alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable materials, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of Mental Health Special Emphasis Panel; K99/R00—Pathway to Independence.                    

*Date:*                         June 17, 2010.                    

*Time:*                         8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         Crowne Plaza Tyson's Corner, 1960 Chain Bridge Road, McLean, VA 22102.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Megan Libbey, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute of Mental Health, NIH, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Blvd., Room 6148, MSC 9609, Bethesda, MD 20892-9609, 301-402-6807,                         *libbeym@mail.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos.93.242, Mental Health Research Grants; 93.281, Scientist Development Award, Scientist Development Award for Clinicians, and Research Scientist Award; 93.282, Mental Health National Research Service Awards for Research Training, National Institutes of Health, HHS).

Dated:  May 11, 2010. 

Jennifer Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2010-11685 Filed 5-14-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
463 A.2d 28

#### In re Shook. Appeal of Alverta Shook. Shook v. Shook, Appellant.

Argued April 14, 1983.

Robert Lee Steinberg, for appellant; Emil William I. Kantra, II, for appellees.

*626Before HESTER, POPOVICH and HOFFMAN, JJ.

Orders affirmed.

HESTER, J., filed a memorandum concurring statement.
EXTENSION AGREEMENT
                        RE: LEASE DATED FEBRUARY _, 1995
                      BENDELL REALTY, L.L.C., LANDLORD and
                MAJOR CHRYSLER PLYMOUTH JEEP EAGLE, INC., TENANT

      PREMISES: 34-20 45TH Street, L.I.C., NY

            WHEREAS, LANDLORD and TENANT acknowledge that the above lease by and
between BENDELL REALTY, L.L.C., LANDLORD and MAJOR CHRYSLER PLYMOUTH JEEP EAGLE,
INC., TENANT is in full force and effect (the "Lease"); and

            WHEREAS, the Lease had a stated termination date of December 31,
1995; and

            WHEREAS, thereafter, by Extension Agreement dated May 29, 1996, the
termination date was extended to December 31, 1996; and

            WHEREAS, LANDLORD and TENANT desire'to further extend the Lease to
December 31, 1997;

            NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, and for other good
and valuable consideration receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, the parties
agree as follows:

            1. The Lease termination date is modified to December 31, 1997.

            2. Except as modified herein, the Lease remains in full force and
effect.

Dated: August 14, 1997

                                      BRUCE BENDELL and HAROLD BENDELL, LANDLORD


                                      BY: /s/ Bruce Bendell
                                          ---------------------------------
                                                   BRUCE BENDELL


                                      BY: /s/ Harold Bendell
                                          ---------------------------------
                                                 HAROLD BENDELL

MAJOR DODGE, INC. (formerly known as MAJOR CHRYSLER-PLYMOUTH, INC.), TENANT


BY: /s/ Bruce Bendell
    ----------------------------------
           BRUCE BENDELL
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential. 

# Wniteb**~tate~** 

# (!Courtof**~eaI~** 

# for !bejfeberaI (!Circuit
IN RE PRINCETON DIGITAL IMAGE CORPORATION, Petitioner. Miscellaneous Docket No. 136 On Petition for Writ ofMandamus to the United States District Court for the Eastern District ofTexas in case no. 11-CV-0039, Judge James Rodney Gilstrap. 

### ON MOTION

ORDER Upon consideration ofPrinceton Digital Image Corporation's unopposed motion to withdraw Timothy N. Trop as counsel, IT Is ORDERED THAT: The motion is granted. Case: 12-136 Document: 12 Page: 1 Filed: 11/26/2012IN RE PRINCETON DIGITAL IMAGE

s19 FOR THE COURT /s/ Jan Horbaly Jan Horbaly Clerk 2 Case: 12-136 Document: 12 Page: 2 Filed: 11/26/2012
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR
. 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 5 TH C IR
. R. 47.5.4. 

