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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED March 17, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-40027 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus CONSTANTINO PADRON-BALDERAS, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas

(5:04-CR-691-1) Before BARKSDALE, STEWART, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Constantino Padron-Balderas (Padron) appeals his guilty-plea conviction and 60-month sentence for illegal reentry into the United States following deportation. Padron claims that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) is unconstitutional because it treats prior felony and aggravated felony convictions as sentencing factors. Padron’s constitutional challenge is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998). Although Padron contends that Almendarez-Torres was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule Almendarez-Torres in the lightof Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000), we have repeatedly

rejected such arguments Almendarez-Torres remains binding. See United States v. Garza-Lopez , 410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 126 S. Ct. 298 (2005). Padron properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed in the light of Almendarez-Torres and circuit precedent; he raises it to preserve it for further review. Padron also contends that the district court erred in sentencing him under the mandatory guideline regime held unconstitutional in United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 22 0 (2005) ( Fanfan error). Because Padron preserved the issue in district court, the Government must show the Fanfan error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. See United States v. Walters , 418 F.3d 461, 463 (5th Cir. 2005). The sentencing transcript is devoid of evidence that the district court would have imposed the same sentence under an advisory regime; therefore, the Government has not borne its burden. Id . CONVICTION AFFIRMED; SENTENCE VACATED; REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING
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 on Form 10-QSB of Madison
Avenue Holdings, Inc. (the "Company") for the six months ended June 30, 2006, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Alex Kam, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Report fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, and the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Company.

/s/ Alex Kam
-------------------------------
Alex Kam
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
Date: August 4, 2006


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Madison Avenue Holdings, Inc. and will be retained by Madison Avenue
Holdings, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
Exhibit 32.2

Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection
with the Quarterly Report of Mewbourne Energy Partners 04-A, L.P. (the Registrant) on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
the undersigned hereby certifies, in the capacity as indicated below and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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, as amended, and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Registrant.
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: May 15, 2009



/s/ J. Roe BuckleyJ. Roe BuckleyExecutive Vice PresidentChief Financial OfficerMewbourne Development Corporation,Managing General Partner of the Registrant
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 annual report of
White Mountain Titanium Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q/A-2 for the six
months ended June 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned principal financial officer
of the Company, 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
      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:  December
1, 2009
 
 /s/ Michael P.
      KurtanjekMichael
      P. Kurtanjek, President & Chief Executive Officer(Principal
      Executive
Officer)
STATE of North Carolina v. Marijo RUDISILL

No. COA18-464

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: December 4, 2018

NO ERROR IN PART, AFFIRMED IN PART.
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Dex Media,
Inc.
(the Company) hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that: (i) the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for
the quarterly period ended June 30, 2004 (the Report) fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company. Dated: August 12, 2004
    /s/ George BurnettGeorge BurnettPresident and Chief Executive Officer
<PAGE>

Exhibit 99.1


                    CERTIFICATION OF CEO AND CFO 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 Annual Report of Cyber Public Relations, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Maria
Trinh, as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, 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 her knowledge, that:

(1)      The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of the
         Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


By:  /s/ Maria Trinh
-----------------------------
Maria Trinh
President, CEO
April 7, 2003
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4440 

To amend title 49, United States Code, to prohibit the transportation of 

horses in interstate transportation in a motor vehicle containing 2 or 

more levels stacked on top of one another. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 9, 2014 

Mr. COHEN (for himself and Mr. WHITFIELD) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To amend title 49, United States Code, to prohibit the transportation of horses in interstate transportation in a 

motor vehicle containing 2 or more levels stacked on 

top of one another. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Horse Transportation 

5 Safety Act of 2014’’. 

6 SEC. 2. TRANSPORTATION OF HORSES. 

7 Section 80502 of title 49, United States Code, is 

8 amended— 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•HR 4440 IH

1 (1) in subsection (c), by striking ‘‘This section 

2 does not’’ and inserting ‘‘Subsections (a) and (b) 

3 shall not’’; 

4 (2) by redesignating subsection (d) as sub5 section (e); 

6 (3) by inserting after subsection (c) the fol7 lowing: 

8 ‘‘(d) TRANSPORTATION OF HORSES.— 

9 ‘‘(1) PROHIBITION.—No person may transport, 

10 or cause to be transported, a horse from a place in 

11 a State, the District of Columbia, or a territory or 

12 possession of the United States through or to a 

13 place in another State, the District of Columbia, or 

14 a territory or possession of the United States in a 

15 motor vehicle containing 2 or more levels stacked on 

16 top of each other. 

