alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-7189

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

BOBBY LAMONT HOWIE,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, District Judge. (3:02-cr-00152-FDW-2)

Submitted: November 23, 2009 Decided: January 12, 2010

Before KING, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Bobby Lamont Howie, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

Bobby Lamont Howie appeals the district court’s order

granting his motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C.

§ 3582(c)(2) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the order of the

district court. See United States v. Howie , No. 3:02-cr-00152-

FDW-2 (W.D.N.C. June 9, 2009). 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
Exhibit
31.1




Certification
Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.




I,
Wallace Boyack, certify that:




1. I have
reviewed this Report on Form 10-Q with financial statements for the period
ended September 30, 2008, of NORTH HORIZON, INC.




2. Based
on my knowledge, this Form does not contain any untrue statement of a material
fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstance under which such statements were made, not misleading
with respect to the period and disclosures covered by this Form.




3. Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in the Form 10-Q, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and
for, the periods presented in this Form.




4. The
registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rule
13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:




a)
designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which the Form 10-Q is being prepared;




b)
evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of the Form 10-Q
(the “Evaluation Date”); and




c)
presented in the Form 10-Q the conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation
Date;




d)
presented in this Form 10-Q our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation
Date;




5. The
registrant’s certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s
board of directors (or other persons performing equivalent
functions):




a) all
significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which
could adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize
and report financial data and have identified for the registrant’s auditors any
material weaknesses in internal controls; and




b) any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls; and




6. The
registrant’s other certifying officer and I have indicated in the Form 10-Q
whether there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors
that could significantly affect internal control subsequent to the date of our
most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.




Date:
      October 9, 2008/s/Wallace
      BoyackWallace
      BoyackPresident/Chief
      Executive Officer/Director
**Exhibit 32.2****CERTIFICATION**Pursuant to the requirement set forth in Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the UnitedStates Code (18 U.S.C. §1350), Fritz L. LaPorte, in his capacity as Senior Vice President ofFinance and Administration, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of MAKO Surgical Corp., herebycertifies that, to the best of his knowledge: (i) the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2008 towhich this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the “Quarterly Report”) fully complieswith the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act, and  (ii) the information contained in the Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and result of operations of MAKO Surgical Corp.     May 9, 2008 /s/ Fritz L. LaPorte   Fritz L. LaPorte    Senior Vice President of Finance and Administration,
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jerrell E. COATES, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 13-2307.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: Nov. 5, 2013.

Filed: Nov. 12, 2013.

*718Laine Cardarella, Asst. Fed. Public Defender, Kansas City, MO (Stephen C. Moss, Acting Fed. Public Defender, on the brief), for appellant.

Bruce E. Clark, Asst. U.S. Atty., Kansas City, MO, for appellee.

Before MURPHY, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Jerrell Coates directly appeals after he pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm and the district court1 imposed a sentence at the low end of the Guidelines range. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief under *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), arguing that the prison term imposed by the district court is unreasonable.

Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing Coates. *See United States v. Feemster,*572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th Cir.2009) (en banc). Further, having independently reviewed the record under *Penson v. Ohio,*488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues.

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, subject to counsel informing Coates about procedures for seeking rehearing or filing a petition for certiorari.

1

. The Honorable Beth Phillips, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.
COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

FORM DCM

APPLICATION OR AMENDMENT TO APPLICATION FOR DESIGNATION AS A

DESIGNATED CONTRACT MARKET

Exact name of Applicant as specified in charter: AQUA-INDEX EXCHANGE, LLC

Address of principal executive offices: 216 West Jackson Blvd., Suite 400, Chicago, IL 60606

If this is an APPLICATION for designation, complete in full and check here.

If this is an AMENDMENT to an application, or to an existing designation, list all items that are

amended and check here.

Exhibits B, C, E and F

GENERAL INFORMATION

1. Name under which the business of the designated contract market will be conducted, if different 

than name specified on facing sheet: N/A

2. If name of designated contract market is hereby amended, state previous designated contract

market name: N/A

3. Mailing address, if different than address specified on facing sheet: N/A

3(a). Additional contact information:

FAX: N/A

Phone: (312) 371-3229

Website: N/A

4. List of principal office(s) and address(es) where designated contract market activities are/will

be conducted:

Office Address

Business Office 216 West Jackson Blvd., Suite 400, Chicago, IL 60606
BUSINESS ORGANIZATION 

5. Applicant is a: 

D Corporation 

D Partnership 

[83 Limited Liability Company 

D · Oilier form of organization (specify) 

6. If Applicant is a corporation, provide date and state of incorporation: NIA 

7. If Applicant is a partnership, provide date and state of filing of partnership articles: N/ A 

8. ff Applicant is a limited liability company, provide date and state of filing of Articles of 

Organization/Certificate of Formation: The Articles of Organization of AQUA-INDEX 

EJ):CHANGR LLC were filed in Illinois on March 2, 2015 

9. Applicant agrees and consents that the notice of any proceeding before the Commission in 

connection witb its application for designation as a conlract market may be given by sending 

such notice by certified mail or confirmed telegram to the officer specified or person named 

below at 1he address given. 