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-50976 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee

v. BENJAMIN RUBALCABA-VAZQUEZ Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:07-CR-523-ALL
Before STEWART, OWEN and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Benjamin Rubalcaba-Vazquez was convicted of one count of attempted illegal reentry into the United States and sentenced to serve 76 months in prison. Rubalcaba-Vazquez appeals his sentence. He argues that the district court erred by including three of his prior convictions in his criminal history score. He contends that these convictions should not have been scored because he was not represented by counsel in connection with these convictions. He thus United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D June 10, 2008 Charles R. Fulbruge III ClerkNo. 07-50976

2 contends that the district court used the wrong guidelines sentencing range when sentencing him and that his range should have been significantly lower. When review

ing a sentence, we typically consider whether the district court committed procedural error at sentencing and whether the sentence imposed is substantively reasonable. See Gall v. United States, 128 S. Ct. 586, 594 (2007); see also United States v. Cisneros-Guiterrez, 517 F.3d 751, 764 (5th Cir. 2008). The district court’s interpretation and application of the Guidelines
are reviewed de novo, and its findings of fact are reviewed for clear error. See Cisneros-Guiterrez, 517 F.3d at 764. Rubalcaba-Vazquez’s sentencing claim, however, is reviewed for plain
error only because it was not presented to the district court. See United States
v. Hernandez-Martinez, 485 F.3d 270, 272 (5th Cir. 2007). Under the plain error standard ofreview, “reversal is not required unless there is (1) an error; (2) that is clear or plain; (3) that affects the defendant’s substantial rights; and (4) that seriously affects the fairness, integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings.” United States v. Vasquez, 216 F.3d 456, 459 (5th Cir. 2000). Rubalcaba-Vazquez’s claim is unavailing. The record does confirm Rubalcaba-Vazquez’s assertion that the disputed convictions were uncounseled. However, the record does not showwhether these convictions were uncounseled because Rubalcaba-Vazquez validly waived his right to counsel or because he was uninformed of his right to counsel. Consequently, Rubalcaba-Vazquez has not carried his burden of showi ng that the disputed convictions were constitutionally infirm, nor has he shown plain error in connection with his sentence. See United States v. Osborne , 68 F.3d 94, 100-01 (5th Cir. 1995). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

KHELBY LAMAR CALMESE,

Petitioner

- Appellant,

v.

S. YOUNG,

Respondent

- Appellee. No. 20

- 15155

D.C. No. 1:19

- cv

- 00798

- LJO

- SKO

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Lawrence J. O ’ Neill, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 17, 2021 * *

Before: FERNANDEZ

, BYBEE , and BADE, Circuit Judges.

Federal prisoner Khelby Lamar Calmese appeals pro se from the district

court ’ s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas corpus petition. We have

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, see Thomas v. Brewer

,

923 F.2d 1361, 1364 (9th Cir. 1991), and we affirm.

* 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 24 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 20

- 15155

Calmese contends that he is entitled to credit toward s his federal sentence

for the time period between March 201 6 and April 2017. Although Calmese’s

earliest possible release date from state custody was March 25, 2016, the parole

board denied early release and required him to serve the maximum parole sentence

with a projected release date of June 22, 2017. Calmese

, therefore

, did not begin

serving his federal sentence until April 2 7 , 2017, when he obtained early release

from his state sentence for good conduct. See 18 U.S.C. § 3585(a). The time

Calmese spent in federal custody pursuant to a writ of habeas corpus ad

prosequendum p rior to that date did not interrupt the state’s primary jurisdiction

over him

. S

ee Schleining v. Thomas , 642 F.3d 1242, 124 3 n.1 (9th Cir. 2011)

( temporary transfer of state prisoner to federal custody pursuant to a writ of habeas

corpus ad prosequendum d oes not interrupt the state ’s primary jurisdiction over the

prisoner )

. Moreover, because Calmese received credit against his state parole

revocation sentence for this time period

, he is not entitled to any additional federal

credit

. See 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b); United States v. Wilson , 503 U.S. 329, 337 (1992)

(defendant may not “receive a double credit for his detention time”).

All pending motions are denied.

AFFIRMED.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2418 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2418

   To prohibit commercial air tour operations over the Black Canyon 
                             National Park.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 13, 2000

 Mr. Campbell introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
   referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To prohibit commercial air tour operations over the Black Canyon 
                             National Park.

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

SECTION 1. PROHIBITION ON CERTAIN COMMERCIAL AIR TOUR OPERATIONS.