17 ‘‘(2) MOTOR VEHICLE DEFINED.—In this sub18 section, the term ‘motor vehicle’— 

19 ‘‘(A) means a vehicle driven or drawn by 

20 mechanical power and manufactured primarily 

21 for use on public highways; and 

22 ‘‘(B) does not include a vehicle operated 

23 exclusively on a rail or rails.’’; and 

24 (4) in subsection (e), as redesignated— 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

3 

•HR 4440 IH

1 (A) by striking ‘‘A rail carrier’’ and insert2 ing the following: 

3 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—A rail carrier’’; 

4 (B) by striking ‘‘this section’’ and insert5 ing ‘‘subsection (a) or (b)’’; and 

6 (C) by striking ‘‘On learning’’ and insert7 ing the following: 

8 ‘‘(2) TRANSPORTATION OF HORSES IN MULTI9 LEVEL TRAILER.— 

10 ‘‘(A) CIVIL PENALTY.—A person that 

11 knowingly violates subsection (d) is liable to the 

12 United States Government for a civil penalty of 

13 at least $100, but not more than $500, for each 

14 violation. A separate violation of subsection (d) 

15 occurs for each horse that is transported, or 

16 caused to be transported, in violation of sub17 section (d). 

18 ‘‘(B) RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER LAWS.— 

19 The penalty imposed under subparagraph (A) 

20 shall be in addition to any penalty or remedy 

21 available under any other law or common law. 

22 ‘‘(3) CIVIL ACTION.—On learning’’. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0001067173
<NAME> SPG REALTY CONSULTANTS INC
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          1,569
<SECURITIES>                                        0         
<RECEIVABLES>                                     786
<ALLOWANCES>                                        3
<INVENTORY>                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    0<F1>
<PP&E>                                         33,689
<DEPRECIATION>                                 12,359
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 46,601
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               0<F1>
<BONDS>                                        21,556
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                            0
<OTHER-SE>                                     15,067 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   46,601<F2>
<SALES>                                             0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                4,912
<CGS>                                               0         
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   8,893 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              1,279
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (4,621)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    (190) 
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (4,431)
<DISCONTINUED>                                (4,431) 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0 
<NET-INCOME>                                  (4,431)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (5.17)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (5.17)
<FN>
<F1>The Registrant does not report using a classified balance sheet.
<F2>Includes limited partner's interest in the SRC Operating Partnership of 
$5,988.
</FN>
        


</TABLE>
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MICHAEL ANDERSON, AKA Sorin Florin Boroghina,

Petitioner,

v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General,
Respondent. No. 14

- 73870
Agency No. A039

- 044

- 356

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted February 13, 2018 **

Before: LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

Michael Anderson, a native and citizen of Romania, petitions pro se for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal
from an immigration judge’s removal order
, and denying a motion to remand. Our

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

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

# FILED

FEB 21 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 14

- 73870

jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law.

Moha mmed v. Gonzales , 400 F.3d 785, 791

- 92 (9th Cir. 2005)

. We deny in pa rt
and grant in part the petition for review
, and we remand.

Anderson does not raise, and has therefore waived any challenge to
, the
agency’s denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the
Convention Against Torture. See Lopez

- Vasquez v. Holder , 706 F.3d 1072, 1079

- 80 (9th Cir. 2013) (issues not specifically raised and argued in an opening brief are
waived)

. The BIA denied Anderson’s motion to remand, determining he had not

demonstrated that a change in law had materially affected his removability such

that he was no longer bound by his attorney’s concession that Anderson is

removable because his conviction for unlawful delivery of marijuana under Oregon

Revised Statutes § 475.860(2)(a) is an aggravated felony

. However, the BIA did

not have the benefit of our decision in Sandoval v. Sessions , 866 F.3d 986 (9th Cir.
2017), which held that the “delivery” elemen t of delivery of a controlled substance
under Oregon Revised Statutes § 475.992(1)(a) was not a categorical matc h to a
drug trafficking aggravated felony because it punishes conduct outside of the scope
of the federal equivalent. Accordingly, we remand for the BIA to consider
Anderson’s motion to remand in light of that decision. See Santiago

- Rodriguez v.

