alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States Court of Appeals,

Eleventh Circuit.

No. 98-8167

Non-Argument Calendar.

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

Ramiro SANCHEZ-VALENCIA, Defendant-Appellant.

Aug. 5, 1998.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. (No. 2:97-cr-028-

WCO), William C. O’Kelley, Judge.

Before GODBOLD, HILL and FAY, Senior Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Ramiro Sanchez-Valencia appeals his 66-month sentence for illegally re-entering the United

States after being deported.

 On appeal, Sanchez-Valencia argues that the district court erroneously believed that it did

not have the authority to downwardly depart on the basis of cultural assimilation, and that such a

departure was warranted.

 This Court has held that a district court's discretionary refusal to depart downward is not

appealable, unless the refusal was based on an erroneous belief that the court did not have the

statutory authority to depart from the guideline range. United States v. Fossett, 881 F.2d 976, 979

(11th Cir.1989).

We have reviewed the transcripts, the presentence investigation report, the judgment and

commitment order, and all other relevant portions of the record. Those, together with the briefs of

the parties, demonstrate that the sentencing judge was aware of his authority to depart in light of
United States v. Lipman, 133 F.3d 726 (9th Cir.1998).

While it is possible to determine from this record that the district court was aware of its

authority, it would facilitate review if sentencing judges would state on the record that they believe

they have or do not have the authority to depart.

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit A

Filed Under Seal

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1200-1 Filed 08/05/21 Page 1 of 1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

STEVE LEVENGOOD,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 281 MAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 25th day of September, 2018

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.
IV 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 886 

Supporting the goals and purposes of National Teach Ag Day. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 3, 2009 

Mr. CHILDERS (for himself and Mr. HARPER) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government 

Reform 

RESOLUTION 

Supporting the goals and purposes of National Teach Ag 

Day. 

Whereas 10,000 agricultural educators teach in nearly 7,500 

public middle schools and high schools in the United 

States; 

Whereas approximately one million students receive agricultural education in United States public schools; 

Whereas more than 500,000 of these students are members 

of the National FFA Organization; 

Whereas there is a nationwide teacher shortage in agricultural education and many agricultural education programs suffer from the lack of qualified teachers; 

Whereas the National Association of Agricultural Educators, 

on behalf of the National Council for Agricultural EduVerDate Nov 24 2008 01:49 Nov 04, 2009 Jkt 089200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6300 E:\BILLS\HR886.IH HR886

jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 886 IH 

cation, is organizing National Teach Ag Day on February 

25, 2010, as one component of the National Teach Ag 

Campaign; 

Whereas the goal of National Teach Ag Day is to have every 

agricultural educator in America teaching a lesson to encourage their students to consider a career in agricultural 

education; 

Whereas agricultural educators contribute to a strong and effective education in public schools; and 

Whereas a student’s growth and future are positively impacted by the dedication and quality teaching of agricultural educators: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives supports 

2 the goals and purposes of National Teach Ag Day. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

CHARLES G. REECE,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

D. K. SISTO, Warden; DON MIMIS,

Plant Operation,

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 12-16070

D.C. No. 2:10-cv-00203-JAMEFB

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

John A. Mendez, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted July 24, 2013** 

Before: ALARCÓN, CLIFTON, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Charles G. Reece appeals pro se from the district

court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to exhaust

administrative remedies as required by the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 42 U.S.C.

FILED

AUG 02 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 12-16070

§ 1997e(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, 

Sapp v. Kimbrell, 623 F.3d 813, 821 (9th Cir. 2010), and we reverse and remand.

The district court dismissed Reece’s action because Reece did not exhaust

administrative remedies at the second and final levels of review. However,

because Reece’s grievance was fully granted at the first level of review, Reece

“ha[d] no obligation to appeal from a grant of relief . . . in order to exhaust his

administrative remedies.” Harvey v. Jordan, 605 F.3d 681, 685 (9th Cir. 2010). 

Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings.

REVERSED and REMANDED.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 824 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 824

Congratulating the Northwestern University Wildcats on winning the 2009 
    NCAA women's lacrosse championship, and to commend Northwestern 
    University for its pursuit of athletic and academic excellence.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 13, 2009

 Ms. Schakowsky submitted the following resolution; which was referred 
                to the Committee on Education and Labor

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Congratulating the Northwestern University Wildcats on winning the 2009 
    NCAA women's lacrosse championship, and to commend Northwestern 
    University for its pursuit of athletic and academic excellence.

