alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d byN i nth C i r c ui tR ul e 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. T O M M Y M C I N T O S H , J r ., D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e llan t. N o. 09- 10155 D . C . N o. 5: 08 -C R -003 77 -R M W -1 ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e N o rth e rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia R ona l d M . W hy t e , S e ni orD i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng

S ubm i tt e d F e brua ry3, 2010 ** S a n F r a n c is c o , C a lif

o rn ia B efo re: H U G , B E E Z E R an dH A L L , C i rcu i tJu d g es. D e f e n d a n t - ap p e l l a n tTo mmyM c I n t o s h , J r . ( “ M c I n t o s h ” ) ap p e a l s f r o m a fi nal j ud gm entconv i ct i ng hi m of on e c ou ntof bei ng a f el on i n p osse ss i on of a fi re arm and am m un i t i on . M cI nt osh w as foun d g ui l ty of the cr i m e a ft era one-day 

# FI LED JU N 16 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

b e n c h tr ia l, an dth e d is tr ic t c o u rt s e n te n c e dh im to 1 0 8 m o n th s im p r is o n m e n t. W e h a v e j u r i s d i c t i o n p u r s u a n tt o 1 8 U . S. C. § 1 2 9 1 , a n dw e a f f i rm. Th e f a c t s o f th i s c a s e a r e k n o w n t o th e p a rt i e s . W e d o n o tr e p e a tth e m.

I W e r e v ie w “a ll s e n te n c in g d e c is io n s ” f o ra n ab u s e o f

d is c r e tio n . U

ni ted S ta tes v . Ca r ty , 52 0 F . 3d 98 4, 99 3 (9th C i r. 20 08 ) ( en banc). II T h e d is tr ic t c o u rt a c te dw e ll w ith in its d is c r e tio n b ys e n te n c in g M c I n to s h to 1 0 8 m o n th s im p r is o n m e n t, 1 2 m o n th s b e lo w th e s ta tu to rym a x im u m . C o n tr a ryto M c I nt os h’ s a s s e rt i ons , the di s tr i c tc ourte nga ge d i n a“ thor ough a nd thought f ul consi dera t i on of the § 3 55 3(a) fa ct ors. ” U ni te d States v . Cabac c ang , 481 F . 3d 1 1 7 6 , 1 1 8 8 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 7 ) . I n r e a c h in g its d e c is io n , th e d is tr ic t c o u rt e x p lic itly a c know l e dge d M c I nt os h’ s “ unf ortuna t e upbr i ngi ng” a nd s truggl e s w i th a l c ohol abus e . G i ve n M c I nt os h’ s i nvol ve m e ntw i th ga ngs a nd pe rva s i ve a nd vi ol e nt c r i m i na l hi s t ory , the di s tr i c tc ourta c t e d w i thi n i t s di s c r e t i on i n or de r i ng a n above g u id e lin e s s e n te n c e “to a f f o r da d e q u a te d e te rr e n c e to c r im in a l c o n du c t” a n d“to p r o t e c tth e p u b l i c f

r o m f u rth e rc r i me s o f

th e d e f e n d a n t . ” 1 8 U . S. C. § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) ( 2 ) ( B ) a n d( C ) . AF F I RME D.
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 Annual Report of ACE*COMM Corporation (the "Company") on
form 10-K for the year ending June 30, 2002, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), we, the Chief Executive
Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to and
solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of our
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.



                                    By:/s/ Steven R. Delmar
                                    ---------------------------------------
                                    Steven R. Delmar
                                    Chief Financial Officer

                                    By:/s/ George T. Jimenez
                                    ---------------------------------------
                                    George T. Jimenez
                                    Chief Executive Officer

Date:  September 13, 2002
#### ANNUS, Respondent, v. THEISS et al. Appellants.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

December 22, 1896.)

Action by Lena Annus against George Theiss and others. Jacob Fromme, for appellants. Michael Sehapp, for respondent.

