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

No. 11-10911

Non-Argument Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

Sept. 29, 2011.

*728Anne R. Schultz, Olivia Choe, Wifredo A. Ferrer, U.S. Attorney, Nicole Mariani, Kathleen M. Salyer, Arimentha R. Wal-kins, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Miami, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Sabrina D. Puglisi, Law Offices of Sabrina Puglisi, Miami, FL, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before EDMONDSON, WILSON and KRAVITCH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Alexis Fuentes appeals his 71-month sentence, imposed after he pleaded guilty to two counts of bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a). Fuentes contends that his sentence is procedurally and substantively unreasonable because the district court failed to articulate sufficient findings to support its length. His sentence fell at the top of the applicable 57-71 month Guidelines range.

We review a sentence imposed by a district court for reasonableness under a deferential abuse-of-discretion standard. *Gall v. United States,*552 U.S. 38, 41 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). This Court will not reverse a district court so long as the district court’s ruling does not constitute a clear error of judgment. *United States v. Pugh,*515 F.3d 1179, 1191 (11th Cir.2008). Ordinarily, we expect sentences within the recommended Guidelines range to be reasonable. *United States v. Talley,*431 F.3d 784, 788 (11th Cir.2005) (per curiam).

The record here shows that Fuentes’s argument is without merit. The district court correctly calculated the Guidelines range, considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, and clearly articulated its reasoning for concluding that a sentence at the high-end of the Guidelines range was necessary to comply with the purposes of § 3553(a). Consequently, the district court did not abuse its discretion, and we affirm.

AFFIRMED.
C AUSE N O

. 04-15-00405-CV

D AVID G ILLESPIE , § I N THE C OURT OF A PPEALS A PPELLANT , § §

— VERSUS — § F OURTH C OURT OF A PPEALS D ISTRICT § A.L. H ERNDEN AND § F REDERICK R. Z LOTUCHA , § A PPELLEES . § S AN A NTONIO , T EXAS

A PPEARANCE OF C OUNSEL

TO THE HONORABLE JUSTICES OF SAID COURT:

NOW COME S Beth Watkins and files this app earance of counsel for Appellees and

Conditional Cross-Appellants A.L. Hernden and Fr ederick R. Zlotucha. I ask that the Court

please enter my appearance as lead counsel fo r Appellee and conditional Cross-Appellant A.L.

Hernden and as co-counsel for Appellee and Cond itional Cross-Appellant Frederick R. Zlotucha.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Beth Watkins Beth Watkins State Bar No. 24037675 L AW O FFICE OF B ETH W ATKINS 926 Chulie Drive San Antonio, Texas 78216 (210) 225-6666—phone (210) 225-2300—fax Beth.Watkins@WatkinsAppeals.com

Counsel for Appellees and Conditional Cross-Appellants A.L. Hernden and Frederick R. Zlotucha ACCEPTED 04-15-00405-cv FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 11/23/2015 12:00:00 AM KEITH HOTTLE CLERK2 C ERTIFICATE OF S ERVICE

I hereby certify that, on November 21, 2015, I electronically served, via FileTime, my efiling service provider, a true and correct copy of the above document on the following counsel of record:

Ms. Kimberly S. Keller K ELLER S TOLARCZYK , PLLC 234 West Bandera Road #120 Boerne, Texas 78006 (830) 981-5000—phone (888) 293-8580—fax kim@kellsto.com

Attorney for Appellant David Gillespie

/s/ Beth Watkins Beth Watkins

Counsel for Appellees and Conditional Cross-Appellants A.L. Hernden and Frederick R. Zlotucha
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Eric Vancura, Appellant.

[942 NYS2d 900]—

Appeal by the defendant from an order of the County Court, Westchester County (Cacace, J.), dated March 16, 2011, which, after a hearing, granted the petition of the People of the State *853of New York pursuant to Correction Law § 168-0 (3) for an upward modification of his risk level classification, to the extent of designating him a level two sex offender pursuant to Correction Law article 6-C.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The defendant was convicted of possessing an obscene sexual performance of a child and sentenced to time served plus 10 years of probation. The defendant initially was designated a level one sex offender. When the defendant violated the terms of his probation, the People of the State of New York petitioned pursuant to Correction Law § I68-0 (3) for an upward modification of his risk level classification.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the proof offered at the hearing, showing that he failed to meaningfully participate in and complete sex offender treatment and denied that he had victimized the children depicted in the pornographic images he possessed, provided clear and convincing evidence that he was at an increased risk to re-offend *(see*Correction Law § I68-0; *see generally People v Johnson,*11 NY3d 416, 420 [2008]). Accordingly, the County Court properly granted the petition of the People of the State of New York for an upward departure of his risk level classification to the extent of modifying his risk level classification from a level one to a level two sex offender *(see People v Turpeau,*68 AD3d 1083 [2009]).