Whereas the Northwestern women's lacrosse team serves as important role models 
        to young athletes, demonstrating excellence on the athletic field and in 
        the classroom;
Whereas Northwestern defeated North Carolina 21-7 to win the national 
        championship on May 24, 2009;
Whereas Northwestern finished the season with a 23-0 record to win their fifth 
        straight national championship; and
Whereas senior Hannah Nielsen won the Tewaaraton Trophy, given to the Nation's 
        top player, and played a vital role in helping Northwestern to a 23-0 
        record in 2009, finishing her distinguished career as the Wildcats' all-
        time leader in points (398) after becoming the NCAA Division I all-time 
        assist leader with 224: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) congratulates Northwestern University and its athletes, 
        coaches, faculty, students, administration, and alumni on the 
        winning of the 2009 NCAA women's lacrosse championship;
            (2) recognizes and commends Northwestern University for its 
        pursuit of athletic as well as academic excellence; and
            (3) directs the Clerk of the House of Representatives to 
        make available enrolled copies of this resolution to 
        Northwestern University President Henry S. Bienen, Athletic 
        Director James Phillips, and Head Coach Kelly Amonte Hiller for 
        appropriate display.
                                 <all>
```
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-Q of SmartHeat Inc. (the
“Company”) for the quarter ended March 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Jun Wang, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, 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; 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:
      June 23, 2009
                  By:
                  /s/
      Jun WangJun
      WangChief
      Executive Officer
                    (Principle Executive
      Officer)




This
certification accompanies each Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of §18 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
|Exhibit 24.2
|------------

CERTIFIED RESOLUTIONS

Certified to be a true and
correct copy of the resolutions adopted by the Board of Directors of PMA Capital
Corporation at a meeting held on February 6, 2002, a quorum being present, and
such resolutions are still in full force and effect as of this date of
certification, not having been amended, modified or rescinded since the date of
their adoption.

RESOLVED,
that the Officers of the Company, and each of them, are hereby authorized to
sign the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December
31, 2001, and any amendments thereto, (the Form 10-K) in the name
and on behalf of the Company and as attorneys for each of its Directors and
Officers.

RESOLVED,
that each Officer and Director of the Company who may be required to execute
(whether on behalf of the Company or as an Officer or Director thereof) the Form
10-K, is hereby authorized to execute and deliver a power of attorney appointing
such person or persons named therein as true and lawful attorneys and agents to
execute in the name, place and stead (in any such capacity) of any such Officer
or Director the Form 10-K and to file any such power of attorney together with
the Form 10-K with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have
hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the Company, this 19th day of
March, 2002.

| | /s/ Charles A. Brawley, IIICharles A. Brawley, IIIAssistant Secretary
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------

(SEAL)

---
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**





Each
      of
      the undersigned, Philip Septimus, the President and Director of Sentra
      Consulting Corp. (the “Company”), and Bonnie Septimus, the Treasurer, Secretary,
      and Director of the Company, certifies, under the standards set forth and solely
      for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the undersigned’s knowledge, the Quarterly
      Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the fiscal quarter ended March 31,
      2007, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in that Form 10-QSB
      fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
      of operations of the Company.





Dated:
      May 14, 2007





/s/
      Philip Septimus


Philip
      Septimus


President
      and Director


(Principal
      Executive, Financial,


and
      Accounting Officer)





/s/
      Bonnie Septimus


Bonnie
      Septimus


Treasurer,
      Secretary, and Director





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
      and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
SCPW-15-0000033
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI # I

EDMUND M. ABORDO, Petitioner,

vs. INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF HAWAI # I, Respondent Court,

and DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY and SHARI KIMOTO,

MAINLAND BRANCH ADMINISTRATOR,

Respondents.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (CAAP-13-0001474; CIV. NO. 11-1-2228)
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS (By: Reck tenwald, C.J., Nak ayama, Mc Kenna, Po llack, an d Wilson, JJ.)

