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

No. 07-10334.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Sept. 8, 2008.*

Filed Sept. 11, 2008.

Office of the U.S. Attorney, Hagatna, GU, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Howard Trapp, Esq., Howard Trapp Incorporated, Hagatna, GU, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: TASHIMA, SILVERMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Duh Wan Efim appeals from his jury-trial conviction for attempted possession of *663methamphetamine hydrochloride with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846(a)(1), (b). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Kim contends that the district court’s denial of his motion for acquittal should be reversed because no rational trier of fact could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that he intended to possess methamphetamine. We conclude that, taking the evidence in the light most favorable to the government, a rational trier of fact could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that Kim intended to possess methamphetamine. *Jackson v. Virginia,*443 U.S. 307, 319, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); *see also United States v.*Carranza, 289 F.3d 634, 644 (9th Cir.2002).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
```

[Federal Register: October 28, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 208)]
[Notices]
[Page 58037]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr28oc99-41]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

TIME AND DATE: 11:00 a.m., Friday, November 5, 1999.

PLACE: 1155 21st St., NW, Washington, DC, 9th Floor Conference Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Surveillance Matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Jean A. Webb, 202-418-5111.
Jean A. Webb,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 99-28342 Filed 10-26-99; 1:40 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
```

----

**======== RETURN TO INDEX    ========**

----
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 4, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 02-40924

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MIGUEL ANGEL ALFARO-LOPEZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. L-01-CR-1280-ALL

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

Before BARKSDALE, DEMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Miguel Angel Alfaro-Lopez (“Alfaro”) appeals the sentence

imposed following his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry

into the United States after deportation following the commission

of an aggravated felony. He argues that the district court erred

by applying the 16-level enhancement for a prior conviction for a

crime of violence pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) on

the basis of his prior state felony convictions for battery on a
No. 02-40924

-2-

law enforcement officer. Alfaro maintains that these convictions

were not aggravated felonies because he received a sentence of

less than one year confinement for each offense. While Alfaro

concedes that the literal language of the guideline does not

require a prior conviction to be an aggravated felony to qualify

as a crime of violence, he contends that the clear intent of the

Sentencing Commission was for the crime of violence enhancement

not to apply to crimes that were not aggravated felonies.

Because Alfaro did not raise this issue below, we review for

plain error. See United States v. Hull, 160 F.3d 265, 271 (5th

Cir. 1998). As Alfaro is raising an issue of apparent first

impression and the district court’s ruling was consistent with

the plain language of the guideline, the district court’s

application of the crime of violence enhancement was not plain

error. See id. at 272 (extension of precedent cannot be the

basis of plain error).

Alfaro additionally argues, for the first time on appeal,

that the sentence enhancing provisions contained in 8 U.S.C. 

§§ 1326(b)(1) and 1326(b)(2) are unconstitutional. Alfaro

concedes that this argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v.

United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), but asserts that the

decision has been cast into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530

U.S. 466, 490 (2000). He seeks to preserve his argument for

further review. 
No. 02-40924

-3-

Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi,

530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984

(5th Cir. 2000). As Alfaro acknowledges, this court must follow

Almendarez-Torres “unless and until the Supreme Court itself

determines to overrule it.” Dabeit, 231 F.3d at 984 (internal

quotation marks and citation omitted). 

For the foregoing reasons, Alfaro’s sentence is AFFIRMED.
```

[Federal Register: September 7, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 174)]
[Notices]
[Page 54240]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr07se00-55]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

TIME AND DATE: 11 a.m., Friday, September 29, 2000.

PLACE: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Conference Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Surveillance Matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Jean A. Webb, 202-418-5100.

Jean A. Webb,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 00-23113 Filed 9-5-00; 2:42 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
```

----

**======== RETURN TO INDEX    ========**

----
EXHIBIT 32.1

                           CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                            18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                            AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly report of China Quest Acquisition Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending June 30, 2008, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, William Tay, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify to the best of my knowledge, 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 result of operations of the Company.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, another
document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained
by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.

China Quest Acquisition Corp.


/s/ William Tay
--------------------------------
By: William Tay
Title: Chief Executive Officer,
Principal Financial Officer and Director

Dated: July 15, 2008
No. 13, original.

#### Nebraska *v.*Wyoming.

October 14, 1935.

The motion for leave to file replication herein is granted. The motion for the appointment of a Special *543Master is granted. An order is entered appointing Michael J. Doherty, Esq., of St. Paul, Minnesota, Special Master in this cause; defining his authority and duties; providing for his compensation and expenses; and authorizing the Chief Justice to designate another if this appointment be not accepted or if the place should become vacant during a recess of the court.

*Mr. Wm. H.*Wright, Attorney General of Nebraska, and *Mr. Paul F. Good*for plaintiff, in support of the motions.
#### Jack K. STEIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Kenneth QUINN, Superintendent, Monroe Correctional Complex-TRU, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 07-35399.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 26, 2008.*

Filed Sept. 8, 2008.

Jack K. Stein, Twin Rivers Correctional Complex, Monroe, WA, pro se.

