alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

KENNETH ODOM,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 3:09cv570/MCR/CJK

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF

CORRECTIONS, et al.,

Defendants.

_________________________/

ORDER

This cause comes on for consideration upon the Magistrate Judge’s Report and

Recommendation dated July 15, 2014 (doc. 112). The parties have been furnished a copy

of the Report and Recommendation and have been afforded an opportunity to file

objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). No timely

objections have been filed.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, the Court has determined that

the Report and Recommendation should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows: 

1. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (doc. 112) is adopted and

incorporated by reference in this Order. 

2. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (doc. 106) is GRANTED.

3. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly and close the file.

DONE AND ORDERED this 19th day of August, 2014.

M. Casey Rodgers 

M. CASEY RODGERS

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:09-cv-00570-MCR-CJK Document 113 Filed 08/19/14 Page 1 of 1
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________ No. 19

- 12727 Non

- Argument Calendar

________________________

Agency No. A205

- 634

- 432

LESLY PATROSINIA GUEVARA

- TORRES, a.k.a. Lelsy Maribel Guevara

- Arias, a.k.a. Lelsy Guevara

- Torres, a.k.a. Elsy Maribel Guevara

- Arias, JORDY ALEJANDRO VELASQUEZ

- GUEVARA, DENINSON JORDANY BACA

- GUEVARA, Petitioners,

versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent.

_________________ _______ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals

________________________ ( February 12, 2020 ) Case: 19-12727 Date Filed: 02/12/2020 Page: 1 of 32 Before WILLIAM PRYOR , GRANT and LUCK , Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Lesly Guevara

- Torres and her two children petition for review of the order of the B oard of Immigration Appeals affirming the denial of her applications for asylum and withholding of removal

. Guevara

- Torres argue s that the B oard erred in concluding that her particular social group

— Honduran women exposed to gender

based violence because of the male

- dominated society

— was not cognizable under the Immigration and Nationality Act , and s he argues that she suffered past persecution and has a well

- founded fear of future persecution. We dismiss in part and deny in part her petition for re view. If a petitioner fail s to exhaust her administrative remedies for a claim for relief , we lack jurisdiction to consider the claim even whe n the B oard addresses it sua sponte . 8 U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1); Amaya

- Artunduaga v. U.S. Att’y Gen. , 463 F.3d 1247, 1250

– 51 (11th Cir. 2006). The Board did not err in concluding that Guevara

- Torres failed to establish her status as a refugee under the Act by membership in a “particular social group

. ” I n Castillo

- Arias v. U.S. Attorney General , we deferred to t he administrative criteria for establish ing a cognizable social group, including that the members of the group share a common characteristic that is immutable or fundamental to their individual identities or consciences. 446 F.3d 1190, 1196

– 97 (11th Cir. 2 006). And

Case: 19-12727 Date Filed: 02/12/2020 Page: 2 of 33 we explained that a social group should not be defined so broadly that it becomes “a catch all for all groups who might claim persecution.” See id. at 1196

– 98. A particular social group cannot be defined by the underlying harm asserted as persecution . Amezcua

- Preciado v. U.S. Att’y Gen. , 943 F.3d 1337, 1345 (11th Cir. 2019). The Board correctly concluded that Guevara

- Torres’s alleged social group lacked particularity, is not socially distinct, and is defined by the risk of harm asserted by her as persecution. As a result, we deny her petition in part. And because Guevara

- Torres failed to exhaust her argument s about suffering past persecution or having a well

- founded fear of future pe rsecution , we lack jurisdiction to consider th em and dismis s her petition in part

. PETITION DENIED IN PART, DISMISSED IN PART. Case: 19-12727 Date Filed: 02/12/2020 Page: 3 of 3
EXHIBIT 32
                                                                      ----------

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of North American Galvanizing &
Coatings, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30,
2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), each
of the undersigned hereby certifies in his or her capacity as an office of the
Company, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted by ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his or her 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 the results of
          operations of the Company.


                   NORTH AMERICAN GALVANIZING & COATINGS, INC.
                                  (Registrant)

                                       /s/ Ronald J. Evans
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       President and
                                       Chief Executive Officer
                                       (Principal Executive Officer)

                                       /s/ Beth B. Hood
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       Vice President and
                                       Chief Financial Officer
                                       (Principal Financial Officer)

Date:  October 29, 2007
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-13 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 1 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-13 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 2 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-13 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 3 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-13 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 4 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-13 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 5 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-13 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 6 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-13 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 7 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-13 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 8 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-13 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 9 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-13 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 10 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-13 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 11 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-13 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 12 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-13 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 13 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-13 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 14 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-13 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 15 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-13 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 16 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-13 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 17 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-13 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 18 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-13 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 19 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-13 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 20 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-13 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 21 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-13 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 22 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-13 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 23 of 23
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 7