In light of our determination, we need not reach the parties’ remaining contentions. Dillon, J.P, Eng, Belen and Sgroi, JJ., concur.
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 823 

To permit aliens who lawfully enter the United States on valid visas as 

nonimmigrant elementary and secondary school students to attend public 

schools in the United States for longer than 1 year if such aliens 

reimburse the local educational agency that administers the school for 

the full, unsubsidized per capita cost of providing education at such 

school for the period of the alien’s attendance. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 14, 2011 

Mr. SCHUMER (for himself, Ms. COLLINS, Mr. KERRY, and Mr. LEAHY) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To permit aliens who lawfully enter the United States on 

valid visas as nonimmigrant elementary and secondary 

school students to attend public schools in the United 

States for longer than 1 year if such aliens reimburse 

the local educational agency that administers the school 

for the full, unsubsidized per capita cost of providing 

education at such school for the period of the alien’s 

attendance. 

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


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 823 IS

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Strengthening Amer3 ica’s Public Schools Through Promoting Foreign Invest4 ment Act’’. 

5 SEC. 2. NONIMMIGRANT ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY 

6 SCHOOL STUDENTS. 

7 Section 214(m)(1)(B) of the Immigration and Na8 tionality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(m)(1)(B)) is amended by 

9 striking ‘‘unless—’’ and all that follows through ‘‘(ii)’’ and 

10 inserting ‘‘unless’’. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Kevin Loveland, Appellant

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Counsel’s application to withdraw granted *(see, People v Crawford,*71 AD2d 38). (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, McGowan, J.—criminal possession of stolen property, third degree.) Present—Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Doerr, Boomer and Pine, JJ.
# Official Journal C 133I/2023

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 133I |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6617 April 2023 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 133I

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6617 April 2023

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2023/C 133 I/01 | Communication from the Commission – Amendments to the Commission Notice – Supplementary guidelines on vertical restraints in agreements for the sale and repair of motor vehicles and for the distribution of spare parts for motor vehicles | 1 |

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2023/C 133 I/01

Communication from the Commission – Amendments to the Commission Notice – Supplementary guidelines on vertical restraints in agreements for the sale and repair of motor vehicles and for the distribution of spare parts for motor vehicles

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 220 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 220

Expressing the sense of the Senate regarding the June 30, 2011, opening 
           of the Tom Lantos Institute in Budapest, Hungary.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 29, 2011

    Mr. Kerry (for himself, Mr. Lugar, and Mr. Reid) submitted the 
        following resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Expressing the sense of the Senate regarding the June 30, 2011, opening 
           of the Tom Lantos Institute in Budapest, Hungary.

Whereas the late Congressman Tom Lantos was a champion of human and minority 
        rights in Europe and around the world;
Whereas Congressman Lantos, the only Holocaust survivor to be elected to the 
        United States Congress, was a leading voice on human rights and founding 
        co-chairman of the Congressional Human Rights Caucus, now known as the 
        Tom Lantos Human Rights Caucus;
Whereas Congressman Lantos always remained a proud Hungarian-American and an 
        active promoter of strong cooperation between the country of his birth 
        and the United States;
Whereas Congressman Lantos was a tireless advocate for tolerance and moderation, 
        virtues embodied in the stated mission of the Tom Lantos Institute in 
        Budapest;
Whereas the Tom Lantos Institute is a non-profit, non-partisan, and independent 
        organization supported by the Government of Hungary and dedicated to the 
        goal of promoting human and minority rights in Central and Eastern 
        Europe;
Whereas educational programs on human and minority rights will lay the 
        foundation for a more sustainable and inclusive peace; and
Whereas a strong transatlantic partnership is in the mutual interests of the 
        United States and the countries of Central and Eastern Europe: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate--
            (1) to recognize and applaud the opening of the Tom Lantos 
        Institute;
            (2) to acknowledge the Government of Hungary for honoring 
        the legacy of Congressman Lantos through its contributions to 
        the Institute;
            (3) to express support for the principles of the Institute, 
        including democracy, pluralism, and human and minority rights;
            (4) to express support for the education of present and 
        future generations in Central and Eastern Europe, which will 
        contribute to regional cooperation, historical reconciliation, 
        and tolerance throughout the Euro-Atlantic region; and
            (5) to encourage the people and the governments of the 
        United States and the countries of Central and Eastern Europe 
        to continue to deepen and broaden their relations.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>
 
