alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

JEREMY McCROREY,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 13-30073

D.C. No. 2:12-cr-00062-RSL

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Washington

Robert S. Lasnik, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 17, 2013** 

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and GRABER, Circuit Judges. 

Jeremy McCrorey appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges

his guilty-plea conviction and 72-month sentence for conspiracy to distribute

controlled substances, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(B), and

846. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), McCrorey’s counsel

FILED

DEC 30 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to

withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided McCrorey the opportunity to

file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief

has been filed. 

Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S.

75, 80 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief as to McCrorey’s

conviction. We accordingly affirm the conviction. 

McCrorey waived the right to appeal his sentence. Because the record

discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the sentencing waiver, we dismiss

McCrorey’s appeal as to his sentence. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974,

986-88 (9th Cir. 2009). 

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

AFFIRMED in part; DISMISSED in part.

2 13-30073
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Damar McMillan, Appellant.

—Appeal by defendant from four judgments of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Sherman, J.), all rendered February 10, 1984, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (two counts), burglary in the first degree, and conspiracy in the second degree, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences.

Judgments affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf. People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Mangano, J. P., Bracken, Weinstein, Lawrence and Hooper, JJ.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 897 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                       Calendar No. 143
112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 897

                          [Report No. 112-63]

  To amend the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 to 
clarify that uncertified States and Indian tribes have the authority to 
use certain payments for certain noncoal reclamation projects and acid 
                       mine remediation programs.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 5, 2011

Mr. Bingaman (for himself, Mr. Bennet, Mr. Udall of Colorado, Mr. Udall 
 of New Mexico, and Mr. Lee) introduced the following bill; which was 
    read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural 
                               Resources

              August 30 (legislative day, August 2), 2011

Reported under authority of the order of the Senate of August 2, 2011, 
                   by Mr. Bingaman, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 to 
clarify that uncertified States and Indian tribes have the authority to 
use certain payments for certain noncoal reclamation projects and acid 
                       mine remediation programs.

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

SECTION 1. ABANDONED MINE RECLAMATION.

    (a) Reclamation Fee.--Section 402(g)(6)(A) of the Surface Mining 
Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (30 U.S.C. 1232(g)(6)(A)) is 
amended by inserting ``and section 411(h)(1)'' after ``paragraphs (1) 
and (5)''.
    (b) Filling Voids and Sealing Tunnels.--Section 409(b) of the 
Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (30 U.S.C. 1239(b)) 
is amended by inserting ``and section 411(h)(1)'' after ``section 
402(g)''.
    (c) Use of Funds.--Section 411(h)(1)(D)(ii) of the Surface Mining 
Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (30 U.S.C. 1240a(h)(1)(D)(ii)) is 
amended by striking ``section 403'' and inserting ``section 402(g)(6), 
403, or 409''.
                                                       Calendar No. 143

112th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                 S. 897

                          [Report No. 112-63]

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

  To amend the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 to 
clarify that uncertified States and Indian tribes have the authority to 
use certain payments for certain noncoal reclamation projects and acid 
                       mine remediation programs.