Name of person (if Applicant is a corporation, limited liability company or partuership, title of 

officer) 

Name of Applicant AQUA-INDEX EXCHANGE. LLC 

Notice of any proceeding should be provided to: )';:enneth M. Raisler 

Number and Street c/o Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, 125 Broad Street 

City: NewYork State: NY Zip Code: 10004 

SIGNATURES 

l 0. The Applicant has duly caused this application or amendment to be signed on its behalf by the 

undersigned, hereunto duly authorized, this _8_th day of March, 2016. The Applicant and the 

undersigned represent that all information contained herein .is true, cummt and complete. It is 

understood that all required items and Exhibits are considered integral parts of this F onn DCM 

and that the submissio.n of any amendment represents that all unamended items and Exhibits 

remain true, cun-ent, and complete as previously filed. 

Manual signature of Member, General P · g Agent, or Principal Agent 

CbiefElrecutive Officer 

Title 

-2-
UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549



---

FORM 8-K

---



CURRENT REPORT PURSUANT

TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934



Date of report (Date of earliest event reported):  December 27, 2006



---

Nature Vision, Inc.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)



Minnesota

(State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation)



0-7475
        41-0831186(Commission File Number)
        (IRS Employer Identification No.)






213 NW 4th Street

Brainerd, Minnesota 56401

(Address of Principal Executive Offices and Zip Code)



(218) 825-0733

(Registrants Telephone Number, Including Area Code)



---

Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions:



oWritten communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)



oSoliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)



oPre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))



oPre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))





---

Item 5.02Departure of Directors or Certain Officers; Election of Directors; Appointment of Certain Officers; Compensatory Arrangements of Certain Officers.



(b)On December 27, 2006, Thomas F. Leahy resigned from his position as a member of the Board of Directors of Nature Vision, Inc. (the Company).



(d)The Company appointed Philip M. McLaughlin as a replacement for Mr. Leahy to serve as a member of the Board of Directors of the Company, effective December 27, 2006, until the 2009 annual meeting of shareholders and a successor is elected.



The Company intends that Mr. McLaughlin will replace Mr. Leahys to serve on the audit committee of the Board. There were no arrangements or understandings with Mr. McLaughlin regarding his appointment to the Companys Board of Directors.



Item 9.01Financial Statements and Exhibits.

(d)
        Exhibits




99.1
        Nature Vision, Inc. Press Release dated January 4, 2007.






SIGNATURES



Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.



NATURE VISION, INC.Date:  January 4, 2007/s/ Jeffrey P. ZernovJeffrey P. ZernovPresident andChief Executive Officer


---
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Sharon Sherman HALL, a.k.a. Sharon P. Sherman, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 08-11321

Non-Argument Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

Sept. 12, 2008.

Terry Flynn, U.S. Attorney’s Office, N.D. of Florida, E. Bryan Wilson, Tallahassee, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Sharon Sherman Hall, Tallahassee, FL, pro se.

Before BLACK, CARNES and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Gwendolyn Spivey, appointed counsel for Sharon Sherman Hall, has filed a motion to withdraw on appeal, supported by a brief prepared pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because independent review of the entire record reveals no arguably meritorious issues, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the district court’s finding that Hall violated the terms of her supervised release, along with her modified monthly restitution payment amount, are AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 32.1

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Kat Gold Holdings Corp. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of
the undersigned, Kenneth Stead, Chief Executive Officer of the registrant and
David M. Barnes, Chief Financial Officer of the registrant, certifies, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge that:

1.          The
Report on Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Sections 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.

This certificate is being made for the exclusive purpose of compliance
by the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of the Company
with the requirements of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and may
not be disclosed, distributed or used by any person or for any reason other
than as specifically required by law.

|      |              |  |     |                                
|----- | ------------ |  | --- | -------------------------------
|Date: | May 16, 2011 |  | By: | /s/ Kenneth
 Stead             
|      |              |  |     |                                
|      |              |  |     | Name: Kenneth
 Stead           
|      |              |  |     | Title: Chief
 Executive Officer
|      |              |  |     |                                
|Date: | May 16, 2011 |  | By: | /s/ David M.
 Barnes           
|      |              |  |     |                                
|      |              |  |     | Name: David
 M. Barnes         
|      |              |  |     | Title: Chief
 Financial Officer

---
**Exhibit No. 32.1**

Form 10-Q

BTHC XV, Inc.

