alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* 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should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-51262

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JUAN GABRIEL RANGEL-CAMACHO, also known as Juan Gabriel Rangel

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 5:07-CR-167-ALL

Before KING, BARKSDALE, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Juan Gabriel Rangel-Camacho (Rangel) appeals the sentence imposed

following his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry after deportation, in

violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. The district court enhanced Rangel’s sentence by

eight levels under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C) based on a determination that

Rangel’s second state law conviction for possession of a controlled substance

qualified as an “aggravated felony.” 

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

October 21, 2008

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 07-51262

2

Rangel contends that in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Lopez v.

Gonzales, 549 U.S. 47 (2006), his second state law conviction does not qualify as

an aggravated felony. In United States v. Cepeda-Rios, 530 F.3d 333, 335-36

(5th Cir. 2008), we rejected the same arguments made by Rangel in this appeal.

For the reasons set forth in Cepeda-Rios, we also affirm Rangel’s sentence.

AFFIRMED.
### NUMBER 13

- 1 5

- 00 402

- CR 

## COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________ MICHAEL CLARENCE GIL LUM , A ppellant ,
v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, A ppellee

.

____________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 3 6 th District Court of Aransas County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________



## ORDER OF ABATEMENT
Before Justices Garza, Benavides, and Longo ria

Order Per Curiam Appellant, Michael Clarence Gillum , has filed a notice of appeal with this Court from his conviction in trial court cause number A

- 15

- 5077

- CR . The trial court's certification of the defendant's right to appeal shows that the defendant does not have the right to appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 25.2(a)(2).On September 8, 2015 , we ordered appellant's counsel, Michele Villarreal

- Kuchta ,

to , within thirty days, review the record and advise this Court as to whether appellant has a right to appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 44.3, 44.4. No response to this Court's order has been received. Therefore, we abate this appeal and remand this cause to th e trial court for a hearing to determine why counsel has failed to comply with this Court's order. The trial court's findings and conclusions shall be included in a supplemental clerk's record. The trial court shall file the supplemental clerk's record a nd reporter's record, if any, with the Clerk of this Court within thirty days of the date of this order. If the trial court determines that counsel is unable to represent appellant in this matter, the trial court shall conduct a hearing to determine whethe r appellant desires to prosecute the appeal, whether appellant is indigent, and whether appellant is entitled to appointed counsel. See Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 83

- 84 (1988); Stafford v. State , 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We further d irect the trial court to issue findings of fact and conclusions of law regarding these issues. Should the trial court find that appellant desires to pursue this appeal, is indigent, and is entitled to appointed counsel, the trial court shall appoint couns el. If counsel is appointed, the name, address,

e - mail address, telephone number, and state bar number of said counsel shall be included in the trial court's findings of fact and conclusions of law. PER CURIAM Do not publish. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47.2(b).
D elivered and file d T he 28 th day of October, 20 1 5

.
United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

September 25, 2008

Before

RICHARD D. CUDAHY, Circuit Judge

DANIEL A. MANION, Circuit Judge

JOHN DANIEL TINDER, Circuit Judge

No. 08-1172

STEVEN D. DYE, Sr., and

PATRICIA L. DYE,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

AMERIQUEST MORTGAGE

COMPANY and AUSSPRUNG &

ASSOCIATES APPRAISALS, LTD.,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District

Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.

No. 07 C 430

Rudolph T. Randa,

Chief Judge.

ORDER

The order of this court released on August 15, 2008, is AMENDED as follows:

Page 2, second full paragraph, and page 3, third full

paragraph, replace “inflated appraisal” with “low

appraisal”.

Case: 08-1172 Document: 28 Filed: 09/25/2008 Pages: 1
Exhibit 31.1



Section 302 Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer







I, B. Alva Schoomer, certify that:



1.

I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Innocap, Inc.



2.

Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report 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 circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;



3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, 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 quarterly report;



4.

I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) 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 me by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;



b)

Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report my conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



c)

Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.



5.

I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



a)

all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably 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 management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.







Date: September 14, 2005



/s/ B. Alva Schoomer

B. Alva Schoomer

Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit
23.1
 Consent
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
 
  The Board
of Directors
 Broadvision,
Inc.:
  We
consent to the use of our report of Independent Registered Public Accounting
Firm dated May 26,
2006 on the consolidated balance sheet of BroadVision, Inc. as of December 31,
2005, the
related consolidated statements of operations, shareholders' equity (deficit)
and comprehensive
income (loss), and cash flows for the year then ended and the financial statement
schedule that appear in this Form 10-K.
    /s/
Stonefield Josephson, Inc.
  Irvine,
CA
 February
20, 2008
----

----

| Jurisdiction of incorporation | Name of subsidiary                       |
|-------------------------------|------------------------------------------|
| Argentina                     | Pointer Localizacion Y Asistencia S.A.   |
| Israel                        | Shagrir Systems Ltd.                     |
| Mexico                        | Pointer Recuperacion de Mexico, SA de CV |
| Romania                       | S.C. Pointer S.R.L.                      |
| Brazil                        | Pointer do Brazil Commercial S.A.        |
| USA                           | Pointer Telocation Inc.                  |
| Israel                        | Car2go Ltd.                              |
| Israel                        | Rider Mekvuzat Shagrir Ltd.              |

----

----
Argued and submitted October 14,

judgment of Oregon Tax Court affirmed October 28, 1999

#### Chester S. KURZET and Louise Jayne, *Appellants, v.*DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, *Respondent.*

(OTC 3866; SC S43936)

988 P2d 376

Louise Jayne, Portland, appellant *pro se,*argued the cause and filed the briefs for appellants.