    Section 806 of the National Parks Air Tour Management Act of 2000 
is amended by inserting ``or the Black Canyon of the Gunnison National 
Park'' after ``Rocky Mountain National Park''.
                                 <all>
```
1

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 40949

STATE OF IDAHO,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

CORNELIO LUNA,

Defendant-Appellant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

2014 Unpublished Opinion No. 383

Filed: February 20, 2014

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED 

OPINION AND SHALL NOT 

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Third Judicial District, State of Idaho, 

Canyon County. Hon. George A. Southworth, District Judge. 

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of four years, with a minimum 

period of confinement of one and one-half years, for trafficking in 

marijuana, affirmed.

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Diane M. Walker, Deputy 

Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. 

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney 

General, Boise, for respondent. 

________________________________________________

Before GUTIERREZ, Chief Judge; LANSING, Judge;

and MELANSON, Judge

PER CURIAM

Cornelio Luna pled guilty to trafficking in marijuana. I.C. § 37-2732B(a)(1). In 

exchange for his guilty plea, additional charges were dismissed. The district court sentenced 

Luna to a unified term of four years, with a minimum period of confinement of one and one-half 

years. Luna appeals.

Sentencing is a matter for the trial court's discretion. Both our standard of review and the 

factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of the sentence are well established and 

need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez, 121 Idaho 114, 117-18, 822 P.2d 1011, 1014-

15 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lopez, 106 Idaho 447, 449-51, 680 P.2d 869, 871-73 (Ct. App. 
2

1984); State v. Toohill, 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct. App. 1982). When reviewing 

the length of a sentence, we consider the defendant’s entire sentence. State v. Oliver, 144 Idaho 

722, 726, 170 P.3d 387, 391 (2007). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record 

in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.

Therefore, Luna’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 12**  **- 6711** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v.
CALVIN FONVILLE, a/k/a Cal , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Norfolk

. Rebecca Beach Smith , Chief District Judge. ( 2:95

- cr
- 00049

- RGD

- 3 )

Submitted : August 2 2 , 2012 Decided: August 27, 2012

Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and DIAZ , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Calvin Fonville, Appellant Pro Se. Kevin Michael Comstock, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circu it.2 PER CURIAM:
Calvin Fonville appeals the district court ’ s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion to reduce his

sentence

. Because Fonville’s Guidelines range remains unchanged
under Amendment 750 to the Sentencing Guidelines , w e find n o
reversible error. See United States v. Goines , 357 F.3d 469,
478 (4th Cir. 2004)

. Accordingly, we affirm. 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
***Exhibit 31.1******CERTIFICATIONS***     I, Thomas D. Vance, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this Form 10-Q of First McMinnville Corporation;     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects, the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand 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 financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors:(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe 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 havea significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.July 24, 2007        /s/ Thomas D. Vance   President and CEO
Exhibit 32


                                 CERTIFICATION

     By  signing  below,  each  of the  undersigned  officers  hereby  certifies
pursuant  to 18  U.S.C.  1350,  as  adopted  pursuant  to  Section  906  of  the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his or her knowledge, (i) this report fully
complies  with the  requirements  of  Section  13(a) or 15(d) of the  Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the  information  contained in this report  fairly
presents,  in all material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and results of
operations of Home Financial Bancorp.

     Signed this 5th day of September, 2003.



/s/ Kurt D. Rosenberger                     /s/ Gary M. Monnett
-------------------------------------       ------------------------------------
Kurt D. Rosenberger                         Gary M. Monnett
President and Chief Executive Officer       Executive Vice President, Chief
                                            Financial Officer











A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of this written  statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to Home Financial Bancorp and will be
retained by Home Financial  Bancorp and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### Department of the Army

# AGENCY:

Department of the Army, DoD.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

Announcement is made of the availability for licensing of the invention set forth in U.S. Provisional Patent Application Serial No. 61/319,070 entitled “Two-Stage Evaporative Cooling Method for Protective Clothing Ensembles,” filed March 30, 2010. The United States Government, as represented by the Secretary of the Army, has rights to this invention.

# ADDRESSES:

Commander, U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command, ATTN: Command Judge Advocate, MCMR-JA, 504 Scott Street, Fort Detrick, Frederick, MD 21702-5012.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

For patent issues, Ms. Elizabeth Arwine, Patent Attorney, (301) 619-7808. For licensing issues, Dr. Paul Mele, Office of Research and Technology Assessment, (301) 619-6664, both at telefax (301) 619-5034.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The invention relates generally to a two-stage evaporative cooling method for use in protective clothing ensembles.

Brenda S. Bowen,

Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. 2010-11818 Filed 5-17-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3710-08-P
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 B & D Food Corp. (the "Company") on
Form  10-QSB  for the  period  ending  September  30,  2005 as  filed  with  the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Daniel
Ollech, President,  Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer,  Treasurer
and Secretary of the Company,  certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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 and 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.

Dated:    November 21, 2005            By: /s/ Daniel Ollech
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Daniel Ollech
                                           President,  Chief Executive  Officer,
                                           Chief  Financial  Officer,  Treasurer
                                           and Secretary