No opinion. Motion to dismiss appeal granted, with $10 costs.
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2146 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2146

    To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow Federal law 
enforcement officers, firefighters, and air traffic controllers to make 
penalty-free withdrawals from governmental plans after age 50, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 30, 2015

Mr. Reichert (for himself, Mr. Pascrell, Mr. Fitzpatrick, and Mr. Reed) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                             Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow Federal law 
enforcement officers, firefighters, and air traffic controllers to make 
penalty-free withdrawals from governmental plans after age 50, and for 
                            other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Defending Public Safety Employees' 
Retirement Act''.

SEC. 2. EARLY RETIREMENT DISTRIBUTIONS TO FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT 
              OFFICERS, FIREFIGHTERS, AND AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS IN 
              GOVERNMENTAL PLANS.

    (a) In General.--Section 72(t)(10)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code 
of 1986 is amended--
            (1) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``, 
        or'',
            (2) by striking ``means any employee'' and inserting the 
        following: ``means--
                            ``(i) any employee'', and
            (3) by adding at the end the following new clause:
                            ``(ii) any Federal law enforcement officer 
                        described in section 8331(20) or 8401(17) of 
                        title 5, United States Code, any Federal 
                        customs and border protection officer described 
                        in section 8331(31) or 8401(36) of such title, 
                        any Federal firefighter described in section 
                        8331(21) or 8401(14) of such title, or any air 
                        traffic controller described in 8331(30) or 
                        8401(35) of such title.''.
    (b) Application to Defined Contribution Plans.--Section 
72(t)(10)(A) of such Code is amended by striking ``which is a defined 
benefit plan''.
    (c) Distributions Not Treated as Modification of Substantially 
Equal Payments.--Section 72(t)(4)(A)(ii) of such Code is amended by 
inserting ``or a distribution to which paragraph (10) applies'' after 
``other than by reason of death or disability''.
    (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to distributions after December 31, 2014.
                                 <all>
```
Skip to main content

Privacy Policy•Site map

# Filing A Complaint

The Clerk's Office is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.

How to File a Complaint (please click here for information on filing a Vaccine Petition)

United States Court of Federal Claims General Filing Tips

Complaint Cover Sheet (Form 2, RCFC)

Pro Se Complaint Form

Pro Se Information (Individuals Representing Themselves)

Bid Protest Information

Fee Schedule. (Checks are to be made payable to: Clerk, U.S. Court of Federal Claims)

New Cases Involving the Addicks and Barker Flood-Control Reservoirs in Houston, Texas

Guidelines for Cases Involving Classified Information

Guidelines for Cases Involving Highly Sensitive Documents

Howard T. Markey National Courts Building • 717 Madison Place, NW, Washington, DC 20439 • 202-357-6400
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

July 10, 2019

No. 04

- 19

- 00445

- CV

IN RE Jason D. PRESLEY

Original Mandamus Proceeding 1

ORDER

On July 1, 2019, r elator filed a petition for writ of mandamus and a motion for temporary relief pending final resolution of the petition for writ of mandamus. After considering the petition, this court concludes relator is not entitled to the relief sought. Accordingly, the petition for writ

of mandamus is DENIED. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 52.8(a). The motion for temporary relief is

DENIED AS MOOT.

It is so ORDERED on July 10, 2019

.

_____________________________ Beth Watkins, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 10th day of July, 2019

.

_____________________________ Keith E. Hottle, Clerk of Court

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2018CI01770, styled In the Matter of the Marriage of Jason Dale Presley

and Suzanne Marie Presley and In the Interest of Z.B.P. and V.I.P., Children , pending in the 224th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Angelica Jimenez presiding.
# C_2021061EN.01000301.xml

| 22.2.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 61/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.2.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 61/3

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10136 — PGGM/Arcus/AMP/Alpha Trains)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 61/03)