Holder , 657 F.3d 820, 830

- 31 (9th Cir. 2011) (absent egregious circumstances, an3 14

- 73870

attorney’s admission or concession is binding on an alien; egregious circ umstances

include circumstances where binding the alien to the concession would be unjust,
such as if the propriety of the concession has be en undercut by intervening law).
In light of this disposition, we need not address Anderson’s remaining

contentions.
Each party shall bear its own costs for this petition for review.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; GRANTED in part;

REMANDED.
STATE of North Carolina v. Jermaine Earl HICKS, Defendant.

No. COA17-1109

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: June 5, 2018

NO ERROR.
TGI-EX10.2-3-31-2013V2


EXHIBIT 10.2










TRIUMPH GROUP, INC.
AMENDED AND RESTATED DIRECTORS' STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN
DEFERRED STOCK UNIT AWARD AGREEMENT


Triumph Group, Inc. (the “Company”) hereby awards to the director named below (the “Participant”) the number of deferred stock units of the Company (the “Units”) in accordance with and subject to the terms, conditions and restrictions of this Agreement together with the provisions of the Amended and Restated Directors' Stock Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) of the Company, which Plan is incorporated herein by reference (all capitalized terms used herein having the meanings assigned in the Plan unless otherwise herein defined):


Name and Address of Participant:    


Number of Units Awarded:        


Relevant Dates:  The following dates are applicable for this Agreement:


______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Grant Date:            
______________________________________________________________________________________________________            
Vesting Date:        
______________________________________________________________________________________________________    
Additional Terms and Conditions:


		
	1.
	Each Unit represents a hypothetical share of the Company's common stock, $.001 par value per share (the "Stock"), and will at all times be equal in value to a share of Stock. The Units will be credited to the Participant in an account established for the Participant.  




		
	2.
	The Units will vest on the earlier of the vesting date set forth above or the death of the Participant; provided, however, that in the event of a cessation of membership on the Board, unvested Units will be forfeited or continue to vest pursuant to Section 8.2 of the Plan.  Vested Units will not be distributed in Stock to the Participant until the later of (a) January 1 of the year following the year in which his or her service as a director of the Company is terminated or (b) within ninety (90) days following the date that the Units vest; provided that in no case will the Participant be entitled to receive Dividend Equivalents.  




		
	3.
	This award is subject to the terms of the Plan, the terms and conditions of which will govern this Award to the extent not otherwise provided in this Agreement.  A copy of the Plan is being delivered to the Participant with this Agreement. 




- HIGHLY RESTRICTED -
##### 



Exhibit 32.2 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Kenneth J. Cichocki, as Chief Financial Officer of Home Interiors & Gifts, Inc., (the
Company) certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that to my knowledge: (1) The accompanying Form 10-K report for the period ending December 31, 2004 as filed with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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 23, 2005 /s/ KENNETH J. CICHOCKIKenneth J. CichockiChief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.2  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 StrikeForce Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Philip E. Blocker, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2001, that:  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  Dated: May 23, 2011  /s/ Philip E. Blocker Philip E. Blocker Chief Financial Officer
----

Infringement 2003/4497 — multiple complaint

(2005/C 66/03)

(Text with EEA relevance)

Following the decision on infringement No 2003/4497 (multiple complaint) taken at the A1/2004 meeting on infringements, the Commission sent Italy a reasoned opinion regarding its incorrect application of Directives 96/62/EC on ambient air quality assessment and management and 99/30/EC relating to limit values for sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and oxides of nitrogen, particulate matter and lead in ambient air. In particular, the Commission considered that, by not correctly measuring ambient concentrations of PM10 particles in Civitavecchia, Rome, and consequently failing to inform the public of these concentrations regularly, Italy had failed to fulfil its obligations under Directives 96/62/EC and 99/30/EC.

----
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7594
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ELLUS LAROUS, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (CR-98-7-FO) Submitted: November 8, 2001 Decided: November 21, 2001 Before WILKINS, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ellus Larous, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Gordon James, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Ellus Larous appeals the district court’s orders denying his motion filed under 18 U.S.C.A. § 3582 (West 2000) and his motion for reconsideration of that order. We have reviewed the record andthe district court’s orders and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Larous , No. CR-98-7-FO (E.D.N.C. Aug . 1 & 31, 2000). 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
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

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

In connection with the Annual Report of First National Bancshares, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 29, 2004 (the "Report"), I, Glen
W. Fausset, President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as enacted 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.

/s/ Glen W. Fausset

Glen W. Fausset
President and Chief Financial Officer
March 26, 2004