alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Jose Angel ZAMBRANO NATAREN, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 08-4359.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Dec. 15, 2008.

Decided: Jan. 13, 2009.

*810Sue Genrich Berry, Bowen and Berry, PLLC, Wilmington, North Carolina, for Appellant. Anna Mills Wagoner, United States Attorney, Angela H. Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Jose Angel Zambrano Nataren appeals his conviction and forty-one month sentence after pleading guilty pursuant to a plea agreement to unlawful reentry of a deported alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (2006). Zambrano Nataren’s sole argument is that the district court erred when it increased his offense level by sixteen levels pursuant to *U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual*(“USSG”) § 2L1.2 (b)(l)(A)(ii) (2007). Finding no error, we affirm.

Although Zambrano Nataren generally complained at sentencing that he was unhappy with his Guidelines range because it was greater than he anticipated, Zambrano Nataren filed no objections to his presentence investigation report (“PSR”) and specifically informed the district court that he had no objections to the PSR. Because Zambrano Nataren did not raise his claim of error before the district court, we review for plain error. *See United States v. Olano,*507 U.S. 725, 731-32, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993).

To establish plain error, Zambrano Nataren was required to show that an error occurred, that it was plain, and that it affected his substantial rights. *See id.*at 732, 113 S.Ct. 1770. We have reviewed the record and have considered Zambrano Nataren’s arguments. We conclude that it was not error, plain or otherwise, for the district court to adopt the PSR’s calculation of Zambrano Nataren’s Guidelines range and sentence him to the bottom of the properly calculated range. *See United States v. Go,*517 F.3d 216, 218 (4th Cir. 2008); *see also Rita v. United States,*551 *811U.S. 338, 127 S.Ct. 2456, 2462-69, 168 L.Ed.2d 203 (2007) (upholding presumption of reasonableness for within-Guidelines sentence).

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*
Order entered June 9, 2016

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-15-00989-CR

ROSICK HILL, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 4

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F-1171579-K

ORDER

 The Court REINSTATES the appeal.

On May 9, 2016, we ordered the trial court to make findings regarding why appellant’s 

brief has not been filed. We ADOPT the findings that: (1) appellant desires to pursue the 

appeal; (2) appellant is indigent and represented by court-appointed counsel Nanette 

Hendrickson; (3) counsel’s explanation for the delay in filing appellant’s brief is due to her 

workload; and (4) counsel anticipates filing a brief within thirty days.

We ORDER appellant to file his brief within THIRTY DAYS of the date of this order.

/s/ ADA BROWN 

JUSTICE
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 on Form 10-Q of Merrill Lynch Preferred
Capital Trust II and Merrill Lynch Preferred Funding II, L.P. (the
"Partnership") for the period ended September 30, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Kathleen Skero, Controller of Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc., the General Partner of
the Partnership, 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
    Partnership.




                              MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED FUNDING II, L.P.

                              By:  MERRILL LYNCH & CO., INC., as General Partner


                              By:  /s/ KATHLEEN SKERO
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                              Name:    Kathleen Skero *
                              Title:   Controller, Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc.








Dated: November 9, 2005
_______________________

*  Kathleen Skero functions as the equivalent of the Chief Executive Officer
   and Chief Financial Officer of the Partnership for purposes of Section 906
   of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
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 on Form 10-Q of Merrill Lynch Preferred
Capital Trust II and Merrill Lynch Preferred Funding II, L.P. (the
"Partnership") for the period ended June 25, 2004 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John J. Fosina,
Controller of Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc., the General Partner of the Partnership,
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
    Partnership.




                              MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED FUNDING II, L.P.

                              By:  MERRILL LYNCH & CO., INC., as General Partner


                              By:  /s/ JOHN J. FOSINA
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                              Name:    John J. Fosina *
                              Title:   Controller, Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc.








Dated: August 4, 2004
_____________________

*  John J. Fosina functions as the equivalent of the Chief Executive Officer
   and Chief Financial Officer of the Partnership for purposes of Section 906
   of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

                            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 CD&L, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002 filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Russell J. Reardon, 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) of the
        Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

    (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
        respects, the consolidated financial condition of the Company as of the
        dates presented and the consolidated results of operations of the
        Company for the periods presented.