_______________________________________________________________________

              August 30 (legislative day, August 2), 2011

                       Reported without amendment
```
Exhibit
13.1





PRINCIPAL
EXECUTIVE OFFICER CERTIFICATION


PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350





In
connection with this Annual Report of TORM A/S (the “Company”) on Form 20-F
for the year ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the “SEC”) on or about the date hereof (the “Report”),
I, Mikael Skov, Chief Executive 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:





(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.





A
signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon
request.








Date:
June 25, 2009








/s/
      Mikael Skov


Mikael
Skov,


Chief
Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)
# United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Submitted June 14, 2018 *

Decided June 20, 2018

Before

DIANE P. WOOD, Chief Judge

J OEL M. FLAUM, Circuit Judge

DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge

No. 17

‐ 3348

ROBERT EDWARD ORTH,

Petitioner

‐ Appellant

,

v

.

COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL

REVENUE,

Respondent

‐ Appellee

. Appeal from the

United States Tax Court.

No. 18049

‐ 16

Ronald L. Buch,

J udge

.

O R D E R

Robert Orth failed to file tax returns for two years because he believes the law

justifies his nonpayment. He petitioned the United States Tax Court for redetermination

of tax deficiencies and additions to tax assessed by the Commissioner of Internal

Revenue but elected to “reserve for appeal” his outlandish theories challenging the

legality of the tax code. His restraint was strategic; he knew that tax courts often impose

penalties on litigants who assert the frivolous tax

‐ protester arguments that Orth now

* We agreed to decide this case without oral argument because the appeal is

frivolous. See F ED

. R. A PP

. P. 34(a)(2)(A). NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited onl y in accordance with Fed. R. A pp

. P. 32.1 NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited onl y in accordance with Fed. R. A pp

. P. 32.1No. 17

‐ 3348 Page 2

presents for review. See 26 U.S.C. § 6673(a)(1)(B). In his response to a motion for

summary judgment, Orth referred to his own arguments as “off

‐ limits” and

acknowledged that he is “banned from mentioning” and “barred from arguing” them in

the Tax Court. The Tax Court entered summary judgment for the Commissioner,

finding that Orth had not contested the facts establishing the tax deficiencies.

Orth insists that he is not a tax protester. Regardless of his disclaimer, he has

filed an appeal rife with tax

‐ protester arguments that this court and others have

repeatedly deemed frivolous. He contends, for example, that United States citizens are

not subject to an income tax, that the Treasury regulations violate the Sixteenth

Amendment because only Congress can collect income taxes, and that wages are not

taxable income. See United States v. Stuart

, 773 F.3d 849, 850–51 (7th Cir. 2014)

(identifying tax

‐ protester argument that wages are not income); United States v. Benson

,

561 F.3d 718, 720 (7th Cir. 2009) (calling a tax

‐ protester argument challenging the

constitutionality of the Sixteenth Amendment “frivolous”); United States v. Cooper

,

170 F.3d 691, 691 (7th Cir. 1999) (labeling same arguments “frivolous squared”). Orth’s

arguments raise no nonfrivolous challenge to the Commissioner’s assessment and do

not excuse deficiencies in his income taxes.

Because this appeal is frivolous, we AFFIRM the decision of the Tax Court and

direct Orth to show cause within 14 days why sanctions should not be imposed under

Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Szopa v. United States

, 460 F.3d

884, 887 (7th Cir. 2006) (establishing that $4,000 is the presumptive sanction for a tax

appeal of this type).
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                            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 Noble Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2003, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Mark A. Jackson, Senior Vice President - Finance and Chief Financial 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.

March 1, 2004                       /s/  MARK A. JACKSON
                                    --------------------------------------------
                                             Mark A. Jackson
                                             Senior Vice President - Finance and
                                             Chief Financial Officer
                                             of Noble Corporation
#### PEOPLE v. BRYAN et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

October 18, 1907.)

Proceedings by the people of the state of New York against John Bryan and another.

No opinion. Motion granted. Order filed.
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 994 

To amend title 23, United States Code, to protect States that have in 

effect laws or orders with respect to pay-to-play reform, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 12, 2011 

Mr. KIRK (for himself, Mr. MENENDEZ, Mr. LAUTENBERG, and Mr. DURBIN) 

introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 

Committee on Environment and Public Works 

A BILL 

To amend title 23, United States Code, to protect States 

that have in effect laws or orders with respect to payto-play reform, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘State Ethics Law Pro5 tection Act of 2011’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PAY-TO-PLAY REFORM. 

7 Section 112 of title 23, United States Code, is 

8 amended by adding at the end the following: 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 994 IS

1 ‘‘(h) PAY-TO-PLAY REFORM.—A State transportation 

2 department shall not be considered to have violated a re3 quirement of this section solely because the State in which 

4 that State transportation department is located, or a local 

5 government within that State, has in effect a law or an 

6 order that limits the amount of money an individual or 

7 entity that is doing business with a State or local agency 

8 with respect to a Federal-aid highway project may con9 tribute to a political party, campaign, candidate, or elected 

10 official.’’. 

Æ 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 32.1



THANKSGIVING COFFEE COMPANY, INC.



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 Thanksgiving Coffee Company, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, the undersigned