File No. 0-52808

**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 BTHC XV, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2009 as filed with the        Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Timothy P. Halter, Chief Executive and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|   | (1) |   | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                                |   |   |
|--------|-----|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|
|        |     |        |                                                                                                                                                 |        |        |
|   | (2) |   | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |   |   |

 

| Date: November 9, 2009 |   |  By: |  /s/ Timothy P. Halter |   |   |
|------------------------|--------|-----------|-----------------------------|--------|--------|
|                        |   |      | Timothy P. Halter           |   |   |
|                        |   |      | Chief Executive             |   |   |
|                        |   |      | and Chief Financial Officer |   |   |

----

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to BTHC XV, Inc. and will be retained by BTHC XV, Inc. and furnished to the        Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-84,524-01

EX PARTE TERRY JIMENEZ, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 20100D04694-01 IN THE 409 DISTRICT COURT TH

FROM EL PASO COUNTY

Per curiam. YEARY, J., filed a dissenting opinion. 

O P I N I O N

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of two counts of

online solicitation of a minor. TEX. PENAL CODE § 33.021(b) & (c). He was sentenced to

imprisonment for four years on each count. He did not appeal his convictions.

In Ex parte Lo, this Court declared § 33.021(b) unconstitutional. Ex parte Lo, 424 S.W.3d

10 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013). Applicant now contends that in light of Lo his conviction for count I

is no longer valid. The habeas court has entered agreed findings of fact recommending that relief
2

be granted. Ex parte Chance, 439 S.W.3d 918 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). The court’s findings are

supported by the record. Relief is granted. Applicant’s conviction for count I in cause number

20100D04694 is set aside and this cause is remanded to the trial court to dismiss count I of the

indictment.

Copies of this opinion shall be sent to theTexas Department of Criminal Justice-Correctional

Institutions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division.

Delivered: September 14, 2016

Do not publish
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Sergio ROMERO-NUNEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 09-10140.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Sept. 13, 2010.*

Filed Oct. 6, 2010.

Randall M. Howe, Esquire, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USPX-Office of the U.S. *223Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appel-lee.

Adrian Paulino Fontes, Counsel, The Law Offices of Adrian P. Fontes, Phoenix, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.

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

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *223*See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Sergio Romero-Nunez appeals from the 46-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for illegal re-entry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Romero-Nunez’s counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided the appellant with the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

Our independent review of the record pursuant to *Penson v. Ohio,*488 U.S. 75, 80-81, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.

Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
EXHIBIT 31.1

          Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted
            Pursuant to Section 906 of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Peter Wardle, the Chief Executive and Chief Financial Officer of Protosource
Corporation (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of my
knowledge:

(1)  the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the Company for the fiscal year ended
     December 31, 2004 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of
     Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
     78m or 78o(d)); and

(2)  the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
     respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



Dated: March 30, 2005



                                               /s/ PETER WARDLE
                                               ----------------
                                               Name: Peter Wardle
                                               Title: Chief Executive and
                                               Chief Financial Officer
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-20078 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus STEPHEN ANENE EZEOKE, Defendant-Appellant

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. CA-H-95-4014

- - - - - - - - - - August 9, 1996 Before SMITH, DUHÉ, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Appellant Stephen Anene Ezeoke, #59812-079, appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to vacate, set aside or correct sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, arguing ineffective assistance of counsel, an improper guilty-plea colloquy, and sentencing errors. We affirm for essentially the reasons given by the district court. See United States v. Ezeoke , Cr. No. H-92-104 (S.D. Tex. Nov. 15, 1995).No. 96-20078 - 2 -

Ezeoke also argues that the district court erred by not granting his motion for enlargement of time in which to file a response brief. This argument is moot as the response brief was before the court when it denied Ezeoke’s post-judgment motion. Finally, Ezeoke argues that the district court was biased. This court has reviewed the record and finds no bias. An adverse judicial ruling cannot, alone, show improper bias. Liteky v. United States , 114 S. Ct. 1146, 1157 (1994). Because Ezeoke cannot show a strong likelihood of success on his constitutional claims or any exceptional circumstances warranting relief, his motion for release pending appeal is also denied. See Calley v. Callaway , 596 F.2d 701, 702 (5th Cir. 1974). AFFIRMED.