alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-2370

ROBERT E. KELTNER, Plaintiff - Appellant,
versusHOLMES R. SHAVER, individually and as President of the Wood County Commission; DAVID A. COUCH, individually and as member of the WoodCounty Commission; ROBERT K. TEBAY, individually and as member of the Wood County Commission; KEITH LITTON, individually and as a duly appointed officer of the Wood County Commission; MICHAEL BALZANO; LOUIS BALZANO, d/b/a Eddies Auto Parts Company, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virinia, at Parkersburg. Robert C. Chambers, District Judge. (CA-00-1162-6) Submitted: February 14, 2002 Decided: February 21, 2002 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert E. Keltner, Appellant Pro Se. Mark William Browning, SHUMAN, MCCLUSKEY & SLICER, P.L.L.C., Charleston, West Virginia; David Edward Schumacher, SCHUMACHER, FRANCIS & NELSON, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellees.2 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Robert E. Keltner appeals two separate district court orders granting the Appellees’ motions for summary judgment on his civil action alleging that various vehicles were improperly removed from his property. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Keltner v. Shaver , No. CA-00-1162-6 (S.D.W. Va. filed Oct. 12, 2001; entered Oct. 15, 2001). 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
* Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions

that have no precedential value and merely decide particular

cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes

needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal

profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 95-40063

Conference Calendar

__________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ESTEBAN GONZALEZ-CUELLAR,

 Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. L-CR-94-154

- - - - - - - - - -

August 23, 1995

Before KING, JOLLY, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Esteban Gonzalez-Cuellar argues that the district court

erred when it increased his offense level under U.S.S.G.

§ 2L1.2(b)(2) because of his prior deportation after committing

an aggravated felony. Gonzalez-Cuellar contends that the

burglary of a nonresidential building is not a "crime of
No. 95-40063

-2-

violence" as that term is defined in 18 U.S.C. § 16, which is

referenced by § 2L1.2, comment. (n. 7). Id.

A sentence imposed under the guidelines will be upheld

unless it is imposed in violation of the law, is the result of an

incorrect application of the guidelines, or is an unreasonable

departure from the applicable guideline range. United States v.

Anderson, 5 F.3d 795, 798 (5th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 114 S.

Ct. 1118 (1994). 

A Texas conviction for a burglary of a non-residential

building constitutes a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 16(b),

and is thus an aggravated felony justifying a 16-level increase

under § 2L1.2(b)(2). United States v. Rodriguez-Guzman, 56 F.3d

18, 20-21 (5th Cir. 1995). 

The sentence imposed was not unreasonable nor the result of

an incorrect application of the Guidelines.

AFFIRMED.
# Commission Regulation (EU) No 905/2013Show full title

Commission Regulation (EU) No 905/2013 of 19 September 2013 establishing a prohibition of fishing for black scabbardfish in            EU and international waters of V, VI, VII and XII by vessels flying the flag of Spain         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Regulation (EU) No 905/2013                     

# of 19 September 2013

# establishing a prohibition of fishing for black scabbardfish in EU and international waters of V, VI, VII and XII by vessels                        flying the flag of Spain                     

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring                           compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy(1), and in particular Article 36(2) thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)Council Regulation (EU) No 1262/2012 of 20 December 2012 fixing for 2013 and 2014 the fishing opportunities for EU vessels                              for certain deep-sea fish stocks(2), lays down quotas for 2013.

(2)According to the information received by the Commission, catches of the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation                              by vessels flying the flag of or registered in the Member State referred to therein have exhausted the quota allocated for                              2013.

(3)It is therefore necessary to prohibit fishing activities for that stock,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

## Article 1U.K.Quota exhaustion

The fishing quota allocated to the Member State referred to in the Annex to this Regulation for the stock referred to therein                     for 2013 shall be deemed to be exhausted from the date set out in that Annex.                  

## Article 2U.K.Prohibitions

Fishing activities for the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation by vessels flying the flag of or registered in                     the Member State referred to therein shall be prohibited from the date set out in that Annex. In particular it shall be prohibited                     to retain on board, relocate, tranship or land fish from that stock caught by those vessels after that date.                  

## Article 3U.K.Entry into force

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*.                  

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 19 September 2013.

*For the Commission, On behalf of the President*,                           

Lowri Evans                            

*Director-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries*                            

## ANNEXU.K.

1

OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.                           

2

OJ L 356, 22.12.2012, p. 22.
BALDWIN v. CENTURY CARE CENTER, INC.

No. COA06-380.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed December 5, 2006.

Certification Date December 27, 2006.

Appeal from Columbus (04CVS1031).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
`[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3241 Referred in House (RFH)]







110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3241


_______________________________________________________________________


                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 8, 2008

      Referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT


 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 1717 Orange Avenue in Fort Pierce, Florida, as the ``CeeCee Ross 
                     Lyles Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. CEECEE ROSS LYLES POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 1717 Orange Avenue in Fort Pierce, Florida, shall be known 
and designated as the ``CeeCee Ross Lyles Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``CeeCee 
Ross Lyles Post Office Building''.