Dated: April 30, 2003


                                              /s/ Russell J. Reardon
                                              -----------------------
                                              Russell J. Reardon
                                              Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 13.2

CERTIFICATION OF LUKA MUCIC, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF SAP SE

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 SAP SE (the Company) on Form 20-F for the period ending December 31, 2016, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on February 28, 2017 (the Report), the undersigned hereby certifies that, to his 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.
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       |  |  |  |        |  |                         |  | 
|---------------------- |  |  |  | ------ |  | ----------------------- |  | 
|Date February 28, 2017 |  |  |  |        |  | /s/ Luka Mucic          |  | 
|                       |  |  |  | Name:  |  | Luka Mucic              |  | 
|                       |  |  |  | Title: |  | Chief Financial Officer |  | 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being
filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Premier Holding Corporation(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissionon the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Randall M. Letcavage, Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officerof the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

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

 

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

 

A signed original of this written statementrequired by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

November 19, 2012

 

/s/ Randall M. Letcavage

Randall M. Letcavage

Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 144 (Friday, July 30, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 40917-40918]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-16330]



========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents 
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed 
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published 
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents. 

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 144 / Friday, July 30, 2021 / Rules 
and Regulations

[[Page 40917]]



DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

8 CFR Chapter I

[CIS No. 2555-14; DHS Docket No. USCIS-2016-0006; 1615-AC07]


Ratification of Department Actions

AGENCY: Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

ACTION: Ratification.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Homeland Security is publishing notification 
of the Secretary of Homeland Security's ratification of a rule.

DATES: The ratification was signed on March 31, 2021 and relates back 
to the original date of the action that it ratifies.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Leo (Chip) Boucher, Assistant General 
Counsel, Administrative Law, Office of the General Counsel, Department 
of Homeland Security, Washington, DC 20528, (202) 282-9822.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 31, 2021, the Secretary of Homeland 
Security ratified a final rule entitled, EB-5 Immigrant Investor 
Program Modernization. See 84 FR 35750 (July 24, 2019). The Department 
is now publishing the ratification in the Federal Register out of an 
abundance of caution. Neither the ratification nor the publication is a 
statement that the ratified action would be invalid absent the 
ratification, whether published or otherwise.

Adam Hunter,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Immigration Policy, U.S. Department of 
Homeland Security.

Appendix
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR30AU21.001


[[Page 40918]]


[FR Doc. 2021-16330 Filed 7-29-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9112-FP-P
#### In the Matter of Christopher S., Respondent, v Kathleen S., Appellant, and Steven S., Respondent.

In a child protection proceeding, the mother appeals from so much of a dispositional order of the Family Court, Rockland County (Weiner, J.), entered August 3, 1983, as found that she had neglected her child.

*654Order affirmed, insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

In a child protection proceeding, the petitioner has the burden of establishing abuse or neglect by a preponderance of the evidence *(see,*Family Ct Act § 1046 [b]). The statute provides that "proof of injuries sustained by a child * * * of such a nature as would ordinarily not be sustained or exist except by reason of the acts or omissions of the parent * * * shall be prima facie evidence of child abuse or neglect * * * of the parent” (Family Ct Act § 1046 [a] [ii]). Upon the presentation of proof establishing a prima facie case, the parent must offer a satisfactory explanation to rebut the evidence of neglect *(see, Matter of Tashyne L.,*53 AD2d 629).

Although the mother had legal custody of the child at the time of his injury, and she testified at the hearing, she offered no satisfactory explanation of the injuries sufficient to rebut petitioner’s prima facie showing of neglect *(cf. Matter of Cynthia V.,*94 AD2d 773).

Accordingly, the court’s finding of neglect as to the mother is affirmed. Gibbons, J. P., Bracken, Lawrence and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.
# Official Journal C 209A/4 Ju

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 209A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 574 July 2014 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 209A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 574 July 2014

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | V   Announcements |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) |
| 2014/C 209A/01 | Reserve lists — Open competition — EPSO/AD/177/10 — Administrators (AD 5) | 1 |
| 2014/C 209A/02 | Reserve list — Open competition — OHIM/AST/02/13 — Assistants (AST 3) in the field of intellectual property | 7 |

Notice No

Contents

page

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO)

2014/C 209A/01

Reserve lists — Open competition — EPSO/AD/177/10 — Administrators (AD 5)

