alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

EDWARD MICHAEL PHILLIPS, aka

Mikey,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 14-10487

D.C. No. 1:11-cr-00581-LEK-1

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Hawaii

Leslie E. Kobayashi, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted February 12, 2016

Honolulu, Hawaii

Before: GRABER, BYBEE, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.

Defendant Edward Michael Phillips appeals the district court’s denial of his

motion to compel the government to file a motion for further sentencing reduction

under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35(b). We affirm.

FILED

FEB 19 2016

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Having reviewed the entire record, we conclude that the government’s

amended sentencing motion was intended to replace its original sentencing motion

entirely. Accordingly, any statements in the original motion do not bind the

government, even if the statements were otherwise binding. It is clear from the

face of the amended motion that the government did not act in bad faith, arbitrarily,

or for an impermissible reason. Wade v. United States, 504 U.S. 181, 185–87

(1992); United States v. Murphy, 65 F.3d 758, 762 (9th Cir. 1995). It was rational

for the government to conclude that Defendant is not entitled to a further

sentencing reduction; in the interim, the government learned that Defendant had

stolen drugs while a cooperating informant.

AFFIRMED.

2
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 5874 

To amend the United States-Mexico Transboundary Aquifer Assessment Act 

to reauthorize the United States-Mexico transboundary aquifer assessment program. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 3, 2023 

Mr. CISCOMANI (for himself and Ms. STANSBURY) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To amend the United States-Mexico Transboundary Aquifer 

Assessment Act to reauthorize the United States-Mexico 

transboundary aquifer assessment program. 

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 ‘‘Transboundary Aqui5 fer Assessment Program Act’’ or the ‘‘TAAP Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION OF TRANSBOUNDARY AQUIFER 

7 ASSESSMENT PROGRAM. 

8 (a) DESIGNATION OF PRIORITY TRANSBOUNDARY

9 AQUIFERS.—Section 4(c)(2) of the United States-Mexico 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 5874 IH

1 Transboundary Aquifer Assessment Act (42 U.S.C. 1962 

2 note; Public Law 109–448) is amended by striking ‘‘New 

3 Mexico or Texas’’ and inserting ‘‘New Mexico, Texas, or 

4 Arizona (other than an aquifer underlying Arizona and 

5 Sonora, Mexico, that is partially within the Yuma ground6 water basin designated by the order of the Director of the 

7 Arizona Department of Water Resources dated June 21, 

8 1984)’’. 

9 (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Section 

10 8(a) of the United States-Mexico Transboundary Aquifer 

11 Assessment Act (42 U.S.C. 1962 note; Public Law 109– 

12 448) is amended by striking ‘‘fiscal years 2007 through 

13 2016’’ and inserting ‘‘fiscal years 2025 through 2035’’. 

14 (c) SUNSET OF AUTHORITY.—Section 9 of the United 

15 States-Mexico Transboundary Aquifer Assessment Act (42 

16 U.S.C. 1962 note; Public Law 109–448) is amended by 

17 striking ‘‘enactment of this Act’’ and inserting ‘‘enactment 

18 of the Transboundary Aquifer Assessment Program Act’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Anthony Smith, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Dennis Edwards, Jr., J.), rendered on March 2, 1988, unanimously affirmed. Application by appellant’s counsel to withdraw as counsel is granted. *(See, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Saunders,*52 AD2d 833.) We have reviewed this record and agree with appellant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous points which could be raised on this appeal. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Ross, Milonas, Kassal and Wallach, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 94 (Tuesday, May 14, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24326-24327]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-12149]



-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[OR-130-1020-00; GP6-0154]


Notice of Meeting of the Eastern Washington Resource Advisory 
Council

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Spokane District.

ACTION: Meeting of the Eastern Washington Resource Advisory Council; 
June 13 and 14, 1996, in Odessa, Washington, and Spokane, Washington.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Eastern Washington Resource Advisory Council will meet at 
10:00 a.m., June 13, 1996 at the Odessa Community Center, 21 East First 
Avenue, Odessa, Washington 98823 for the purpose of a field trip to 
Bureau of Land Management public lands in the local area. If weather is 
inclement or if the Council wishes, the field trip may be canceled and 
the council will meet at the Odessa Community Center to discuss 
rangeland issues. The meeting and/or field trip will recess at 
approximately 4:00 p.m. on June 13, 1996 or upon completion of 
business. The meeting will reconvene at 9:00 a.m., June 14, 1996, at 
Cavanaughs Inn at the Park, 303 West North River Drive, Ballroom ``D'', 
Spokane, Washington 99201, 509-326-8000. Public comments will be 
received from 10:00 a.m. to 10:30 a.m., on June 14, 1996.
    At an appropriate time, on June 14, 1996, the meeting will adjourn 
for approximately one hour for lunch. The meeting will conclude at 4:00 
p.m. or upon conclusion of business. The topics to be discussed are 
Standards for Rangeland Health and Livestock Grazing Guidelines, and 
the Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Hubbard, Bureau of Land 
Management, Spokane District Office, 1103 N. Fancher Road, Spokane, 
Washington 99212; or call 509-536-1200.


[[Page 24327]]


    Dated: May 9, 1996.
Joseph K. Buesing,
District Manager.
[FR Doc. 96-12149 Filed 5-13-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-33-P
EXHIBIT 31.1
 **CERTIFICATIONS**
 
 I, Edward W. Savarese, certify that:
 
 1.    I have reviewed this Form 10-KSB of Com-Guard.com, Inc.
 
 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 registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 
 4.
The registrants other certifying officer(s) 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 registrant 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 registrant, 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 registrant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 registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting;
 
 5.
The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the 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.
 
 DATED: October 13, 2004
/s/ Edward SavareseEDWARD W. SAVARESE
Chief Executive Officer
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**




**MMC
      ENERGY, INC.**


**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 MMC Energy, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form
      10-QSB/A for the period ended June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Karl W. Miller, 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:





(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.