            Passed the Senate August 1, 2008.

            Attest:

                                                NANCY ERICKSON,

                                                             Secretary.`
<PAGE>

                                                                      Exhibit 21

                          SUBSIDIARIES OF DOCENT, INC.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
      Subsidiary                                State/Country of Incorporation
      ----------                                ------------------------------
      <S>                                       <C>
      Wholly Owned
        Docent International Corporation                      Delaware
        Docent Europe BV                               The Netherlands
        Docent BV                                      The Netherlands
        Docent AS                                               Norway
        Docent AB                                               Sweden
        Docent, Ltd.                                    United Kingdom
        Docent GmbH                                            Germany
        Docent BVBH                                            Belgium
        Docent SAS                                              France
        Docent ANZ PTY. Ltd.                                Australian
        Docent (Asia) Ltd.                                   Hong Kong
</TABLE>
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 620/2013Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 620/2013 of 26 June 2013 establishing the standard import values for determining            the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 620/2013                     

# of 26 June 2013

# establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural                           markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation)(1),                        

Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application                           of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors(2), and in particular Article 136(1) thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations,                              the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products                              and periods stipulated in Annex XVI, Part A thereto.

(2)The standard import value is calculated each working day, in accordance with Article 136(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU)                              No 543/2011, taking into account variable daily data. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its                              publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

# Article 1U.K.

The standard import values referred to in Article 136 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 are fixed in the Annex to                     this Regulation.                  

# Article 2U.K.

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*.                  

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 26 June 2013.

*For the Commission, On behalf of the President*,                           

Jerzy Plewa                            

*Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development*                            

## ANNEXU.K.Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

1

OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.                           

2

OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.
IN RE L.S.

No. COA06-733.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed February 6, 2007.

Certification Date February 26, 2007.

Appeal from the Durham (02J93).

Case Reported Without Published Opinion. Affirmed.
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1400/2013Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1400/2013 of 18 December 2013 entering a name in the register of protected designations            of origin and protected geographical indications (Τοματάκι Σαντορίνης (Tomataki Santorinis) (PDO))         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1400/2013                     

# of 18 December 2013

# entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Τοματάκι Σαντορίνης                        (Tomataki Santorinis) (PDO))                     

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality                           schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs(1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Greece’s application to register the name ‘Τοματάκι Σαντορίνης’                              (Tomataki Santorinis) was published in the *Official Journal of the European Union* (2).

(2)As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name                              ‘Τοματάκι Σαντορίνης’ (Tomataki Santorinis) should therefore be entered in the register,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

# Article 1U.K.

The name contained in the Annex to this Regulation is hereby entered in the register.

# Article 2U.K.

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*.                  

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 18 December 2013.

*For the Commission, On behalf of the President*,                           

Dacian Cioloș                            

*Member of the Commission*                            

## ANNEXU.K.

Agricultural products intended for human consumption listed in Annex I to the Treaty:

### **Class 1.6.****Fruit, vegetables and cereals, fresh or processed**U.K.

#### GREECEU.K.

Τοματάκι Σαντορίνης (Tomataki Santorinis) (PDO)

1

OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.                           

2

OJ C 167, 13.6.2013, p. 22.
FORMYDUVAL v. BRITT.

No. 357A06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

January 9, 2007.

Coy E. Brewer, Jr., Fayetteville, for Britt.

Thomas L. Odom, Jr., T. LaFontine Odom, Sr., Benton H. Walton, III, Whiteville, for Formyduval.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 5th day of January 2007 by Defendants for Judicial Notice:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference this the 9th day of January 2007."

Justice TIMMONS-GOODSON recused.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JUNE 21, 2018

NO. 03-18-00125-CV

L. R., Appellant

v.

Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 424TH DISTRICT COURT OF LLANO COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, PEMBERTON, AND BOURLAND

AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE BOURLAND

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the trial court on February 13, 2018. Having 

reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error 

in the trial court’s judgment. Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment. Because 

appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication of costs is made.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3285 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3285

   To ensure that, for each small business participating in the 8(a) 
business development program that was affected by Hurricane Katrina of 
2005 or Hurricane Rita of 2005, the period in which it can participate 
                       is extended by 24 months.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 17, 2008

 Ms. Landrieu introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
    referred to the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To ensure that, for each small business participating in the 8(a) 
business development program that was affected by Hurricane Katrina of 
2005 or Hurricane Rita of 2005, the period in which it can participate 
                       is extended by 24 months.

    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 ``Disadvantaged Business Disaster 
Eligibility Act of 2008''.

SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF PARTICIPATION TERM FOR VICTIMS OF HURRICANE 
              KATRINA OR HURRICANE RITA.