                                  EXHIBIT 11

 
                              CURAGEN CORPORATION
                       COMPUTATION OF NET LOSS PER SHARE
                      ATTRIBUTABLE TO COMMON STOCKHOLDERS
                                  (unaudited)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                              THREE MONTHS ENDED                SIX MONTHS ENDED
                                                                     JUNE 30,                        JUNE 30,
                                                       --------------------------------     ---------------------------
                                                            1998               1997            1998             1997
                                                       ----------------    ------------     -----------    ------------
<S>                                                    <C>                 <C>             <C>             <C>
Net loss                                                    ($2,499,017)    ($1,460,086)    ($5,666,530)    ($1,996,570)
Preferred dividends                                                   -         (17,106)       (508,435)        (34,212)
                                                       ----------------     -----------     -----------     -----------
Net loss attributable to common stockholders                ($2,499,017)    ($1,477,192)    ($6,174,965)    ($2,030,782)
                                                       ----------------     -----------     -----------     -----------
Basic and diluted net loss per share attributable
   to common stockholders                                        ($0.19)         ($0.18)         ($0.55)         ($0.29)
                                                       ----------------     -----------     -----------     ----------- 
Weighted average number of shares used in
   computing basic and diluted net loss per share
   attributable to common stockholders                       13,059,502       8,239,913      11,134,192       6,888,476
                                                       ----------------     -----------     -----------     ----------- 
</TABLE> 

                                      37
BLUEFLY, INC.
                                  JUNE 30, 2004

                                                                    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 Quarterly Report of Bluefly, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Patrick C. Barry,
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:

        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/ Patrick C. Barry
-----------------------
Patrick C. Barry
Chief Financial Officer
August 13, 2004
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 

 

AARON FRIED, § 

 § No. 84, 2021 

 Plaintiff Below, § 

 Appellant, § 

 § Court Below—Court of Chancery 

 v. § of the State of Delaware 

 § 

INTERSECT LABORATORIES § 

INC. and ANKIT GORDHANDAS, § C.A. No. 2020-0408 

 § 

 Defendants Below, § 

 Appellees. § 

 Submitted: November 3, 2021 

 Decided: November 16, 2021 

Before SEITZ, Chief Justice; VAUGHN and MONTGOMERY-REEVES, 

Justices.

ORDER 

 This 16th day of November 2021, after careful consideration of the parties’ 

briefs and the record below, and following oral argument, we find it evident that the 

judgment of the Court of Chancery should be affirmed on the basis of and for the 

reasons stated in its Order dated February 18, 2021.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Court of 

Chancery is AFFIRMED. 

 BY THE COURT: 

 /s/ Collins J. Seitz, Jr. 

 Chief Justice
First Amendment, dated March 21, 2007, to Credit Agreement




 Exhibit 10.17 
 Explanatory Note: The body of this document was previously filed with the SEC, as indicated in the Exhibit Index. What follows are additional schedules and/or exhibits to that document that were
not included in the original filing. 








 Schedule 3.15 
 Capitalization and Subsidiaries 
 Schedule 3.15 is
hereby supplemented with the information set forth below: 
  

											
	 Owner
	  	 Subsidiary
	  	Ownership
Interest	  	Subsidiary Jurisdiction
of Organization/Type
of Entity	  	Number of
Authorized
Shares/Interests	  	Number of
Outstanding
Shares/Interests
	Cellu Tissue Holdings, Inc.	  	Cellu Tissue-CityForest LLC	  	100%	  	Minnesota (limited
liability company)	  	N/A	  	N/A; Sole Member
# C_2022207EN.01003302.xml

| 23.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 207/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 207/33

