alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### DEL’MARMOL v. HEINZE et al.

Misc. No. 310.

United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit.

June 17, 1953.

Edwin J. Del’Marmol, in pro. per.

No appearances for respondents.

DENMAN, Chief Judge.'

Del’Marmol seeks a certificate of probable cause for appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Northern Division, and for permission to proceed with the appeal in forma pauperis. The district judge refused to grant a certificate of probable cause and ruled that the appeal was not taken in good faith.

On November 17, 1945, Del’Marmol was convicted of the crime of second-degree burglary and was sentenced by the California court to a term of 1-15 years. The Adult Authority, pursuant to California’s indeterminate sentence law, set Del’Mar-mol’s term at seven years. He was released on parole on December 1, 1947. His parole was revoked on March 26, 1948, and he was returned to prison. On August 8, 1949, he was again released on parole. On November 9, 1950, he was arrested and placed in custody on a charge of having violated 18 U.S.C. § 2315, a charge upon which he was ultimately convicted. On December 12, 1950, Del’Marmol’s parole was ordered suspended and he was ordered returned to prison. He now seeks release from this imprisonment.

It is Del’Marmol’s contention that he has served the full sentence imposed by law, that at the completion of a period of seven years from the date of the commencement of the -sentence he was entitled to be discharged. The gravamen of his complaint seems to be that the Adult Authority does not have the power to fix his sentence at a higher term — still within the maximum fixed by the court — after it has once fixed his sentence. The district court rejected this contention, holding that the question was one of state law and that the determination of the state courts was therefore conclusive.

The only issue under the United States Constitution presented by the petition is that the Adult Authority has made Del’Marmol’s enjoyment of personal liberty depend upon their whim, sufferance or caprice. In presenting this claim, he relies upon U. S. ex rel. Howard v. Ragen, D.C.N.D.Ill., 59 F.Supp. 374. That case is not in point. There the prisoner who had been released on parole could be returned to prison at any time in the future, irrespective of whether the time of the original maximum sentence had expired. In California, on the other hand, a paroled prisoner remains in the legal custody of the Adult Authority, but must be released from that custody upon the expiration of the maximum period of punishment. Calif.Pen.C. §§ 3056, 2940. Furthermore, the Howard case has been expressly disapproved, U. S. ex rel. Meiner v. Ragen, 7 Cir., 199 F.2d 798.

The petition for the certificate of probable cause is denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998             DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998             DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                      14,377,781              13,393,646
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,713,409               2,704,434
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,001,851                 624,291
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            17,816,683              17,312,204
<PP&E>                                      14,155,971              16,444,606
<DEPRECIATION>                               8,229,821              10,539,516
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              24,521,065              23,946,438
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,440,479               1,385,098
<BONDS>                                        239,929                  88,812
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                        12,753                  12,812
<OTHER-SE>                                  22,541,579              23,933,626
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                24,521,065              23,872,160
<SALES>                                              0                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            16,132,206              17,104,682
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             1,690,293               1,130,183
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              59,306                  41,279
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (773,583)               (204,861)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (773,583)               (204,861)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (773,583)               (204,861)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.12)                   (.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.12)                   (.03)


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5004 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5004

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on flumiclorac pentyl ester.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 16, 2008

Mrs. Tauscher introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To extend the temporary suspension of duty on flumiclorac pentyl ester.

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

SECTION 1. FLUMICLORAC PENTYL ESTER.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.24.36 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States is amended by striking ``12/31/2009'' and 
inserting ``12/31/2011''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 17

- 1046 V

Filed: July 28, 2020

UNPUBLISHED

ROBERT WILLIAMS

,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Special Master Horner

Ruling for Entitlement; Table Injury; Pneumococcal vaccine (PCV13); Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA)

Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC , for
petitioner.