    (a) Retroactivity.--If a small business concern (within the meaning 
given that term in section 3 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 
632)), while participating in any program or activity under the 
authority of paragraph (10) of section 7(j) of the Small Business Act 
(15 U.S.C. 636(j)), was located in a parish or county described in 
subsection (b) of this section and was affected by Hurricane Katrina of 
2005 or Hurricane Rita of 2005, the period during which that small 
business concern is permitted continuing participation and eligibility 
in that program or activity shall be extended for 24 months after the 
date such participation and eligibility would otherwise terminate.
    (b) Parishes and Counties Covered.--Subsection (a) applies to any 
parish in the State of Louisiana, or any county in the State of 
Mississippi or in the State of Alabama, that has been designated by the 
Administrator of the Small Business Administration as a disaster area 
by reason of Hurricane Katrina of 2005 or Hurricane Rita of 2005 under 
disaster declaration 10176, 10177, 10178, 10179, 10180, 10181, 10205, 
or 10206.
    (c) Review and Compliance.--The Administrator of the Small Business 
Administration shall ensure that the case of every small business 
concern participating before the date of enactment of this Act in a 
program or activity covered by subsection (a) is reviewed and brought 
into compliance with this section.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 99.2



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 The Sports Authority, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended May 3, 2003 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, George R. Mihalko, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify that to the best of my 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.
|--- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ GEORGE R. MIHALKO

---

George R. Mihalko

Vice
Chairman,

Chief Administrative Officer and

Chief Financial Officer

(Principal Financial Officer)



June 17, 2003
STATE v. DAVIS.

No. COA07-429.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed October 2, 2007.

Certification Date October 22, 2007.

Appeal from Guilford (06CRS24111, 06CRS24193).

Case Reported Without Published Opinion. Reversed and remanded.
i i i i i i



### MEM ORA ND UM OP INION
No
. 04 -0 8- 00 71 9- CR Donald HASTING , Appellant
v . The State of

TEXAS , Appellee F ro m th e 29 0th

Judic ia l D ist

ri c t Co ur t, B e xar County , T e xas Trial Court No. 2008-CR-4054 Honora ble Sharon Mac Rae , J udg e Presiding PER CU RI AM Sitt ing: Kar en Ang elini , J ustice

Sandee B ry an Mar ion , J ustice Phy lis J . Speedlin , J ustice Deliver ed and F iled: November 26, 2008 DI SMI SSED Pur su ant t o a ple a -b arg a in a g re e me nt, Do na ld H a sti ngple d n olo c on te nd e re to t he of fe ns e of po sse ssi on

of c oc a ine , le ss t

ha n o ne g ra m, an d wa s se nte nc e d in

a c c or da nc e wi th t he te rm s o f h is plea- barg ain ag ree ment. On September 12, 2008, the trial cour t signe d a ce rtification of de fenda nt’s rig ht to appeal stating that this “is a plea-bar g ain case, and the defe ndant has NO rig ht of appe al.” See T EX . R. A PP . P. 25.2(a) (2). Af ter Ha sting filed a notice of appe al, the trial c ourt cler k sent copies04
- 08
- 00 71 9- CR

- 2- of the c ertifica

tion and noti ce of

appea l to this court. See id. 25.2(e) . The c lerk’s r ecor d, which includes the trial c ourt’s Rule 25.2(a )(2) cer tification, has bee n filed. See id. 25.2(d). “In a plea barg ain case ... a defenda nt may appea l only : (A) those matters that wer e ra ised by
wr itt e n mo tio n f

ile d a nd rul ed on befo re tri a l, o r ( B ) a ft e r g e tti ngthe tr ia l c ourt ’s pe rm iss ion to appea l.” Id . 25.2(a) (2). The cler k’s re cord, w hich contains a written plea

barg ain, es t abli shes the punishment assessed by

the cour t does not exceed the punishment recommende d by the prosec utor and ag ree d to by

the def endant. See id
. The clerk’s recor d does not include a w ritten motion filed and ruled upon be fore trial; nor does it indicate that the trial court gave it s permission to appea l. See id
. Th e tr ia l c ourt ’s c e rt if

ic a tio n, the re fo re , ap pe ars to ac c ur a te ly re fl e c t tha t th is i s a ple a -b arg a in c a se and that Ha sting doe s not have a rig ht to appeal. We must dismis s an appe al “if a cer tification that shows the def

endant ha s the rig ht of appe al has not bee n made pa rt of the r ecor d.” Id . 25.2(d). We, the re fo re , w arn e d Ha sti ng that this ap pe a l wou ld be dis mis se d p ur su ant t o T e xas R ule of Appellate Procedur e 25.2(d) , unless an ame nded trial c ourt ce rtification showing that he had the rig ht to appea l w as made part of the appe llate re cord. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 25 .2 (d ), 37 .1 ; Daniels v. Sta te , 110 S.W .3d 174 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, order) . No such amended tria l court
cer tification has bee n filed. This appe al is, theref ore, dismissed pursuant to Rule 25.2(d)
.

PER CU RI AM DO NO T PU B L I SH