alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Booker T. MCNEILL, Claimant-Appellant, v. R. James NICHOLSON, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 2007-7115.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

July 13, 2007.

Booker T. McNeill, of Erwin, NC, pro se.

Marla T. Conneely, Trial Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, for respondent-appellee. With her on the brief were Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, Jeanne E. Davidson, Director, and Mark A. Melnick, Assistant Director. Of counsel on the brief were Michael J. Timinski, Deputy Assistant General Counsel, and Christopher P. McNamee, Staff Attorney, United States Department of Veterans Affairs, of Washington, DC.

Before MAYER and PROST, Circuit Judges and LINARES, District Judge.*

*

 Honorable Jose L. Linares, District Judge, United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, sitting by designation.

PER CURIAM.

Booker T. McNeill appeals the decision of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, which affirmed the Board of Veterans’ Appeals’ decision denying his claim for service connection of post-traumatic stress disorder (“PTSD”). *McNeill v. Nicholson,*No. 05-1413, — Vet.App. - (Vet.App. Dec. 7, 2006). Because we do not have authority to review “a challenge to a law or regulation as applied to the facts of a particular case” absent a constitutional issue, 38 U.S.C. § 7292(d)(2), we *dismiss*his appeal.
Glen Canyon Technical Work Group Meeting

Embassy Suites Hotel - Turquoise Room

1515 N. 44th Street

Phoenix, Arizona

December 7, 1999

9:30 a.m. Welcome and Administrative .............................. . Rick Johnson

Introductions and Determination of Quorum

Approval of Previous TWG Meeting Minutes 

(July, September, and October)

Modification of Operating Procedures

Proposed Motion: “To modify TWG operating procedures to allow an officially

designated alternate to the member to fully participate and vote in TWG meetings

without notification.”

9:45 a.m. Temperature Control Device Workshop Summary ............. . Dennis Kubly

10:30 a.m. Break

10:45 a.m. FY 2000 BHBF Preparation and Issues ................ . Group Discussion

10:45 - 11:00 a.m. - Basin Hydrologic Conditions and Probabilities Randy Peterson

11:00 - 11:30 a.m. - “Sediment Inputs, Storage, Export and HighElevation Sandbars: A Post 1996 Synopsis”

- David Ruben and Joe Hazel

11:30 a.m. Lunch (1 hour)

12:30 p.m. FY 2000 BHBF Preparation and Issues (cont.) ........... . Group Discussion

BHBF Resources Matrix Review GCMRC staff

Physical Resources Ted Melis

Biological Resources Barbara Ralston

Socio-Cultural Resources Ruth Lambert

FY 2000 BHBF Experimental Design Ted Melis et al.

Environmental Compliance Dennis Kubly

Proposed Motion: “To recommend that a BHBF be conducted in FY 2000 if the

hydrologic triggering criteria is met.”

2:00 p.m. Break

2:15 p.m Experimental Flows Adhoc Group Update Bill Persons

2:30 p.m. FY 2001 Budget .............................. . Information and Discussion

GCMRC FY 2001 Monitoring and Research Plan GCMRC Staff

(Comments and Responses)
Glen Canyon Technical Work Group Meeting

Embassy Suites Hotel - Turquoise Room

1515 N. 44th Street

Phoenix, Arizona

December 7, 1999 (cont.)

 FY 2001 Budget (cont.) ........................ . Information and Discussion

Tribal Participation Funding Update Randy Peterson

Proposed Motion: “To recommend the funding alternatives presented by the TWG

budget ad hoc group for FY 2001.”