On 17 February 2021, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32021M10136. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32021M10136. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
Listen

# Massachusetts State Advisory Committee Calls on Commonwealth to Abolish Civil Asset Forfeiture

January 4, 2024

The Massachusetts State Advisory Committee to the United States Commission on Civil Rights released its report, “Seize the Day: Eliminate Civil Forfeiture in Massachusetts,” which calls on the Massachusetts’ Legislature to abolish the predatory practice of civil asset forfeiture.

Last year, the Committee issued an interim memorandum drawing attention to and supporting proposed legislation to address civil asset forfeiture. The Committee called the proposed legislation “a constructive step toward reforming civil asset forfeiture and creating transparency, oversight, and accountability” but only a first step to remedy the injustices of civil asset forfeiture.

The Committee now issues its full report and finds that to truly protect civil rights in the Commonwealth, the use of civil asset forfeiture must be abolished. The Committee reports that civil asset forfeiture does not further the goal of disrupting criminal enterprises and instead contributes to systematic violations of the civil rights of citizens of the Commonwealth.

David Harris, chair of the Massachusetts SAC said, “Sadly, the practice or civil asset forfeiture, like so many of the policies associated with the ‘war on drugs,’ has failed on all fronts. Instead the practice targets those least able to pay, exacerbating racial inequalities in our legal system. Furthermore, our report shows the practice has done so with virtually no oversight or accountability.”

Chair Harris emphasized the findings of the report, stressing: “These failures are so severe, that anything less than eliminating civil asset forfeiture is both futile and unconscionable.”

Press Release

Report

Massachusetts

-  All News 
-  Commission News 
-  Advisory Committees News 
-  Correspondence 
-  Videos 
-  Archives
Listen

# Thomas M. Colclough

## CSSBMB Commissioner

Commissioner Colclough is an experienced Director with a demonstrated history of working in the government administration industry. Skilled in Strategic Planning, Leadership Development, Leadership and Public Speaking. Strong sales professional with a Bachelor's degree focused in Business Administration and Management, General from St. Augustine's College. Over the years, Colclough held progressively higher positions, moving steadily through the investigator, supervisory and managerial ranks, achieving an appointment as area director for the Raleigh Area Office, and subsequently deputy district director in Charlotte. During his tenure with the EEOC, Colclough has been the recipient of numerous agency awards. Colclough regularly presents to employer groups, special emphasis groups, nonprofits and student organizations.

-  Our Mission 
-  Commissioners 
-  Offices and Staff 
-  Careers 
-  Acquisition Opportunities 
-  Rankin Memorial Library 
-  FAQs
EXHIBIT 32.1

PERICOM SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with this quarterly report of Pericom Semiconductor Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the three months ended December 30, 2006 (the Report), I, Alex C. Hui, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63,
Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:



| | (1) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the periods
indicated.
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

February 7, 2007



By:

/s/ Alex C. HuiAlex C. HuiChief Executive OfficerPericom Semiconductor Corporation
#### Roberto Eusebio MARTINEZ-PEREZ, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 05-75887.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 16, 2007 *.

Filed April 20, 2007.

Roberto Eusebio Martinez-Perez, Los Angeles, CA, pro se.

CAS-District Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Diego, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Cindy S. Ferrier, Esq., Surell Brady Fax, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: O’SCANNLAIN, CLIFTON and BEA, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Roberto Eusebio Martinez-Perez seeks review of an order of the Board of Immi*770gration Appeals upholding an immigration judge’s order denying his application for cancellation of removal, asylum, withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). To the extent we have jurisdiction, it is pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We dismiss in part, and deny in part the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to review the discretionary determination that Martinez-Perez failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a qualifying relative, *see Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft,*327 F.3d 887, 892 (9th Cir.2003), and Martinez-Perez does not raise a colorable due process claim, *see Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales,*424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir.2005) (“[Tjraditional abuse of discretion challenges recast as alleged due process violations do not constitute colorable constitutional claims that would invoke our jurisdiction.”).