Chief Executive Officer of 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:



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



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



/s/ Paul KatzeffChief Executive OfficerMarch 29, 2004
##### 



Exhibit 99.1

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 of The Hillman Companies, Inc.
(the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
Max W. Hillman, Chief Executive Officer of The Hillman Companies, Inc.,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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/ Max W. Hillman



Max W. Hillman
Chief Executive Officer
August 14, 2002
#### In the Matter of Ronald Hayes, Appellant, v Brian Fischer, as Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision, Respondent.

[944 NYS2d 800]—

*1588Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Reynolds Fitzgerald, J.), entered June 3, 2011 in Chemung County, which partially granted petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to annul a determination of respondent finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a prison disciplinary determination. Finding that a significant portion of the transcript was missing and that meaningful review was precluded, Supreme Court partially granted the petition by annulling the determination and remitting for a new hearing. Petitioner appeals.

Petitioner’s sole contention is that Supreme Court should have ordered expungement instead of a new hearing. We find this claim to be unpersuasive. As this Court has noted, ‘ ‘ [ejxpungement will be ordered only where there has been a showing that ‘(1) the challenged disciplinary determination is not supported by substantial evidence . . . ; (2) there has been a violation of one of the inmate’s fundamental due process rights, as enunciated in *Wolff v McDonnell*(418 US 539 . . .); or (3) other equitable considerations dictate expungement of the record rather than remittal for a new hearing’ ” *(Matter of Monko v Selsky,*246 AD2d 699, 700 [1998], quoting *Matter of Hillard v Coughlin,*187 AD2d 136, 140 [1993], *lv denied*82 NY2d 651 [1993] [citations omitted]). None of the foregoing concerns are implicated by the missing testimony in the case at hand. Therefore, Supreme Court properly ordered a new hearing *(see Matter of La Van v New York State Dept. of Correctional Servs.,*47 AD3d 1153 [2008]; *Matter of Auricchio v Goord,*273 AD2d 571, 572 [2000]; *Matter of Monko v Selsky,*246 AD2d at 700).

Peters, P.J., Mercure, Malone Jr., Kavanagh and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



The undersigned hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, with respect to the Annual
Report on Form 10-KSB, as amended by Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-KSB/A, for the year ended December 31, 2002 as filed by Thanksgiving Coffee Company, Inc. with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (collectively the
Report), that:



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



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



/s/ Joan KatzeffPresident and Chief Financial OfficerOctober 8, 2003
**Exhibit 32.2**

** **

**Certification Pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to**

 

**Section 906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002**

 

I, Joel Boyarski, the Principal Financial Officer ofWorldGate Communications, Inc., hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that (1) the Form 10-Q/A of WorldGate Communications, Inc., for the quarterlyperiod ended September 30, 2004 (the “Form 10-Q/A”), fully complies withrequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934(15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and (2) the information contained in the Form 10-Q/Afairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of WorldGate Communications, Inc.

 

A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906 has been provided to WorldGate and will be retained by WorldGateand furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff uponrequest.

 

 
| Dated:             January  23, 2006 | /s/ JOEL BOYARSKI                            |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------|
|                                                                                             | Joel Boyarski                                |
|                                                                                             | Chief Financial Officer                      |
|                                                                                             | (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) |

 

----
# C_2022284EN.01002302.xml

| 25.7.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 284/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.7.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 284/23

---

Judgment of the General Court of 18 May 2022 — Wieland-Werke v Commission

(Case T-251/19) (1)

(Competition - Concentrations - Market for rolled products and pre-rolled strip made of copper and copper alloys - Decision declaring the concentration incompatible with the internal market and the EEA Agreement - Commitments - Relevant market - Assessment of the horizontal and vertical effects of the transaction on competition - Manifest error of assessment - Principle of good administration - Rights of the defence)

(2022/C 284/27)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Wieland-Werke AG (Ulm, Germany) (represented by: U. Soltész, C. von Köckritz and K. Winkelmann, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Berghe, A. Cleenewerck de Crayencour, M. Farley and F. Jimeno Fernández, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Decision C(2019) 922 final of 5 February 2019 declaring a concentration to be incompatible with the internal market and the EEA Agreement (Case M.8900 — Wieland/Aurubis Rolled Products/Schwermetall).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Wieland-Werke AG to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Wieland-Werke AG to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 213, 24.6.2019.

---
EX-4.1





 Exhibit 4.1

China Hydroelectric Corporation




No. [     ]



This is to Certify that [     ] of [Clifton House, 75 Fort Street, PO Box 1350, Grand Cayman KY1-1108,
Cayman Islands] is the Registered Holder of [     ] Ordinary Share(s) of USD$0.001 each numbered [ — ]
inclusive, in the above-named Company subject to the Memorandum and Articles of Association
thereof.




	 	 	 	 	 
	 	Executed as a Deed by the Company

dated [     ]

 	 
	 	
 	 
	 	Director