Traci R. Patton , U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

On August 3, 2017

, petitioner filed a petition under the National Childhood
Vaccine Injury Act, 42 U.S.C. § 300aa

- 10

- 34 (2012), alleging that as a result of a pneumococcal (“PCV13”) vaccination that he received on February 16, 2016, he

suffered a left Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (“SIRVA”)

. (ECF No. 1.) On April 1, 2020, I issued a Findings of Fact, concluding that petitioner experienced
onset of shoulder pain within 48 hours of receiving his vaccination.

On July 24, 2020

, r espondent filed an amende d Rule 4(c) report in which he “requests that the special master issue a ruling based on the existing record regarding
petitioner’s entitlement to compensation.” (ECF No. 47, p. 2.) Specifically, respondent
stated that in light of the special master’s fi nding of fact regarding petitioner’s onset of
left shoulder pain, “respondent advises that he will not defend the case on other

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in accordance with the E

Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Managemen t and Promotion of Electronic Government Services). This means the ruling will be available to anyone with access to

the internet. In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), Petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to
redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such material from public access.2

grounds during further proceedings before the Office of Special Masters.” ( Id .)
Additionally, respondent reserves his right to a potential appea l of the Findings of Fact ruling and “maintains that a finding of entitlement to compensation cannot be sustained
if the Findings of Fact are vacated or overturned on appeal.” ( Id . at n.2.)

In view of R espondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that petitioner is entitle d to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Daniel T. Horner

Daniel T. Horner

S pecial Master
**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

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

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

The undersigned, Greg Crowe, President, CEO and director of Entrée Gold Inc., hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)    the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Entrée Gold Inc. for the period ended March 31, 2005 (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 Entrée Gold Inc.

Dated: May 16, 2005
| /s/ Greg Crowe |
|----------------|

Greg Crowe

President, CEO and Director 

(Principal Executive Officer)
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 Wind Works Power Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:  1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.  3.  A signed original 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.    Date:  November 22, 2010  By: /s/ Ingo Stuckmann ------- ----------------- Ingo Stuckmann Chief Executive Officer
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

No. 20

- 30494

**United States of America,**

Plaintiff

— Appellee **,**

versus

**Ray Hatton, III,**

Defendant

— Appellant

**.**

Appeal from the United States District Court for the West ern District of Louisiana USDC No. 6:12

- CR

- 334

- 1

Before **Ho, Oldham,** and **Wilson,** Circuit Judges

**. Per Curiam**  **:** *
Ray Hatton III pleaded guilty to receipt of child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(2)(A). In 201 3 , he was sentenced to 121 months’ imprisonment and a lifetime of supervised release. After exhausting his administrative remedies, Hatton filed a m otion for compassionate release

* Pursuant to **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  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 cuit**  **R ule**  47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED April 7, 2021
Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 20-30494 Document: 00515812377 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/07/2021No. 20

- 30494

2 under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A), as amended by the First Step Act. The
district court denied Hatton ’s motion . Hatton appealed.
His case was routed to this panel for consideration in tandem with No.

20

- 10695 , United States v

. Lorick , and No. 20

- 40543, United States v.
Shkambi . Here, as in those other cases, the district court thought itself bound by the United States Sentencing Commission’s “ p olicy s tatement,” which sets forth substantive standards governing compassionate

- rel ease motions under § 3582(c)(1)(A). See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13 & cmt. 1

. As we explained in Shkambi , the text of § 1B1.13 limits its applicability to “motion[s] of the Director of the Bureau of Prisons.” No. 20

- 40543, at 8

– 9 (5th Cir . Apr. 7 , 2021) (quoting U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13). The district court therefore erred in considering itself bound by the policy statement in considering a prisoner’s § 3582 motion. On remand, the district court must
consider whether Hatton has demonstrated “extraordinary and co mpelling reasons” justifying sentence reduction under § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). Of course, as always, the district court also must consider the factors enumerated in § 3553(a).
The district court’s order denying Hatton ’s motion for compassionate release is VACAT ED, and the case is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. Case: 20-30494 Document: 00515812377 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/07/2021
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5002 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5002

      To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Deltamethrin.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 16, 2008

Mrs. Tauscher introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
      To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Deltamethrin.