We do not consider Martinez-Perez’s contention regarding physical presence because his failure to establish hardship is dispositive.

In his opening brief, Martinez-Perez fails to address, and therefore has waived any challenge to, the determination that he is ineligible for asylum, withholding of removal and CAT relief. *See Martinez-Serrano v. INS,*94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir.1996) (holding issues which are not specifically raised and argued in a party’s opening brief are waived).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
EX-4.1





 Exhibit 4.1 

 
 




 
 Vroom SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR CERTAIN DEFINITIONS CUSIP 000000 00 0 THIS CERTIFIES THAT INCORPORATED UNDER THE
LAWS OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE is the owner of FULLY PAID AND NON-ASSESSABLE SHARES OF COMMON STOCK, $0.001 PAR VALUE, OF COUNTERSIGNED AND REGISTERED: AMERICAN STOCK TRANSFER TRUST & COMPANY New (Brooklyn, York) TRANSFER AGENT AND REGISTRAR BY
AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE VROOM, INC. transferable on the books of the Corporation by the holder hereof in person or by Attorney upon surrender of this certificate properly endorsed. This certificate is not valid until countersigned and registered by the
Transfer Agent and Registrar. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said Corporation has caused this certificate to be signed by facsimile signatures of its duly authorized officers. Dated: CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER SECRETARY 












 



 
 THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THIS CORPORATION HAS THE AUTHORITY TO CREATE AND DETERMINE THE RELATIVE RIGHTS AND PREFERENCES OF CLASSES OR
SERIES OF SHARES OF CAPITAL STOCK OTHER THAN COMMON STOCK. THIS CORPORATION WILL FURNISH TO ANY SHAREHOLDER UPON WRITTEN REQUEST SENT TO ITS PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICES, AND WITHOUT CHARGE, A FULL STATEMENT OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS’ AUTHORITY
TO CREATE AND DETERMINE THE RELATIVE RIGHTS AND PREFERENCES OF CLASSES OR SERIES OF SHARES OF CAPITAL STOCK AS WELL AS THE DESIGNATIONS, PREFERENCES, LIMITATIONS AND RELATIVE RIGHTS OF THE SHARES OF EACH CLASS OR SERIES THEN OUTSTANDING OR
AUTHORIZED TO BE ISSUED. The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this certificate, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations: UTMA Custodian TEN COM as
tenants in common (Cust) (Minor) TEN ENT as tenants by entireties under Uniform Transfers to Minors JT TEN as joint tenants with right of survivorship Act and not as tenants in common (State) Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in
the above list. For value received hereby sell, assign, and transfer unto PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE (PLEASE PRINT OR TYPEWRITE NAME AND ADDRESS INCLUDING POSTAL ZIP CODE OF ASSIGNEE) Shares of the common
stock represented by the within Certificate, and do hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint Attorney to transfer the said stock on the books of the within-named Corporation with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated NOTICE: THE
SIGNATURE TO THIS ASSIGNMENT MUST CORRESPOND WITH THE NAME AS WRITTEN UPON THE FACE OF THE CERTIFICATE IN EVERY PARTICULAR WITHOUT ALTERATION OR ENLARGEMENT OR ANY CHANGE WHATEVER. SIGNATURE GUARANTEED ALL GUARANTEES MUST BE MADE BY A FINANCIAL
INSTITUTION (SUCH AS A BANK OR BROKER) WHICH IS A PARTICIPANT IN THE SECURITIES TRANSFER AGENTS MEDALLION PROGRAM (“STAMP”), THE NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE, INC. MEDALLION SIGNATURE PROGRAM (“MSP”), OR THE STOCK EXCHANGES MEDALLION
PROGRAM (“SEMP”) AND MUST NOT BE DATED. GUARANTEES BY A NOTARY PUBLIC ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE.
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13

- 40871 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
ALEJANDRO PEREZ

- GONZALEZ , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:13

- CR

- 488

- 1

Before KING, HAYNES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Alejandro Perez

Gonzalez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance
with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Perez

- Gonzal ez h a s not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED June 17, 2014 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 13-40871 Document: 00512666677 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/17/2014No. 13

- 40871

nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s moti on for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2.

2 Case: 13-40871 Document: 00512666677 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/17/2014