Upon consideration of Petitioner Edmund M. Abordo’s document entitled “Plaintiff-Appellant’s Writ of Mandamus for Violation of the Rules [of] the Court and the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution,” filed on January 20, 2015, and the record, it appears that Petitioner fails to demonstrate that he has a clear and indisputable right to an immediate decision in CAAP-13-0001474 and, therefore, mandamus Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-15-0000033 02-FEB-2015 12:12 PMrelief is not warranted. See Kema v. Gaddis, 91 Hawai # i 200,

204-05, 982 P.2d 334, 338-39 (1999) (a writ of mandamus is an extraordinary remedy that will not issue unless the petitioner demonstrates a clear and indisputable right to relief and a lack of alternative means to redress adequately the alleged wrong or obtain the requested action). Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the clerk of the appellate court shall process the petition for a writ mandamus without payment of the filing fee.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petition for a writ of mandamus is denied.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai # i, February 2, 2015. /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack /s/ Michael D. Wilson

2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

GLENN B. McCORMICK

Acting United States Attorney District of Arizona

KEVIN M. RAPP (Ariz. Bar No. 014249, kevin.rapp@usdoj.gov) MARGARET PERLMETER (Ariz. Bar No. 024805, margaret.perlmeter@usdoj.gov) PETER S. KOZINETS (Ariz. Bar No. 019856, peter.kozinets@usdoj.gov) ANDREW C. STONE (Ariz. Bar No. 026543, andrew.stone@usdoj.gov) Assistant U.S. Attorneys

40 N. Central Avenue, Suite 1800

Phoenix, Arizona 85004-4408

Telephone (602) 514-7500

DAN G. BOYLE (N.Y. Bar No. 5216825, daniel.boyle2@usdoj.gov) Special Assistant U.S. Attorney

312 N. Spring Street, Suite 1400

Los Angeles, CA 90012

Telephone (213) 894-2426

KENNETH POLITE

Assistant Attorney General 

Criminal Division, U.S. Department of Justice

REGINALD E. JONES (Miss. Bar No. 102806, reginald.jones4@usdoj.gov) Senior Trial Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice

Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section

950 Pennsylvania Ave N.W., Room 2116

Washington, D.C. 20530

Telephone (202) 616-2807 

Attorneys for Plaintiff

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America,

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

Michael Lacey, et al., 

Defendant.

No. CR-18-00422PHX- SMB

NOTICE OF FILING PROPOSED 

CHANGES TO JURY 

QUESTIONNAIRE

The United States, pursuant to Doc. 1336, hereby provides its Notice of Filing 

Proposed Changes to the Jury Questionnaire. See Exhibit A. 

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1349 Filed 10/12/21 Page 1 of 2
- 2 –

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Respectfully submitted this 12th day of October, 2021.

GLENN B. McCORMICK

Acting United States Attorney

District of Arizona

s/ Margaret Perlmeter KEVIN M. RAPP

MARGARET PERLMETER

PETER S. KOZINETS

ANDREW C. STONE

Assistant U.S. Attorneys

DAN G. BOYLE

Special Assistant U.S. Attorney

KENNETH POLITE

Assistant Attorney General 

U.S. Department of Justice 

Criminal Division, U.S. Department of Justice

REGINALD E. JONES

Senior Trial Attorney

U.S. Department of Justice, Criminal Division

Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this same date, I electronically transmitted the attached 

document to the Clerk’s Office using the CM/ECF System for filing and transmittal of a 

Notice of Electronic Filing to the CM/ECF registrants who have entered their appearance 

as counsel of record.

s/ Margaret Perlemter US Attorney’s Office

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1349 Filed 10/12/21 Page 2 of 2
Filed by Bowne Pure Compliance






Exhibit 10.2









China Finance Online Co. Limited

9th Floor of Tower C, Corporate Square

No. 35 Financial District

Xicheng District, Beijing 100140

People’s Republic of China





			
	Subject:	 	WRITTEN CONSENT OF AMERICAN APPRAISAL CHINA LIMITED





We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8/A
(File No. 333-139192) and Forms S-8 (File No. 333-139192, File No 333-123802) filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on September 18, 2007, December 8, 2006 and April 4, 2005 of
the references to our name and our financial appraisal reports, dated March 22, 2007 and April 15,
2008 addressed to the board of directors of China Finance Online Co. Ltd, and to references to our
valuation methodologies, assumptions and conclusions associated with such reports, in the annual
reports on Form 20-F of China Finance Online Co. Limited and any amendments thereto (the
“Registration and Exchange Commission. We further consent to the filing of this letter as an
exhibit to the annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2007.



The Reports relates to valuation of China Finance Online Co. Ltd.’s cost International Inc. as of
December 31, 2006 and 2007. In reaching our value conclusions, we relied on the accuracy and
completeness of the financial statements and other data provided by China Finance Online Co. Ltd.
and its representatives. We did not audit or independently verify such financial statements or
other data and take no responsibility for the accuracy of such information. The Company determined