4:45 a.m. Public Comment and Wrapup ............................. . Rick Johnson

5:00 p.m. Adjourn
Glen Canyon Technical Work Group Meeting

Embassy Suites Hotel - Turquoise Room

1515 N. 44th Street

Phoenix, Arizona

December 8, 1999

8:00 a.m. Welcome and Administrative ............................. . Rick Johnson

Introductions and Determination of Quorum

8:15 a.m. Ad Hoc Group Updates .............. . Rick Johnson and Appropriate Chairs

8:45 a.m. Resource Issues .................................... . Group Discussion

NPS Wilderness Discussion Bob Winfree

Recreation Jeff Behan

Stream Health Indicators Joe Shannon

(with break as needed)

11:45 a.m. Public Comment and Wrapup .......................... . Rick Johnson

12 Noon Adjourn
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM (A)
UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31, 1998 AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH (B) FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
CONTAINED WITHIN THE QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-QSB.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                          94,368
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,250
<ALLOWANCES>                                   700,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               826,618
<PP&E>                                         986,462
<DEPRECIATION>                                 126,802
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,937,928
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,903,724
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     48,813
<COMMON>                                       164,796
<OTHER-SE>                                    (74,708)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,939,928
<SALES>                                         53,463
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                53,463
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  272,418
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                84,966
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               700,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              84,966
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (303,921)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (321,307)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (321,307)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
FY05-06 budget overvie

GCMRC
Challenges

• Not yet having a core monitoring • MATA results not in• No GCMRC Administrative Officer• Reduced funding to AMP in FY05
AMP available funds

• FY04 $11,270,000• FY05 $10,154,600

diff. - $1,115,400
Rationale for new form

• Biennial budget

- synchronization w/ approp. process- cost of fully implementing 05 workload

• Project Summary Sheets
Total GCMRC budget

• FY05 $7,632,620• $1,451,380 less than 

FY04
GCMRC budget

0

500,000

1,000,0001,500,0002,000,0002,500,000

Experim.

Terrestrial

Aquatic

Integrated

Sociocultural

Admin

Tech supp

USGS OH
GCMRC total costs

0

2,000,0004,000,0006,000,0008,000,000

10,000,00012,000,000

2004 2005 2
Humpback chub

780,000800,000820,000840,000860,000880,000900,000

2004 2005 20
AMP budget

0

2,000,0004,000,0006,000,0008,000,000

10,000,00012,000,000

BOR

admin

Tribal PA GCMRC HBC
AMP budget

0

100,000200,000300,000400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000

BOR admin Tribal PA HBC
AMP budget partnersh

• AMWG/TWG GCMRC

Guidance on R&M priorities

• GCMRC AMWG/TWG

Guidance on impacts of fundinchanges on AMP science
Program overviews

• Sociocultural, IESP, Information Program• Encourage questions at end of prosummaries• Record comments/questions on flcharts
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0001000779
<NAME>                        CONSOLIDATED DELIVERY & LOGISTICS, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     DOLLARS
       
<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                               1,778
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       23,029
<ALLOWANCES>                                        (1,140)
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    26,804
<PP&E>                                              11,697
<DEPRECIATION>                                      (7,518)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      34,874
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               20,551
<BONDS>                                              2,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                                 7
<OTHER-SE>                                           9,261
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        34,874
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    81,694
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       56,571
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    23,549
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                       447
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                     407
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                        957
<INCOME-TAX>                                           957
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                    957
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                           555
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                          .08
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          .08
        


</TABLE>
EX-4.2





 Exhibit 4.2 

UCLOUDLINK GROUP INC. 
 优克联集团 
  

			
	Number	  	Class A Ordinary Shares

 Incorporated under the laws of the Cayman Islands 

Share capital is US$100,000 divided into 

2,000,000,000 shares of a par value of US$0.00005 each, comprising of 

(i) 1,700,000,000 Class A Ordinary Shares of a par value of US$0.00005 each, 

(ii) 200,000,000 Class B Ordinary Shares of a par value of US$0.00005 each, and 

(iii) 100,000,000 shares of a par value of US$0.00005 each of such class or classes (however designated) 

 

			
	THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT	  	is the registered holder of

 Class A Ordinary Shares in the above-named Company subject to the 

Memorandum and Articles of Association thereof. 
 EXECUTED on
behalf of the said Company on the              day of                  2020 by: 

 

			
	 DIRECTOR
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF OREGON 

SHERLEY MALARY, 

Plaintiff, 

3: l 4-CV-02052-ST 

vs. 

CAROLYN COL VIN, 

Commissioner of Social Security, 

Defendant. 