Before: SCHROEDER, KLEINFELD, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Washington state prisoner Jack K. Stein appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to comply with an order to amend his complaint. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for abuse of discretion a dismissal for failure to comply with a court order. *Pagta-lunan v. Galaza,*291 F.3d 639, 640 (9th Cir.2002). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Stein’s action, be*570cause the public’s interest in expeditious resolution of litigation, the court’s need to manage its docket, and the risk of prejudice to defendants weighed in favor of dismissal. *See id.*at 642-43 (affirming dismissal of action for failure to comply with court order, and explaining factors courts must consider when deciding whether to dismiss). In addition, the district court informed Stein of the deficiencies of his complaint and warned him that failure to comply would result in dismissal.

Stein’s motions to expedite the appeal are denied as moot.

Stein’s motion for release on personal recognizance is denied.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provid*570ed by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
Motion Granted and Abatement Order filed August 17 , 2012

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 12

- 00673

- CV

____________ IN THE INTEREST OF K .G.S. AND T.W.S., CH ILDREN

On Appeal from the 312th District Court

Harris County, Texas T rial Court Cause No. 2009

- 01569



### A B A T E M E N T O R D E R

In the underlying suit to modify the parent

- child relationship, the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services intervened for protection of the children , and the Department w as named t emporary managing conservator of the children by order signed June 25, 2012

. The Mother of the children counterclaimed against the Department, and the trial court granted the Department’s plea to the jurisdiction. The Mother then brought this interlocutory appeal. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §51.014(a)(8). Under this subsection of the statute, all proceedings in the trial court are stayed pending
resolution of the interlocutory appeal. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §51.014(b).

The stay provision in Se ction 51.014(b) of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code
conflict s with the Family Code statutes governing cases brought by the Department forchild protection. See Tex. Fam. Code §§263.201 , 263.304, 263.305, 263.401.

Accordingly, on August 16, 2012, the De partment filed a motion asking this court to abate the interlocutory appeal so that the trial court may conduct a statutorily required status hearing no later than August 24, 2012. See Tex. Fam. Code § 263.201

. We have authority to make an “ appropriate ord er that the law and the nature of the case require [s] .” See Tex. R. App. P. 43.6. We GRANT the motion and issue the following
order:
We order the appeal ABATED for the trial court to conduct a status hearing pursuant to Tex. Fam. Code § 263.201

. During the abatement period, the trial court may consider an appropriate motion to sever the child protection action f rom the Mother’s
counterclaims. A supplemental clerk’s record containing any new order (s) signed by the
trial court shall be filed with the clerk of this court on or before September 7, 2012.
The appeal is abated, treated as a closed case, and removed from this court = s active docket. The appeal will be reinstated on this court = s active docket when the supplemental clerk’s record is filed in this court . The court will also consider an appropriate motion to reinstate the appeal filed by either party, or the court may reinstate the appeal on its own motion.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Brown and Busby.
# CE2013051EN.01017101.xml

| 22.2.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 51/171 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.2.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 51/171

---

Tuesday 13 September 2011Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Joint Undertaking *

P7_TA(2011)0358

European Parliament legislative resolution of 13 September 2011 on the proposal for a Council regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 521/2008 setting up the Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Joint Undertaking (COM(2011)0224 – C7-0120/2011 – 2011/0091(NLE))

2013/C 51 E/43

(Consultation)

The European Parliament,

The European Parliament

| — | having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2011)0224), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2011)0224),

| — | having regard to Articles 187 and 188 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C7-0120/2011), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Articles 187 and 188 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C7-0120/2011),

| — | having regard to Rule 55 and Rule 46(1) of its Rules of Procedure, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Rule 55 and Rule 46(1) of its Rules of Procedure,

| — | having regard to the report of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (A7-0261/2011), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (A7-0261/2011),

| 1. | Approves the Commission proposal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Approves the Commission proposal;

| 2. | Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament;

| 3. | Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to substantially amend the text approved by Parliament; |
| --- | --- |

3.

Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to substantially amend the text approved by Parliament;

| 4. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.

---
Exhibit
32.1





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 *





I,
Allison Carroll, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Pretoria Resources Two, Inc. for the
quarter ended September 30, 2010 fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and
that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly
presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of
operations of Pretoria Resources Two, Inc.





Date:
      November 22, 2010
              By:
              /s/ Allison CarrollAllison
      CarrollPresident,
      Principal Executive Officer and Principal
                Financial
      Officer





* The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure
document.
#### Deshawn MALONE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MARTINEZ, Correctional Officer, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 07-16587.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 5, 2010.*

Filed April 21, 2010.

Deshawn Malone, Corcoran, CA, pro se.

Constance L. Picciano, Esquire, Deputy Attorney General, California Department of Justice, Sacramento, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.

Before: RYMER, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

*

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

*622MEMORANDUM **

Deshawn Malone, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that defendant violated his right of access to courts. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, *Jones v. Blanas,*393 F.3d 918, 926 (9th Cir.2004), and we affirm.