the fair value of the cost investment and our valuation reports were used to assist China Finance
Online Co. Ltd. in reaching its determinations.



In giving such consent, we do not hereby admit that we come within the category of persons whose
consent is required under Section 7 of the U.S. Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the rules
and regulations adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission thereunder admit that we are
experts with respect to any part of such Registration Statement within the meaning of the term
“experts” as used in the Act.




Yours faithfully,









AMERICAN APPRAISAL CHINA LIMITED
#### Alfred L. HARSTON and Wife, Mary E. Harston, Appellants, v. KENDALL COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT, et al., Appellees.

No. 04-88-00565-CV.

Court of Appeals of Texas, San Antonio.

July 19, 1989.

Richard A. Finegan, Austin, for appellants.

Charles J. Muller, III, Farley P. Katz, San Antonio, for appellees.

Before REEVES, PEEPLES and CARR, JJ.

OPINION

CARR, Justice.

This case involves the interpretation of TEX.TAX CODE ANN. § 42.08 (Vernon 1989).

On April 9, 1987, the appellants, Alfred and Mary Harston, filed an application for an open-space valuation on real property located in Kendall County, Texas. The request was denied by the County Appraisal District and appellants filed a notice of protest. On June 22, 1987, appellee, the Kendall County Appraisal Review Board, denied the requested open-space valuation and appellants appealed to the District Court. In January 1988, appellants paid the taxes, as assessed, prior to the delinquency date. The appellee then filed a motion to dismiss alleging that the appellants had failed to comply with TEX.TAX CODE ANN. § 42.08(c) (Vernon 1987), by having made full payment of the taxes as assessed. Based on that reason, the trial court granted the motion to dismiss.

> Section 42.08 reads as follows:

> (b) A property owner who appeals as provided by this chapter must pay the tax due on the amount of value of the property involved in the pending action that is not in dispute or the amount of tax paid on the property in the preceding year, whichever is greater, before the delinquency date or he forfeits his right to proceed to a final determination of the pending action. In that event, the reviewing court on its own motion or on the motion of an opposing party shall dismiss the pending action.

Subsequent to the submission of this case on appeal, however, TEX.H.B. 432, 71st Leg. (1989), enacted June 15, 1989, amended § 42.08(c) to read as follows:

> (c) A property owner that pays the amount of taxes greater than that required by Subsection (b) does not forfeit the property owner’s right to a final determination of the appeal by making the payment....

*816Furthermore, Bill Section 49(a)(2) provides that Bill Section 43 shall “take effect immediately.” Bill Section 49(i) is a further elaboration of the effective date of Bill Section 43 and provides as follows:

> (i) The change in law made by Section 43 of this Act applies to an appeal under Chapter 42, Tax Code, without regard to whether the appeal was filed or the taxes paid before the effective date of that section.

It was, therefore, not fatal for the appellants to have paid the assessed amount. We sustain appellants’ point of error and reverse and remand this case to the trial court.
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 112 (Monday, June 10, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 29365]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-14506]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. MT96-15-000]


Mid Louisiana Gas Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas 
Tariff

June 4, 1996.
    Take notice that on May 28, 1996, Mid Louisiana Gas Company (Mid 
Louisiana) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Third 
Revised Volume No. 1 the following tariff sheets to become effective 
June 1, 1996:

Second Revised Sheet No. 130
Third Revised Sheet No. 131

    Mid Louisiana states that the purpose of the filing of the Revised 
Tariff Sheets is to update, in accordance with 18 CFR 250.16(b)(1) of 
the Commission's regulations, the listing of shared personnel and 
facilities.
    Pursuant to Section 154.7(a)(7) of the Commission's Regulations, 
Mid Louisiana respectfully requests waiver of Sec. 154.207, Notice 
requirements, as well as any other requirement of the Regulations in 
order to permit the tendered tariff sheets to become effective June 1, 
1996, as submitted.
    Mid Louisiana states that, in compliance with Sec. 154.208, paper 
copies of the Revised Tariff Pages and this filing are being served 
upon its jurisdictional customers and appropriate state regulatory 
agencies.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's 
Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed as 
provided in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests 
will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate 
action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to 
the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion 
to intervene. Copies of this compliance filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-14506 Filed 6-7-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M