ORDER 

Based upon the stipulation of the parties, it is hereby ORDERED that attorney fees in the 

amount of $2,523.31 and costs for filing fees in the amount of $400 shall be awarded to Plaintiff 

pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412. The patties agree that attorney 

fees will be paid to Plaintiff's attorney, dependent upon verification that Plaintiff has no debt 

which qualifies for offset against the awarded fees and costs, pursuant to the Treasury Offset 

Program as discussed inAstrue v. Ratliff, 130 S.Ct. 2521 (2010). 

If Plaintiff has no such debt, then the check shall be made out to Plaintiff's attorney and 

mailed to Plaintiff's attorney's office as follows: Merrill Schneider, P.O. Box 14490, Pmtland, 

OR 97293. If Plaintiff has a debt, then the check for any remaining funds after offset of the debt 

shall be made to Plaintiff and mailed to Plaintiff's attorney's office at the address stated above. 

,hi 1:/ . DATED this ){, f day of I lc?l'·t>;uf:""L , 2015. i 

• J j - .: 

11· V(/<lt,! l /.. I -'· / / I ( 

\ .... /~(>-/;..;_///< 1 { .. (:'Y.._ ____ i-1:::t~'<<A.~_:2,z/ 1 

MniceStewart 

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 3:14-cv-02052-ST Document 20 Filed 11/16/15 Page 1 of 1
## I N THE UNI TED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FI F TH CI RCUI T

No. 12-41254 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

v. RAAF ATRACH, Defendant-Appellant

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:11-CR-599-1
Before DAVIS, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * 

### A p pealing the judgment in a criminal c ase, Raaf Atrach raises a n argument that he concedes is foreclosed by U nited States v. B etancourt , 586 F.3d 303, 3 08-09 ( 5th C ir. 2009), which held that knowledge of d r ug type and quantity is n ot a n element of the offense under 21 U.S.C. § 841. The appellant’s motion for summary disposition is G RANTED, and the judgment of t h e district court is AFFIRMED. U n i t e d S t a te s C o u r t o f A p p e al s F i f t h C i rc u i t 

## F I L E D Decem ber 17, 2013 Ly l e W . Cay ce Clerk

* Purs uant to 5 T H C I R

. R

. 47. 5, the court has d eterm ined that this op inion should not be p ublis hed and is not p reced ent excep t und er the lim ited circum s tances s et forth in 5 T H C I R

. R. 47. 5. 4. 

### Case: 12-41254 Document: 00512473113 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/17/2013
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                       7,977,860
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  510,500
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                         372,269
<DEPRECIATION>                                (77,317)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              10,624,105
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,650,099
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    18,239,120
<OTHER-SE>                                  16,695,535
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                10,624,105
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               21,658,918
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             1,161,622
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              17,804
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (22,838,344)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (22,838,344)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (22,838,344)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.42)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR Document 829 Filed 07/05/16 Page 1 of 1
sleeping. Appellant filmed his acts, and one video showed appellant

penetrating the victim's vagina. The victim testified that the acts were committed against her will, and although she sometimes woke up during the acts, she did not resist because she was scared and did not want to lose her best friend. It is for the jury to determine the weight and credibility to give testimony, and the jury's verdict will not be disturbed on appeal where, as here, it is supported by sufficient evidence. See Bolden v. State, 97 Nev. 71, 73, 624 P.2d 20, 20 (1981); see also McNair v. State, 108 Nev. 

### 53, 56, 825 P.2d 571, 573 (1992).

Second, appellant challenges his convictions for lewdness with a child under the age of fourteen. First, appellant seems to argue that insufficient evidence supports these convictions because no one individual act gratified his lust, passions, or desires. We reject this argument given the evidence presented at trial. Second, appellant argues that he was punished multiple times for one act in violation of the Double Jeopardy Clause. However, appellant fails to explain which convictions constitute multiple punishments for the same action. Because he does not support his Double Jeopardy claim with cogent argument, we decline to consider it. See Maresca v. State, 103 Nev. 669, 673, 748 P.2d 3, 6 (1987).