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                       192,324,585
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                   3,385,180
<MORTGAGE>                                  14,986,939
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                             219,469,947
<CASH>                                       3,318,278
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                             438,740
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                      29,254,790
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             290,898,932
<POLICY-LOSSES>                            215,224,527
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                         22,428,481
<POLICY-OTHER>                               1,879,534
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                        1,817,036
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       853,685
<OTHER-SE>                                  27,406,544
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               290,898,932
<PREMIUMS>                                  22,674,887
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                          7,445,920
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                           (149,072)
<OTHER-INCOME>                                 472,310
<BENEFITS>                                  11,763,951
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                  (872,631)
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                        17,524,772
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,027,953
<INCOME-TAX>                                   665,391
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,362,562
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                367,583
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   994,979
<EPS-BASIC>                                     1.17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                       0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                  0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                    0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                   0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                     0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                      0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 31.1  I, Richard R. Walters, certify that:  1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-QSB of Little Squaw Gold Mining Company; 2. Based on my knowledge, this 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 report. 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects, the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report. 4. The small business issuer's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated 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 small business issuers disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our 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 small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The small business issuers other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer's board of directors: 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 small business issuer'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 small business issuers internal control over financial reporting.  Date: November 14, 2006   By   /s/ Richard R. Walters  Richard R. Walters, President       1
<PAGE>   1
                                 Exhibit 11

  
                      COMPUTATION OF NET EARNINGS PER COMMON SHARE 



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>                                                             
                                Three Months Ended        Six Months Ended
                                     June 30,                 June 30,         
                              -----------------------  ----------------------- 
                                 1997        1996         1997         1996    
                              ----------  ----------   ----------   ----------
<S>                           <C>         <C>          <C>          <C>
EARNINGS
Net Earnings                  $1,806,139  $1,473,228   $2,911,021   $2,715,056 
                              ==========  ==========   ==========   ==========

SHARES
Weighted Average Number
 of Common Shares Outstanding  4,806,737   4,750,237    4,797,847    4,742,775
Common Share Equivalents          83,082     130,731       84,863      112,105
                              ----------  ----------   ----------   ----------
Weighted Average Common
 Shares Outstanding and
 Equivalents                   4,889,819   4,880,968    4,882,710    4,854,880 
                              ==========  ==========   ==========   ==========
PRIMARY EARNINGS PER    
COMMON SHARE
Net Earnings                  $      .37  $      .30   $      .60   $      .56  
                              ==========  ==========   ==========   ==========
</TABLE>
AO 98 (Rev. 06/09) Agreement to Forfeit Property (Other than Real Property) to Obtain a Defendant's Release

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
for the

Northern District of Florida

United States of America )
v. )

) Case No. 1:10cr6 MMP
ERIC LAMORE HARRIS )
Defendant )

AGREEMENT TO FORFEIT PROPERTY
(OTHER THAN REAL PROPERTY) TO OBTAIN A DEFENDANT’S RELEASE

To obtain the defendant’s release, we jointly and severally agree to forfeit the following cash or other property
(other than real property) to the United States of America if this defendant fails to appear as required for any court
proceeding or for the service of any sentence imposed as may be noticed or ordered by any court, or fails to comply with

any conditions of release set by the court considering this matter (describe the cash or other property and any claim, lien, security
interest, or other encumbrance on it):

$50,000 Own Recognizance Bond

Ownership. We declare under penalty of perjury that we are the sole owners of this property and that it is not
subject to any claim, lien, security interest, or other encumbrance except as disclosed above. We promise not to sell,
pledge, or otherwise encumber the property, or do anything to reduce its value while this agreement is in effect. We

deposit with the court the following ownership documents, including any encumbrance documents (list all documents and
submit as attachments):

Surety Information. We understand that the court and the United States of America will rely on the surety
information in approving this agreement.

Conditions of Release. We state that we have either read all court-ordered conditions of release imposed on the
defendant or had them explained to us.

Continuing Agreement. Unless the court orders otherwise, this agreement remains in effect during any appeal
or other review until the defendant has satisfied all court notices, orders, and conditions.

Exoneration of sureties. This agreement is satisfied and ends if the defendant is exonerated on all charges or, if
convicted, the defendant reports to serve any sentence imposed.

