see, State Div. of Human Rights v Xerox Corp.,*60 AD2d 763). Rather, the record supports the Division’s finding that petitioner was discharged because of unsatisfactory job performance *(see, Matter of State Div. of Human Rights v Board of Educ.,*47 AD2d 524). Although petitioner may have been the victim of harassment by students and some unfortunate statements may have been made by respondents, the record does not reflect discriminatory or disparate treatment on the part of respondents sufficient to warrant overturning the determination. Accordingly, the Division’s or*854der is confirmed and the proceeding is dismissed. Lazer, J. P., Gibbons, O’Connor and Brown, JJ., concur.
#### Ann Crawford, Respondent, *v.*The Delaware, Lackawanna and Western Railroad Company, Appellant.

(Argued March 14, 1890;

decided April 15, 1890.)

Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Superior Court of the city of New York, entered upon an order made the first Monday of June, 1888, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and affirmed an order denying a motion for a new trial.

*653
      *Hamilton Odell*for appellant.

*Arteinas H Holmes*for respondent.

Agree to affirm; no opinion.

All concur.

Judgment affirmed.
2014.12.31 CMRX EX 10.18







May 30, 2014
		
	Re:
	Member of the Board of Directors of Chimerix, Inc.




Dear Patrick:
It is my sincere pleasure, on behalf of Chimerix, Inc. (“Chimerix”), to offer you a position as a member of the Board of Directors (the “Board”) of Chimerix, contingent and effective upon your formal approval by the Board at a meeting to take place on June 20, 2014 and your acceptance of the terms of this offer.  It is also anticipated that the Board will appoint you as a member of the Audit Committee of the Board.
As compensation for your service as a member of the Board, you will receive a $35,000 annual retainer, and as compensation for your service as a member of the Audit Committee, you will receive an $7,500 annual retainer.  You will also be granted a nonqualified stock option to purchase 18,000 shares of common stock pursuant to our 2013 Equity Incentive Plan (the “Plan”), at an exercise price equal to the closing price of Chimerix’s common stock on the date of grant, which would occur on the later of June 20, 2014 and your acceptance of this offer.  One-fourth of the shares subject to this option will vest on the one year anniversary of the date of grant and the balance of the shares will vest in a series of 36 equal monthly installments thereafter, such that the option will be fully vested on the fourth anniversary of the date of grant, subject to your continued service.   
With your continued service on the Board you will be compensated in accordance with the terms of the Chimerix, Inc. Non-Employee Director Compensation Policy.  Chimerix will also reimburse you for reasonable out-of-pocket travel expenses incurred in connection with your attendance at Board meetings.
If the terms of this letter are acceptable to you and you agree to serve as a member of the Board if appointed, please sign and date this letter below and return it to us via PDF, retaining a copy for your records.
Very truly yours,
/s/ M. Michelle Berrey
M. Michelle Berrey
President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Medical Officer
Chimerix, Inc.




Accepted and agreed:


 /s/ C. Patrick Machado    
Patrick Machado 


Date:      6/1/2014
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2265 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2265

   To extend the suspension of duty on a certain ion exchange resin.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 11, 2005

 Mr. English of Pennsylvania introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To extend the suspension of duty on a certain ion exchange resin.

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

SECTION 1. MACROPOROUS ION EXCHANGE RESIN COMPRISING A COPOLYMER OF 
              STYRENE CROSSLINKED WITH DIVINYLBENEZENE, THIOL 
              FUNCTIONALIZED.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.02.30 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States is amended by striking ``12/31/2006'' and 
inserting ``12/31/2009''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
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>
```
#### Lewis J. Phillips et al., Appellants, *v.*Isaac V. Brokaw, Respondent.

(Argued March 11, 1890;

decided April 15, 1890.)

Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, made March 28, 1888, which affirmed a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Circuit.

*MeVville H. Regensbu/rger*for appellants.

*Morris S. Thompson*for respondent.

Agree to affirm; no, opinion.'

All concur.

Judgment affirmed.
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Vernon W. Hill, II, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Commerce Bancorp, 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 quarterly 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(s) 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) [Intentionally Omitted]

     c) 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

     d) 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(s) 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 the 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.



        /s/  Vernon W. Hill, II                          Date:  November 8, 2004
        -----------------------
        Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer




                             [END OF CERTIFICATION]

                                       25

<PAGE>
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 Lyris, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-K for the period ending June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), we, Luis Rivera and Heidi L. Mackintosh, Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, respectively, of Lyris, Inc. certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                            
|--------------------------------------------
|/s/ Luis Rivera                             
|Luis Rivera, Chief Executive Officer        
|September 24, 2009                          
|                                            
|/s/ Heidi L. Mackintosh                     
|Heidi L. Mackintosh, Chief Financial Officer
|September 24, 2009
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-14-00118-CR

Stephen G. VIDALES,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of TexasAppellee

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 187th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013CR7839

Honorable Raymond Angelini, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Delivered and Filed: April 9, 2014

DISMISSED

Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement with the State, appellant Stephen G. Vidales pleaded 

nolo contendere to “continuous violence against family.” The trial court imposed sentence and 

signed a certificate stating that this “is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of 

appeal.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). Appellant timely filed a notice of appeal. 

The clerk’s record, which includes the plea bargain agreement and the trial court’s Rule 

25.2(a)(2) certification, has been filed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d). This court must dismiss an 
04-14-00118-CR

appeal “if a certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part 

of the record.” Id.

The court gave appellant notice that the appeal would be dismissed unless an amended trial 

court certification showing he has the right to appeal were made part of the appellate record within 

thirty days. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); 37.1; Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.—San 

Antonio 2003, order), disp. on merits, No. 04-03-00176-CR, 2003 WL 21508347 (Tex. App.—

San Antonio July 2, 2003, pet. ref’d) (not designated for publication). Appellant’s appointed 

appellate counsel filed a written response, stating he requested an amended certification from the 

trial court, but none was filed and he did not expect one to be forthcoming. 

After reviewing the record and counsel’s notice, we agree appellant does not have a right 

to appeal. See Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (holding that court of 

appeals should review clerk’s record to determine whether trial court’s certification is accurate). 

We therefore dismiss this appeal. TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d). 

PER CURIAM

Do Not Publish

- 2 -