Third, appellant contends that the State committed misconduct by questioning the victim's mother regarding her husband's custody status, which the defense had attempted to discover before trial, but the district court deemed irrelevant. Appellant fails to demonstrate that this questioning constitutes misconduct under the circumstances, as it appears the State was offering the evidence for a different, relevant purpose than that indicated by the defense, which was to rebut appellant's contention that the victim visited appellant's home because she wanted to

SUPREME COURT OP NEVADA

(0) 1947A .411t977 2SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA engage in sex with him 

### See Valdez v. State, 124 Nev. 1172, 1188, 196

P.3d 465, 476 (2008). Regardless, the district court prohibited the State from referring to the witness' answer and ordered the State to turn over the information it possessed regarding the issue. And given the overwhelming evidence presented at trial, which included videos and photographs documenting appellant's acts and his own admissions, appellant fails to demonstrate that he was prejudiced by any misconduct.

Having concluded that appellant's contentions lack merit,' we ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.

, C.J. Hardesty



### - 

# 9 1/Jta ‘r

Parraguirre

Avs J. Douglas

cc: Hon. Elissa F. Cadish, District Judge Law Office of Betsy Allen Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

'Appellant also contends that cumulative error warrants relief. Because we have found no error, there are no errors to cumulate. J.



### 3 (0) 1947A
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Lashawn J. Scott, Appellant.

[945 NYS2d 886]

Appeal from an order of the Monroe County Court (Frank P Geraci, Jr., J), entered January 24, 2011. The order determined that defendant is a level three risk pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law without costs and the matter is remitted to Monroe County Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following memorandum: Defendant appeals from an order determining that he is a level three risk pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act ([SORA] Correction Law § 168 *et seq.).*We agree with defendant that County Court erred in granting the People’s request, made for the first time at the SORA hearing, to assess 20 additional points for risk factors that were not included in the risk assessment instrument, and therefore to determine that defendant is a level three risk rather than a level two risk. As the People correctly concede, they failed to provide defendant with the requisite 10-day notice that they intended to seek a determination different from that recommended by the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders *(see*§ 168-n [3]; *People v Gardner,*59 AD3d 604 [2009]), and the court otherwise failed to provide defendant with “a meaningful *1431opportunity to respond to the proposed amendment” *(People v*Ferguson, 53 AD3d 571, 572 [2008]; *cf. People v Warren,*42 AD3d 593, 594 [2007], *lv denied*9 NY3d 810 [2007]). Furthermore, defendant properly objected to the People’s request *(cf. People v Charache,*9 NY3d 829, 830 [2007]). Because defendant was denied his due process rights by the assessment of the additional points, we reverse the order, thereby vacating defendant’s risk level determination, and we remit the matter to County Court for further proceedings in compliance with Correction Law § 168-n (3) *(see People v Hackett,*89 AD3d 1479, 1479-1480 [2011]). Present — Scudder, P.J., Smith, Carni, Lindley and Martoche, JJ.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Enrique Hernandez, Appellant.

Submitted February 20, 2007;

decided March 27, 2007

*907Motion to dismiss the appeal herein granted and appeal dismissed without prejudice to a motion to reinstate the appeal should defendant return to this Court’s jurisdiction *(see People v Diaz,*7 NY3d 831 [2006]).
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of State

          - [Public Notice 11514]

# SUMMARY:

On June 15, 2021, notice was published on page 31779 of the **Federal Register** (volume 86, number 113) of determinations pertaining to certain objects to be included in an exhibition entitled “Surrealism Beyond Borders.” Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: I hereby determine that two additional objects being imported from abroad pursuant to agreements with their foreign owners or custodians for temporary display in the aforesaid exhibition at The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, New York, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, are of cultural significance, and, further, that their temporary exhibition or display within the United States as aforementioned is in the national interest. I have ordered that Public Notice of these determinations be published in the **Federal Register**.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Chi D. Tran, Program Administrator, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-632-6471; email: *section2459@state.gov*). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, L/PD, 2200 C Street NW, (SA-5), Suite 5H03, Washington, DC 20522-0505.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The foregoing determinations were made pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681, *et seq.;*22 U.S.C. 6501 note, *et seq.*), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, and Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 of August 28, 2000.

Matthew R. Lussenhop,

Acting Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.

[FR Doc. 2021-18625 Filed 8-27-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-05-P