Forfeiture. If the defendant fails to obey all conditions of release, court notices, and orders to appear, the court
will immediately order the property forfeited and on motion of the United States of America may order a iudement of.
forfeiture against the signing parties and their representatives, jointly and severally,



Page 2

AO 98 (Rev. 06/09) Agreement to Forfeit Property (Other than Real Property) to Obtain a Defendant's Release
= —= —=

1 swear under penalty of perjury that the above information is true and agree to the conditions of this agreement.

vue | ~AI-IO Ge fave

Defendant's signature

City and state: Canesvi Ik. al

Property owner’s printed name Property owner's signature
Property owner's printed name Property owner's signature
Property owner’s printed name Property owner's signature

Sworn and signed before me.
CLERK OF COURT

Date: t 2G [lo fe [eee —
1 ey, of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

Approyaed.

oul falliney 29 2070 D Lfeesiize v7 aes

Judge's signature
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2134 

To extend the transfer of Electronic Travel Authorization System fees from 

the Travel Promotion Fund to the Corporation for Travel Promotion 

(Brand USA) through fiscal year 2027. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 16, 2019 

Mr. BLUNT (for himself, Ms. KLOBUCHAR, Mr. GARDNER, and Ms. CORTEZ

MASTO) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

A BILL 

To extend the transfer of Electronic Travel Authorization 

System fees from the Travel Promotion Fund to the 

Corporation for Travel Promotion (Brand USA) through 

fiscal year 2027. 

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 ‘‘Brand USA Extension 

5 Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF FUNDING FOR BRAND USA. 

7 Subsection (d) of the Travel Promotion Act of 2009 

8 (22 U.S.C. 2131(d)) is amended— 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•S 2134 IS

1 (1) in paragraph (2)(B), by striking ‘‘2020’’ 

2 and inserting ‘‘2027’’; and 

3 (2) in paragraph (4)(B), by striking ‘‘2020’’ 

4 and inserting ‘‘2027’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-7592

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

WILLIE SWANN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Chief District Judge.

(CR-90-166-K, CA-00-3132-JFM)

Submitted: April 6, 2001 Decided: April 20, 2001

Before WILKINS and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Willie Swann, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Reeves Harding, Assistant

United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Willie Swann seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2000),

and his motion to dismiss the indictment. We have reviewed the

record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and

dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See

United States v. Swann, Nos. CR-90-166-K; CA-00-3132-JFM (D. Md.

Oct. 25, 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.

DISMISSED
Case 1:06-cv-14980-AKH Document 5 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 1
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

**____________** No. 22

- 50726 Summary Calendar

**____________ United States of America,**  Plaintiff

— Appellee **,**

versus **James Robert Cupples,** Defendant

— Appellant

**.**

**______________________________** Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 7:21

- CR

- 367

- 1

**_________________ _____________**  Before **Jolly, Smith**  **,** and **Duncan,** Circuit Judges

**. Per Curiam**  **:** ***** James Robert Cupples pleaded guilty to one count of receipt of child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(2) and (b)(1)

. The district court sentenced him to 198 months of imprisonment, to be followed by 10 years of supervised release. Cupples challenges the appl ication of a higher offense level under U.S.S.G. § 2G2.1 by operation of the cross

- reference in

**_____________________**

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See **5th Cir**

**. R** 

**.** 47.5. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED July 20, 2023 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 22-50726 Document: 00516828049 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/20/2023No. 22

- 50726

2 U.S.S.G. § 2G2.2(c)(1 ) , which “ is to be construed broadly

. ” § 2G2.2, comment. (n.7( A )). We review the district court’s interpretation and application of the G uidelines de novo and its factual findings for clear error. See United States v. Ferris , 52 F.4th 235, 239 (5th Cir. 2022), cert. denied , 143 S. Ct. 846 (2023)

. T he record supports the district court ’ s determination that the Government proved , by a preponderance of the evidence , that Cupples caused a minor to engage in sexually explicit conduct for the purpose of producing a visual depiction of such conduct. See § 2G2.2, comment. (n.7(A)); United States v. Landreneau , 967 F.3d 443, 451 (5th Ci r. 2020) ; United States v. Rodriguez , 630 F.3d 377, 380 (5th Cir. 2011). And as Cupples concedes, the court properly enhanced his sentence under § 2G2.1(b)(2)(A) because the offense involved the commission of sexual contact. See United States v. Butler , 65 F.4th 199 , 201

- 03 (5th Cir. 2023 ); United States v. Salinas , 918 F.3d 463, 465 (5th Cir. 2019)

. The judgment of the district court is **AFFIRMED**

. Case: 22-50726 Document: 00516828049 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/20/2023
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice

David F. Viviano,

Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, 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.

 March 22, 2019

Order 

Clerk

February 22, 2019

156737(76)

MICHIGAN ASSOCIATION OF HOME

BUILDERS, ASSOCIATED BUILDERS AND

CONTRACTORS OF MICHIGAN, and

MICHIGAN PLUMBING AND MECHANICAL

CONTRACTOR ASSOCIATION,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

SC: 156737

v COA: 331708

Oakland CC: 2010-115620-CZ

CITY OF TROY,

Defendant-Appellee

_________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of Kickham Hanley PLLC to file a brief

amicus curiae is GRANTED. The amicus brief submitted on March 20, 2019, is accepted 

for filing.