alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
*Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be

published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstancesset forth in LocalRule 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-20315

(Summary Calendar)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

GIULIANO BARBIERI and JOSE BELTRAN

Defendants-Appellants.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

(USDC No. CR-H-94-0248)

January 14, 1997

Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Giuliano Barbieri and Jose Beltran appealfrom their convictions and sentencesfor aiding and

abetting possession with intent to distribute in excess of five kilograms of cocaine, in violation of 21

U.S.C. § 841. Our review of the record and the arguments and authorities convince us that no

reversible error was committed.
2

This court lacks jurisdiction to address Beltran’s challenge to the district court’s refusal to

grant Beltran a downward departure from the sentencing guidelines. See United States v. DiMarco,

46 F.3d 476, 477-78 (5thCir. 1995). Nor has Barbieri shown that the district court erred by refusing

to reduce his offense level based on his asserted mitigating role in the offense. See United States v.

Devine, 934 F.2d 1325, 1340 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 929 (1991).

The evidence adduced at trial was sufficient to allow a reasonable jury to find Barbieri guilty

beyond a reasonable doubt. See United States v. Polk, 56 F.3d 613, 619 (5th Cir. 1995). The

evidence also supported the district court’s decision to give the jury an instruction on deliberate

ignorance. See United States v. Faulkner, 17 F.3d 745, 766 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 193

(1994). Finally, because the facts available to the arresting officers warranted a person of reasonable

caution to believe that an offense was being committed, probable cause existed to support the

warrantless arrests, and the district court did not err in denying Barbieri’s motion to suppress the

evidence seized during the arrest. See United States v. Tellez, 11 F.3d 530, 532 (5thCir. 1993), cert.

denied, 114 S. Ct. 1630 (1994); United States v. Raborn, 872 F.2d 589, 593 (5th Cir. 1989).

AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-03-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-03-1999
<CASH>                                             148
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   11,703
<ALLOWANCES>                                       373
<INVENTORY>                                     14,259
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                30,657
<PP&E>                                          21,273
<DEPRECIATION>                                (11,601)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  40,592
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           13,749
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            33
<OTHER-SE>                                      26,442
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    40,592
<SALES>                                         58,422
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                58,422
<CGS>                                           39,698
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   39,698
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                17,354
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                (52)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,422
<INCOME-TAX>                                       517
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                905
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       905
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0.31
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.31


</TABLE>
Exhibit 21



KOPPERS INC.

SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY

AMENDED LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES



|                                                  |  |                                 
|------------------------------------------------- |  | --------------------------------
|Entity Name                                       |  | State or Country of Organization
|                                                  | 
|Koppers Asia LLC                                  |  | Delaware                        
|Koppers Concrete Products, Inc.                   |  | Delaware                        
|Concrete Partners, Inc.                           |  | Delaware                        
|Koppers Delaware, Inc.                            |  | Delaware                        
|Koppers Monessen Partners LP                      |  | Delaware                        
|Koppers Redemption, Inc.                          |  | Delaware                        
|World-Wide Ventures                               |  | Delaware                        
|Koppers Assurance, Inc.                           |  | South Carolina                  
|Continental Carbon Australia Pty Ltd              |  | Australia                       
|Koppers Australia Holding Company Pty Ltd         |  | Australia                       
|Koppers Australia Pty. Limited                    |  | Australia                       
|Koppers Carbon Materials & Chemicals Pty Ltd      |  | Australia                       
|Koppers Wood Products Pty Ltd                     |  | Australia                       
|Koppers Shipping Pty. Ltd.                        |  | Australia                       
|Koppers (Beijing) Chemical Co., Ltd.              |  | Peoples Republic of China       
|Koppers (China) Carbon & Chemical Company Limited |  | Peoples Republic of China       
|Koppers Mauritius                                 |  | Republic of Mauritius           
|Koppers Europe ApS                                |  | Denmark                         
|Koppers Denmark A/S                               |  | Denmark                         
|Koppers Trading Denmark A/S                       |  | Denmark                         
|Koppers European Holdings A/S                     |  | Denmark                         
|Koppers Luxembourg S.ar.l                         |  | Grand Duchy Luxembourg          
|Koppers Poland Sp.zo.o.                           |  | Poland                          
|Koppers UK Holding Limited                        |  | United Kingdom                  
|Koppers UK Limited                                |  | United Kingdom                  
|Koppers UK Transport Limited                      |  | United Kingdom                  
|Koppers Lambson Limited                           |  | United Kingdom
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 782 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

  1st Session
                                H. R. 782

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 25, 1995

  Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
    To amend title 18 of the United States Code to allow members of 
employee associations to represent their views before the United States 
                              Government.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Federal Employee Representation 
Improvement Act of 1995''.

SEC. 2. REPRESENTATION BY FEDERAL OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES.

    (a) Extension of Exemption to Prohibition.--Subsection (d) of 
section 205 of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as 
follows:
    ``(d)(1) Nothing in subsection (a) or (b) prevents an officer or 
employee, if not inconsistent with the faithful performance of that 
officer's or employee's duties, from acting without compensation as 
agent or attorney for, or otherwise representing--
            ``(A) any person who is the subject of disciplinary, 
        loyalty, or other personnel administration proceedings in 
        connection with those proceedings; or
            ``(B) except as provided in paragraph (2), any cooperative, 
        voluntary, professional, recreational, or similar organization 
        or group not established or operated for profit, if a majority 
        of the organization's or groups's members are current officers 
        or employees of the United States or of the District of 
        Columbia, or their spouses or dependent children.
    ``(2) Paragraph (1)(B) does not apply with respect to a covered 
matter that--
            ``(A) is a claim under subsection (a)(1) or (b)(1);
            ``(B) is a judicial or administrative proceeding where the 
        organization or group is a party; or
            ``(C) involves a grant, a contract, or other agreement 
        (including a request for any such grant, contract, or 
        agreement) providing for the disbursement of Federal funds to 
        the organization or group.''.
    (b) Application to Labor-Management Relations.--Section 205 of 
title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
following:
    ``(i) Nothing in this section prevents an employee from acting 
pursuant to chapter 71 of title 5 or section 1004 or chapter 12 of 
title 39.''.