1

2014/C 209A/02

Reserve list — Open competition — OHIM/AST/02/13 — Assistants (AST 3) in the field of intellectual property

7

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| 2014/C 209A/03 | Review of ‘Competition’ C A Official Journals | 9 |

2014/C 209A/03

Review of ‘Competition’ C A Official Journals

9

---

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

EN
Case: 1:02-cv-00664 Document #: 51 Filed: 02/11/03 Page 1 of 3 PageID #:433
Case: 1:02-cv-00664 Document #: 51 Filed: 02/11/03 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:434
Case: 1:02-cv-00664 Document #: 51 Filed: 02/11/03 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:435
#### HURLEY v. SMITH.

(Supreme Court, ApDivision, First Department.

November 8, 1907.)

Action by John H. Hurley against George M. Smith, as receiver.

No opinion. Motion to dismiss appeal granted, with $10 costs. Order filed.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Peter De Lutro, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Baer, Jr., J.), rendered on January 23, 1985, unanimously affirmed. The case is remitted to the Supreme Court, New York County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (5). No opinion. Concur&emdash;Murphy, P. J., Sandler, Fein, Milonas and Ellerin, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from financial
statements included in the Company's quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the three
months ended March 31, 2000 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to
such financial statement.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                           6,600
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,131
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (2,322)
<INVENTORY>                                      4,391
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                13,936
<PP&E>                                         146,858
<DEPRECIATION>                                (12,231)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 524,798
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           23,125
<BONDS>                                         14,899
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          145,833
<PREFERRED>                                     35,692
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                     258,711
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   524,798
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                16,853
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   27,310
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (612)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (11,432)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (18)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (11,450)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (11,450)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (841.62)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
Exhibit 23.1




                 Consent of Independent Auditors

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements (Form S-8 No. 333-00172 and Form S-8 No. 333-342)
pertaining to the Vanguard Airlines, Inc. 1994 Stock Option Plan
and the Employee Stock Purchase Plan of Vanguard Airlines, Inc.
of our report dated March 10, 1997 with respect to the financial
statements and schedule of Vanguard Airlines, Inc. included in
the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31,
1996.

                                                /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

                                                ERNST & YOUNG LLP


Kansas City, Missouri
March 28, 1997
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

________________

No. 17-3010

________________

BRADLEY BEERS;

JOSEPH DIVITA*,

Appellants

v.

ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; UNITED STATES BUREAU OF ALCOHOL 

TOBACCO FIREARMS & EXPLOSIVES; THOMAS E. BRANDON, Deputy Director 

of the ATF; RONALD B. TURK, Associates Deputy Director/ Chief Operating Office of 

the ATF; FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION; DIRECTOR FEDERAL 

BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; 

PENNSYLVANIA ATTORNEY GENERAL; PENNSYLVANIA STATE POLICE; 

TYREE BLOCKER, Commissioner of the Pennsylvania State Police; EDWARD 

DONNELLY, Bucks County Sheriff; BUCKS COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT; 

BUCKS COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY

*(Party Dismissed Pursuant to Court Order dated 02/13/18)

_______________________

On Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania

(D. C. Civil No. 2-16-cv-06440)

District Judge: Honorable Legrome D. Davis

________________

On Remand from the Supreme Court of the United States

Submitted on Remand June 19, 2020

Before: SHWARTZ, ROTH and RENDELL, Circuit Judges

_________________

JUDGMENT ORDER

__________________
By opinion and judgment entered on June 20, 2019, this Court affirmed the 

judgment of the District Court. Appellant Bradley Beers filed a petition for writ of 

certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court, which was granted. On May 18, 2020, the 

Supreme Court vacated the judgment of this Court and remanded with instructions to 

dismiss the case as moot. See United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U. S. 36 (1950).

 On consideration whereof, it is now hereby

ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the appeal is dismissed as moot. The Clerk is 

directed to issue the mandate.

BY THE COURT:

s/ Jane R. Roth

Circuit Judge

ATTEST:

s/ Patricia S. Dodszuweit

Clerk

Dated: September 25, 2020
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
 Nat'l Clonal Germplasm Rep - Tree Fruit & Nut Crops & Grapes: Davis, CA
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    Orders & ServicesSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us






Olive Inventoryheadline bar Main


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