Jerry Bronner, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief was Hardy Myers, Attorney General.

Before Carson, Chief Justice, and Gillette, Van Hoomissen, Durham, Leeson, and Riggs, Justices.*

*

 Kulongoski, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The judgment of the Oregon Tax Court is affirmed. ORS 305.765; *Atkins v. Dept. of Rev.,*320 Or 713, 894 P2d 449 (1995), *cert den*516 US 1042 (1996).
# C_2011030EN.01003302.xml

| 29.1.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 30/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.1.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 30/33

---

Judgment of the General Court of 7 December 2010 — Fahas v Council

(Case T-49/07) (1)

1

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures with a view to combating terrorism - Freezing of funds - Action for annulment - Right to a fair hearing - Right to effective judicial protection - Statement of reasons - Action for damages)

2011/C 30/58

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Sofiane Fahas (Mielkendorf, Germany) (represented by: F. Zillmer, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented initially by: M. Bishop, E. Finnegan and S. Marquardt, and subsequently by M. Bishop, J.-P. Hix and E. Finnegan, Agents)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the defendant: Italian Republic (represented by: I. Bruni, acting as Agent, and G. Albenzio, avvocato dello Stato)

Intervener in support of the defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment in part, most recently, of Council Decision 2008/583/EC of 15 July 2008 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism and repealing Decision 2007/868/EC (OJ 2008 L 188, p. 21), in so far it concerns the applicant, and an order that the Council no longer refer to the applicant’s name in its future decisions, in the absence of any final judicial decision, and also a claim for damages.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action.

| 2. | Orders Mr Sofiane Fahas, in addition to bearing his own costs, to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr Sofiane Fahas, in addition to bearing his own costs, to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union.

| 3. | Orders the Italian Republic to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Italian Republic to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 95, 28.4.2007.

1

---
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Michael Bolden, Appellant

No. 06

- 18

- 00193

- CR v.
The State of Texas, Appellee Appeal from the 4th District Court of Rusk County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. CR18

- 181 ). Memorandum Opinion delivered by Justice Stevens, Chief Justice Morriss and Justice Burgess participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court

below

. We affirm the judgment of the trial court

. We not e that the appellant, Michael Bolden, has adequately indicated his inability to pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED APRIL 24, 2019 BY ORDER OF THE COURT JOSH R. MORRISS, III CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST: Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
**Avis juridique important**

*|*

# 31999R0836

**Council Regulation (EC) No 836/1999 of 20 April 1999 suspending the application of Regulation (EC) No 3274/93 preventing the supply of certain goods and services to Libya***Official Journal L 106 , 23/04/1999 P. 0001 - 0001*

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 836/1999

of 20 April 1999

suspending the application of Regulation (EC) No 3274/93 preventing the supply of certain goods and services to Libya

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 228a thereof,

Having regard to Common Position 1999/261/CFSP of 16 April 1999 defined by the Council on the basis of Article J.2 of the Treaty on European Union concerning Libya(1),

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,

(1) Whereas the Council adopted on 29 November 1993 Regulation (EC) No 3274/93 preventing the supply of certain goods and services to Libya(2);

(2) Whereas the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) decided in its Resolution 1192 (1998) to suspend the measures set forth in its Resolutions 748 (1992) and 883 (1993) immediately after the UN Secretary-General has reported to the UNSC that the two persons charged with the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 have arrived in the Netherlands for the purpose of their trial before a Scottish court sitting in the Netherlands;

(3) Whereas the UN Secretary-General has so reported on 5 April 1999,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The application of Regulation (EC) No 3274/93 is hereby suspended.

Article 2

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

It shall apply from 6 April 1999.

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

Done at Brussels, 20 April 1999.

For the Council

The President

J. FISCHER

(1) OJ L 103, 20.4.1999, p. 1.