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


*April
                4, 2007**/S/
                KARL W. MILLER**KARL
                W. MILLER**CHIEF
                EXECUTIVE OFFICER*
* 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. 98-20372 Conference Calendar

DONALD GARY EWING, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION; K. NYAK, Doctor, WAYNE SCOTT, DIRECTOR TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION, Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-96-CV-3292

- - - - - - - - - - December 10, 1998 Before DAVIS, DeMOSS and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Donald Gary Ewing, Texas prisoner # 623695, has filed an application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal, following the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. By moving for IFP, Ewing is challenging the district court’s certification that IFP should not be granted onNo. 98-20372 -2- appeal because his appeal presents no nonfrivolous issues. See Baugh v. Taylor , 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997). Because Ewing’s “brief” does not address the reasons for the district court’s certification decision or the basis of the district court’s dismissal, it is the same as if the appellant had not appealed the judgment. See Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner , 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). Accordingly, we uphold the district court’s order certifying that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issues. Ewing’s request for IFP status is DENIED, and his appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous.
See Baugh , 117 F.3d at 202 n.24; 5th Cir. R. 42.2. We caution Ewing that any additional frivolous appeals filed by him or on his behalf will invite the imposition of sanctions. To avoid sanctions, Ewing is further cautioned to review any pending appeals to ensure that they do not raise arguments that are frivolous.
IFP DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 93 (Monday, May 13, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 22025]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-11821]



-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[A-570-825]


Sebacic Acid From the People's Republic of China; Extension of 
Time Limits of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of extension of time limits of antidumping duty 
administrative review.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is extending the 
time limits for preliminary and final results in the administrative 
review of the antidumping duty order on sebacic acid from the People's 
Republic of China (PRC), covering the period July 13, 1994, through 
June 30, 1995, because it is not practicable to complete the review 
within the time limits mandated by the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 
(19 U.S.C. 1675(a)) (the Act).

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 13, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Andrea Chu or Michael Rill, Office of Antidumping Compliance, Import 
Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 14th and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; 
telephone: (202) 482-4733.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    The Department received a request to conduct an administrative 
review of the antidumping duty order on sebacic acid from the PRC. On 
September 15, 1995, the Department published a notice of initiation of 
this administrative review covering the period July 13, 1994, through 
June 30, 1995. The Department adjusted the time limits by 28 days due 
to the government shutdowns, which lasted from November 14, 1995, to 
November 20, 1995, and from December 15, 1995, to January 6, 1996. See 
memoranda to the file from Susan G. Esserman, Assistant Secretary for 
Import Administration, dated November 22, 1995, and January 11, 1996. 
As adjusted, the current time limits are April 29, 1996, for the 
preliminary results and August 27, 1996, for the final results.
    It is not practicable to complete this review within the time 
limits mandated by section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act. Therefore, in 
accordance with that section, the Department is extending the time 
limits for the preliminary results to August 27, 1996, and for the 
final results to February 24, 1997.
    Intersted parties must submit applications for disclosure under 
administrative protective order in accordance with 19 CFR 353.34(b).
    These extensions are in accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the 
Act.

    Dated: April 29, 1996.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Compliance.
[FR Doc. 96-11821 Filed 5-10-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5510-DS-M
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 accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Daniel Stephen Hafner, Chief Executive Officer and Cofounder of KAYAK Software Corporation (the “Registrant”), and Melissa H. Reiter, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the Registrant, each hereby certifies that, to the best of their knowledge:





1. The Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2012, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the “Periodic Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





2. The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the Registrant at the end of the period covered by the Periodic Report and results of operations of the Registrant for the periods covered by the Periodic Report.





Date: August 23, 2012





/s/ Daniel Stephen Hafner


Daniel Stephen Hafner


Chief Executive Officer and Cofounder








/s/ Melissa H. Reiter


Melissa Reiter


Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
#### Troy FORD, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. WD 46593.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Feb. 2, 1993.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied March 30, 1993.

Application to Transfer Denied May 25, 1993.

Susan L. Hogan, Appellate Defender, Kansas City, for appellant.

William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., Michael J. Spillane, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before SMART, P.J., and SHANGLER and FENNER, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from dismissal for untimely filing of Rule 24.035 motion for postconviction relief.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 31.1

                      CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER CERTIFICATION

I, Robert W. Hughes certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of OC Financial, Inc.;

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 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 respect
     the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
     registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.   The registrant's other certifying officers 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 registrant 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
         registrant, 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 registrant'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 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; and

5.   The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on
     our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
     the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the 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:  May 15, 2006

/S/ROBERT W. HUGHES.
--------------------
Robert W. Hughes
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Derek Dewayne Davis , Appellant

No. 06

- 21

- 00078

- CR v.

The State of Texas , Appellee Appeal from the 6th District Court of
Lamar County, Texas (Tr. Ct

. No. 28657 ). Memorandum Opinio n delivered by Chief Justice Morriss

, Justice Burgess and Justice Stevens participating

.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find that the appeal should be dismissed
for want of jurisdiction . Therefore, we dismiss the appeal.

We note that the appellant, Derek Dewayne Davis , has adequately indicated his inability
to pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED SEPTEMBER 23, 2021 BY ORDER OF THE COURT JOSH R. MORRISS, III CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST: Debra K. Autrey , Clerk