            Passed the House of Representatives October 24, 1995.

            Attest:

                                                ROBIN H. CARLE,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
NUMBER 13-12-00138-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG 

____________________________________________________________

MARK MERU, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 117th District Court 

of Nueces County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Rodriguez, Benavides, and Perkes

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, Mark Meru, filed a notice of appeal challenging his conviction for 

burglary of a habitation. By order signed March 30, 2012, the trial court granted 

appellant's motion for new trial.

When the trial court grants a motion for new trial, it restores the case to its position 

before the former trial. See TEX. R. APP. P. 21.9(b). Because there is no conviction to 
2

be appealed, we have no jurisdiction to consider this appeal. See Waller v. State, 931 

S.W.2d 640, 643-44 (Tex. App.BDallas 1996, no pet.).

The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file and the 

trial court's order granting a new trial, is of the opinion that the appeal should be 

dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See id. The appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR 

WANT OF JURISDICTION.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed the

19th day of July, 2012.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS FOUND
ON PAGES       OF THE COMPANY'S FORM 10KSB FOR THE YEAR TO DATE AND IS 
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                             506
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      863
<ALLOWANCES>                                       140
<INVENTORY>                                        160
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,438
<PP&E>                                           2,112
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,004
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   2,580
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              993
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         9,776
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     2,580
<SALES>                                          4,203
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 4,203
<CGS>                                            2,380
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,380
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 3,108
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 325
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,489)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         3
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,492)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,492)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.08)
        

</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**P & F INDUSTRIES, 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 on Form 10-Q of P&F Industries, Inc. (the “Company”) for the period ending September 30, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, Joseph A. Molino, Jr., Principal Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350 that:

 

(1)                                  The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

 
| /s/ Joseph A. Molino, Jr.   |   |
|-----------------------------|--------|
| Joseph A. Molino, Jr.       |
| Principal Financial Officer |
| November 12, 2003      |

 

----
Exhibit
13.2





CERTIFICATION




Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, I, Shuo Zeng, Chief Operation Officer of Yucheng
Technologies Limited (the “Company”), certify, to my knowledge, that the
Company’s annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2008 (the
“Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date:
      June 29, 2009/s/ Shuo ZengName:
      Shuo ZengTitle:
      Chief Operation
Officer


______________________________________________________________________





The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure
document.


Exhibit 13.2, page1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-Q
FOR THE QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                             525
<SECURITIES>                                     4,715
<RECEIVABLES>                                   38,959
<ALLOWANCES>                                       841
<INVENTORY>                                     31,819
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                83,526
<PP&E>                                         112,955
<DEPRECIATION>                                  55,631
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 192,532
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           53,033
<BONDS>                                         24,232
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           144
<OTHER-SE>                                     108,405
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   192,532
<SALES>                                        147,276
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               147,276
<CGS>                                          101,004
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  101,004
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                39,362
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   841
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 254
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,656
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,197
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,459
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,459
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.31
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.31


</TABLE>
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 19

- 50421 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
JORGE LORENZO GRACIDA

- INFANTE , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 4:19

- CR

- 317

- 1

Before KING, SOUTHWICK, and ENGELHARDT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The district court’s order granting the Government’s motion to detain Jorge Lorenzo Gracida

- Infante and reversing the magistrate judge’s order setting conditions of bond is AFFIRMED. This court applies a deferential standard of review when considering a d istrict court’s pretrial detention order. United States v. Rueben , 974 F.2d 580, 586 (5th Cir. 1992); United States v. Hare , 873 F.2d 796, 798 (5th Cir. 1989). Reviewing the record as a whole under

* 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 circums tances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED June 6, 2019 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 19-50421 Document: 00514986498 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/06/2019No. 19

- 50421

2 this deferential standard of review, we hold that Gracid a
- Infante has not established his entitlement to relief. Case: 19-50421 Document: 00514986498 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/06/2019
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 23 (Monday, February 4, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 6498]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-1926]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER07-1199-001]


Airtricity Munnsville Wind Farm, LLC; Notice of Filing

January 28, 2008.
    Take notice that on January 17, 2008, Airtricity Munnsville Wind 
Farm, LLC, tendered for filing revised market-based rate tariff sheets 
in response to a request for reformatting.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must 
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). 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 notice of 
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, 
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. 
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of 
that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an 
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' 
link on the web site that enables subscribers to receive email 
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For 
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#efa9aabdaca0818386818abc9a9f9f809d9baf898a9d8cc1888099"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="db9d9e899894b5b7b2b5be88aeababb4a9af9bbdbea9b8f5bcb4ad">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on February 7, 2008.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-1926 Filed 2-1-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
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 Neuralstem, Inc. (the “Company”) Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, I. Richard Garr, 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, to the
best of my knowledge:





(1).           The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





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





Date:
March 30, 2010





/s/ I. Richard GarrI.
      Richard GarrChief
      Executive Officer
#### In the Matter of the Application of Siegel-Cooper Company, Appellant, for an Order Directing Wilmore Anway, Respondent, to Turn over Certain Papers, etc.

Order affirmed, with costs and disbursements. No opinion.