Malone claimed that defendant failed to give him a partially completed complaint and supporting materials that Malone had requested from his personal property. The district court properly granted summary judgment because Malone failed to raise a triable issue as to whether he suffered an actual injury as a result of defendant’s alleged conduct. *See Lewis v. Casey,*518 U.S. 343, 351-53, 116 S.Ct. 2174, 135 L.Ed.2d 606 (1996) (describing actual injury requirement); *Jones,*393 F.3d at 936 (affirming summary judgment on access to courts claim on the ground that plaintiff did not show “injury, such as inability to file a complaint or defend against a charge”).

Malone’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
```

[Federal Register: September 7, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 174)]
[Notices]
[Page 46780]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr07se01-33]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Membership of the Commission's Performance Review Board

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

ACTION: Membership change of Performance Review Board.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Office of Personnel Management guidance
under the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, notice is given that the
following employees will serve as members of the Commission's
Performance Review Board.
    Members: Donald L. Tendick, Acting Executive Director, Chairman; R.
Scott Parsons, Acting Chief of Staff; Phyllis J. Cela, Acting Director,
Division of Enforcement, Andrea M. Corcoran, Director, Office of
International Affairs; John C. Lawton, Acting Director, Division of
Trading and Markets; David R. Merrill, Acting General Counsel, Office
of General Counsel; Richard A. Shilts, Acting Director, Division of
Economic Analysis.

DATES: This action will be effective on August 31, 2001.

ADDRESS: Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Office of Human
Resources, Three Lafayette Centre, Suite 4100, Washington, DC 20581.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marsha Scialdo, Director, Office of
Human Resources, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette
Centre, Suite 4100, Washington, DC 20581, (202) 418-5003.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This action which changes the membership of
the Board supersedes the previously published Federal Register Notice,
August 10, 2000.

    Issued in Washington, DC on August 31, 2001.
Jean A. Webb,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 01-22534 Filed 9-6-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
```
```

[Federal Register: October 20, 1997 (Volume 62, Number 202)]
[Notices]
[Page 54434]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr20oc97-42]


[[Page 54434]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

TIME AND DATE: 2 p.m., Monday, November 24, 1997.

PLACE: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC 9th Fl. Conference Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Adjudicatory Matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Jean A. Webb, 202-418-5100.
Jean A. Webb,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 97-27807 Filed 10-16-97; 1:18 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
```

----

**======== RETURN TO    INDEX ========**

----
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

 
 

Exhibit 10.21    
    


            ,
2005 


Cold
Spring Capital Inc.

51 Locust Avenue, Suite 302

New Canaan CT 06840 


Re:
Initial Public Offering 


Gentlemen:



        The
undersigned stockholder of Cold Spring Capital Inc. ("Company"), in consideration of Deutsche Bank Securities Inc.
("DBSI") entering into a letter of intent ("Letter of Intent") to underwrite an initial public offering
of the securities of the Company ("IPO") and embarking on the IPO process, hereby agrees as follows (certain capitalized terms used herein are defined
in paragraph 5 hereof): 


        1.     If
the Company solicits approval of its stockholders of an Initial Transaction, the undersigned will vote all Insider Shares owned by it in accordance with the majority
of the votes cast by the holders of the IPO Shares. 


        2.     The
undersigned will escrow its Insider Shares until six months after the consummation of an Initial Transaction subject to the terms of a Stock Escrow Agreement which
the Company will enter into with the undersigned and an escrow agent acceptable to the Company. 



        3.     The
undersigned hereby waives any and all right, title, interest or claim of any kind ("Claim") in or to any distribution
of the Trust Fund (as defined in the Letter of Intent) with respect to its Insider Shares and waives any Claim the undersigned may have in the future as a result of, or arising out of, any contracts
or agreements with the Company to or against the Trust Fund and will not seek recourse against the Trust Fund for any reason whatsoever. 


        4.     The
undersigned has full right and power, without violating any agreement by which it is bound, to enter into this letter agreement. 



        5.     As
used herein, (i) an "Initial Transaction" shall mean an acquisition by merger, capital stock exchange, asset or stock acquisition or other similar business
combination of one or more operating business, one or more portfolios of financial assets (including consumer and/or mortgage loans) or one or more real estate assets, or a series of such
transactions, that has a fair market value of at least 80% of the Company's net worth at the time of such transaction (excluding the amount held in the trust account representing a portion of the fees
of the underwriters, as more fully discussed in the Underwriting Agreement, dated as of            , 2005 between the Company and DBSI); (ii) "Insiders" shall mean all officers,
directors
and stockholders of the Company immediately prior to the IPO; (iii) "Insider Shares" shall mean all of the shares of Common Stock of the Company owned by an Insider prior to the IPO; and
(iv) "IPO Shares" shall mean the shares of Common Stock issued in the Company's IPO. 


[Remainder
of Page Intentionally Left Blank] 








        IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Letter Agreement as of the date first written above. 



	 	 	BENJAMIN R. STRATTON TRUST
	

 	
 	

By:	
 	

 Name: John M. Cornish

Title: Trustee















QuickLinks



Exhibit 10.21