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

SECTION 1. DELTAMETHRIN.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.01.49 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States is amended by striking ``12/31/2009'' and 
inserting ``12/31/2011''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
**EXHIBIT31.2**

I, Jeffrey Klausner,Chief Financial Officer of InfoSonics Corporation, certify that:

1.    I have reviewed this amendedQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of InfoSonics Corporation;

2.    Based on my knowledge,this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit tostate a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report;

3.    Based on my knowledge, thefinancial statements, and other financial information included in this report,fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;

4.    The registrant’s othercertifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the caseof an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;

5.    The registrant’s othercertifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (orpersons performing the equivalent functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record,process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves managementor other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.

 
| Date: June 12, 2006 |   | /s/ Jeffrey Klausner                 |
|--------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------|
|                     |   | Jeffrey Klausner, Chief Financial Officer |

 

 

----
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-13-0002893

07-FEB-2014

09:09 AM
Exhibit 32.1



Certification Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of Telewest Global, Inc. (the Company) does hereby certify,
to such officers knowledge, that:



This quarterly report on Form 10-Q
for the period ending March 31, 2004 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in this report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.



Dated: June 9, 2004



|                              
|------------------------------
|/s/ Barry R. Elson            
|Barry R. Elson                
|Acting Chief Executive Officer
# L_2016280EN.01002701.xml

| 18.10.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 280/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.10.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 280/27

---

COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2016/1836

of 10 October 2016

appointing an alternate member, proposed by the Republic of Austria, of the Committee of the Regions

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal of the Austrian Government,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 26 January 2015, 5 February 2015 and 23 June 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU) 2015/116 (1), (EU) 2015/190 (2) and (EU) 2015/994 (3) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020. On 13 May 2016, by Council Decision (EU) 2016/814 (4), Ms Elisabeth VITOUCH was replaced by Ms Muna DUZDAR as an alternate member. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 26 January 2015, 5 February 2015 and 23 June 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU) 2015/116 (1), (EU) 2015/190 (2) and (EU) 2015/994 (3) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020. On 13 May 2016, by Council Decision (EU) 2016/814 (4), Ms Elisabeth VITOUCH was replaced by Ms Muna DUZDAR as an alternate member.

| (2) | An alternate member's seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Ms Muna DUZDAR, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

An alternate member's seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Ms Muna DUZDAR,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following is hereby appointed as an alternate member of the Committee of the Regions for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2020:

| — | Mr Peter FLORIANSCHÜTZ, Abgeordneter zum Wiener Landtag und Mitglied des Gemeinderats der Stadt Wien. |
| --- | --- |

—

Mr Peter FLORIANSCHÜTZ, Abgeordneter zum Wiener Landtag und Mitglied des Gemeinderats der Stadt Wien.

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

Done at Brussels, 10 October 2016.

For the Council

The President

G. MATEČNÁ

---

(1)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/116 of 26 January 2015 appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020 (OJ L 20, 27.1.2015, p. 42).

1

(2)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/190 of 5 February 2015 appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020 (OJ L 31, 7.2.2015, p. 25).

2

(3)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/994 of 23 June 2015 appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020 (OJ L 159, 25.6.2015, p. 70).

3

(4)  Council Decision (EU) 2016/814 of 13 May 2016 appointing an alternate member, proposed by the Republic of Austria, of the Committee of the Regions (OJ L 133, 24.5.2016, p. 8).

4

---
Andre D. LEE, Petitioner v. LOUISIANA

No. 19-6624

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 13, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Louisiana denied.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

July 30, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

133741 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Stephen J. Markman,

Plaintiff-Appellee, Justices 

v SC: 133741 

 COA: 265377 

Wayne CC: 05-004843-01

MYRON JACKSON,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 22, 2007 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

p0723 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

July 30, 2007 

 Clerk