---

Judgment of the General Court of 23 March 2022 — Necci v Commission

(Case T-129/19 RENV) (1)

(Civil service - Contract staff - Social security - JSIS - Rejection of the application for membership following a transfer of pension rights - Condition relating to a period of employment of more than three years - Article 95 of the CEOS - Article 34(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights - Article 45 TFEU)

(2022/C 207/43)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Claudio Necci (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: S. Orlandi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Mongin and T. Bohr, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: European Parliament (represented by: J. Van Pottelberge and I. Terwinghe, acting as Agents), Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer and M. Alver, acting as Agents)

Re:

By his action under Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the European Commission of 18 April 2018 by which it impliedly rejected his application for membership of the Joint Sickness Insurance Scheme of the Institutions of the European Communities (JSIS) submitted on 18 December 2017.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and those incurred by Mr Claudio Necci relating to the appeal proceedings before the Court of Justice, in Case C-202/20 P; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and those incurred by Mr Claudio Necci relating to the appeal proceedings before the Court of Justice, in Case C-202/20 P;

| 3. | Orders Mr Necci to pay the costs relating to the appeal proceedings before the General Court, in Case T-129/19 RENV, and relating to the initial proceedings before the General Court, in Case T-129/19; |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders Mr Necci to pay the costs relating to the appeal proceedings before the General Court, in Case T-129/19 RENV, and relating to the initial proceedings before the General Court, in Case T-129/19;

| 4. | Orders the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union to bear their own costs relating to Case T-129/19 and to the present proceedings on referral. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Orders the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union to bear their own costs relating to Case T-129/19 and to the present proceedings on referral.

---

(1)  OJ C 155, 6.5.2019.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 157 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 157

          Designating April 21, 2011, as ``PowerTalk 21 Day''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 14, 2011

  Ms. Klobuchar (for herself and Mr. Vitter) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
          Designating April 21, 2011, as ``PowerTalk 21 Day''.

Whereas the goal of PowerTalk 21 Day is to encourage parents and caregivers to 
        embrace their important role in influencing the decisions of the young 
        people of the United States about drinking alcohol;
Whereas high school students who use alcohol or other substances are 5 times 
        more likely to drop out of school or believe good grades are not 
        important;
Whereas teen alcohol use kills about 6,000 people each year, more than all other 
        illegal drugs combined; and
Whereas 74 percent of kids say that their parents are their primary influence 
        when it comes to decisions about drinking alcohol: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate--
            (1) designates April 21, 2011, as ``PowerTalk 21 Day'';
            (2) recognizes the importance of parents talking with their 
        teens about alcohol; and
            (3) urges all people of the United States to join in the 
        efforts to raise awareness of the importance of parents and 
        teens talking together about alcohol in order to reduce the 
        risks and dangers posed to teens and communities by underage 
        drinking.
                                 <all>
```
#### Lumbermen’s Mutual Casualty Company, Respondent, v Fireman’s Fund American Insurance Company, Appellant.

—In an action pursuant to Insurance Law § 3420 (a) (2) to recover on an unsatisfied judgment entered against defendant’s alleged insured, defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Kelly, J.), entered May 3, 1984, upon an order which, upon renewal, awarded summary judgment in favor of plaintiff in the principal sum of $3,622.94.

Appeal dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

Judgment in favor of plaintiff was entered after the court had granted an unopposed motion by plaintiff to renew a prior motion for summary judgment. Although plaintiff characterized the motion as one to reargue, the papers submitted in support of that motion contained factual matters not included in the prior motion. The motion was therefore one to renew. Whether deemed a motion to renew or a motion to reargue, however, the ultimate relief sought was summary judgment in favor of plaintiff. Defendant defaulted in opposing this motion. No appeal lies from an order or judgment granted upon the default of the aggrieved party (CPLR 5511; *Flake v Van Wagenen,*54 NY 25; *Manhattan 30 Corp. v Nassau County,*100 AD2d 576). This rule applies as well to judgments entered pursuant to orders granted upon default *(Lapof v Postulnick,*232 App Div 832; *Wolfensteller v Frank,*50 AD2d 846). Defendant’s remedy is to seek to open its default and vacate the judgment appealed from *(Calvagno v Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co.,*110 AD2d 741; *Montalvo v Key Indus.,*98 AD2d 767). Mollen, P. J., Thompson, Rubin and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.