(2) OJ L 295, 30.11.1993, p. 1.
*Honorable Sharon Lovelace Blackburn, U.S. District Judge for the Northern District of Alabama, sitting by designation. United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit. No. 93-8467. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. Gregory Louis JONES, Defendant-Appellant. Feb. 6, 1996. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. (No. 1:92-CR-35-1), Richard C. Freeman, Judge. Before BIRCH and CARNES, Circuit Judges, and BLACKBURN * , District Judge.
ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES PER CURIAM: The Supreme Court has vacated our prior judgment in this case, United States v. Jones, 28 F.3d 1574 (11th Cir.1994), and remanded the case to us for further consideration in light of Bailey v. United States, --- U.S. ----, 116 S.Ct. 501, --- L.Ed.2d ---- (1995). In upholding Jones' conviction for using or carrying a firearm during and in relation to the commission of a drug trafficking offense, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1), we applied the
pre- Bailey law of this Circuit that the presence of a weapon in a location near a significant quantity of illegal drugs is sufficient to submit to the jury the issue of whether the defendant used that firearm in connection with a drug trafficking crime. Id. at 1577- 79. The Supreme Court has now held that a defendant cannot beconvicted under the "use" prong of § 924(c)(1) merely because a firearm is present at the scene of a drug crime. Instead, if the firearm is not "carried" there must be an active use, such as "brandishing, displaying, bartering, striking with, and most obviously, firing or attempting to fire." Bailey, --- U.S. at ---- , 116 S.Ct. at 508. More specifically, the Court has rejected the proposition "that a gun placed in a closet is "used,' because its mere presence emboldens or protects its owner." Id. In light of Bailey, we modify our prior opinion, insofar as it concerns the § 924(c)(1) conviction, 28 F.3d at 1577-79, and hold that the evidence in this case was insufficient to support that conviction. Our affirmance of the remaining convictions stands. Accordingly, the "Conclusion" part of our prior opinion, id. at 1582, is modified to read as follows: All of Jones' convictions are AFFIRMED, except his conviction for violating 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1). That conviction and sentence are REVERSED. All of Jones' remaining sentences are AFFIRMED, except for the sentence he received for possession of the unregistered sawed-off shotgun, which sentence is V ACATED. The case is REMANDED for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Exhibit 10.3(d)

FOURTH AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENTAGREEMENT

THIS FOURTH AMENDMENT (this Amendment) is made as of this 13thday of April, 2007 to that certain AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT, dated as of
May 15, 2002, as amended (collectively, the Employment Agreement), by and between DAVID E. ULLMAN (Employee) and JOS. A. BANK CLOTHIERS, INC. (Employer).

FOR GOOD AND VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, the receipt and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, Employer and Employee, being the sole parties to the Employment Agreement, hereby amend the Employment
Agreement as follows:

1. Subject to earlier termination otherwise set forth in the Employment Agreement, the last day of the Employment Period shall be January 31, 2009.

2. Effective March 4, 2007, Employees Base Salary shall be $440,000.00.

Except as specifically amended hereby, the Employment Agreement shall remain in full force and effect according to its terms. To the extent of any conflict between the terms of this Amendment and the
terms of the remainder of the Employment Agreement, the terms of this Amendment shall control and prevail. Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have those respective meanings attributed to them in the Employment Agreement. This
Amendment shall hereafter be deemed a part of the Employment Agreement for all purposes. The terms of employment set forth in this Amendment have been approved by the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors of the Employer.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment as of the date first above written.

JOS. A. BANK CLOTHIERS, INC.

|By: | /s/
    Charles D. Frazer               |                 | /s/
    David E. Ullman
|--- | --------------------------------------- | --------------- | -----------------------
|    | Charles D. Frazer,                      | DAVID E. ULLMAN
|    | Senior Vice President  General Counsel |                

---
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 Innocap, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended July 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, B. Alva Schoomer, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:  1. The Report fully complies with 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.   /s/ B.Alva Schoomer  B. Alva Schoomer Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer  February 13, 2007
Christopher Charles Friscia and Maria Adriana Friscia v. Nathan J. Taylor, et al. d.b.a. Nathan J. Taylor, McGuire Woods, et al., Law Firm

No. 246P16

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

July 13, 2016

Mr. Christopher Charles Friscia, for Friscia, Christopher C., et al.

Mr. Nathan J. Taylor, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, for Taylor, Nathan J., et al.

**ORDER**

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Petitioner on the 28th of June 2016 in this matter for a writ of mandamus, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court, Mecklenburg County:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 13th of July 2016."
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 Innocap, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended July 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Paul Tidwell, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:  1. The Report fully complies with 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.  Date: September 19, 2011  /s/ Paul Tidwell Paul Tidwell Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
State v. Greggory G. Mosher, Jr.

242P16-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 18, 2016

*503Greggory G. Mosher, Sr., for Mosher, Greggory George (Jr.).

Teresa M. Postell, Assistant Attorney General, Ernie Lee, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 22nd of June 2016 by Defendant for Petition for Discretionary Review:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 18th of August 2016."
In the Matter of: A.S., A Juvenile.

No. COA15-604.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

July 19, 2016.

**Case Reported Without Published Opinion**

Affirmed.
Exhibit 99.1



CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Jos. A. Bank
Clothiers, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended November 2, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Robert N. Wildrick, Chief Executive 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 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 issuer.
|--- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





|May 1, 2003 |  | /s/ Robert N. Wildrick 
|----------- |  | -----------------------
|            |  | Robert N. Wildrick     
|            |  | Chief Executive Officer