alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 08-cr-030-03-PB

 

Elvis Delarosa

O R D E R

The defendant, Elvis Delarosa, moved for a sentence

reduction based upon the cocaine base ("crack cocaine") amendment

to the Federal Sentencing Guidelines implementing the Fair

Sentencing Act of 2010, Pub. L. No. 111-220, 124 Stat. 2372

(2010) ("2010 Fair Sentencing Act") (document no. 98). That

amendment was given retroactive effect on November 1, 2011. For

the reasons stated below, the defendant's motion to reduce

sentence is DENIED. 

The 2010 Fair Sentencing Act, by omission, prohibits persons

who received a career offender guideline sentence from receiving

a sentence reduction based upon the retroactive application of

the cocaine base amendment. Specifically, the United States

Sentencing Commission amended § 1B1.1, (Application Instructions)

and adopted a three-step approach to determine the sentence to be

imposed. Under § 1B1.1, the court first determines the guideline

range and then considers any departures or variances. Consistent

with that approach, the proposed guideline at §1B1.10, comment

Case 1:08-cr-00030-PB Document 99 Filed 03/23/12 Page 1 of 2
(n.1[A]) was also amended to reflect that "eligibility for

consideration under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) is triggered only by

an amendment listed in subsection (c) that lowers the applicable

guideline range (i.e., the guideline range that corresponds to

the offense level and criminal history category determined

pursuant to § 1B1.1(a), which is determined before consideration

of any departure provision in the Guidelines Manual or any

variances.)." The only exception to reducing the defendant's

term of imprisonment to a term that is less than the minimum of

the amended guideline range would be a sentence which resulted

from a downward departure pursuant to a government motion for

substantial assistance, which has no application here.

In this case, without regard to whether the application of

the cocaine base amendment would result in a reduction of his

base offense level, the defendant's total offense level would not

change because he is a career offender. As a result, because the

career offender guideline was not lowered by the 2010 Fair

Sentencing Act cocaine base amendment, he is not eligible for a

reduction of his sentence. Therefore, the defendant's motion to

for a sentence reduction (document no. 98) is DENIED.

SO ORDERED.

Date: March 23, 2012 __________________________________

Paul J. Barbadoro

United States District Judge

cc: Elvis Delarosa, pro se

Counsel of Record

2

Case 1:08-cr-00030-PB Document 99 Filed 03/23/12 Page 2 of 2
---

B.5. Net Charge-offs of Real Estate Farm Loans Held by Insured Commercial Banks Year
                  Estimated volume (billions of dollars)
                  Share of outstanding real estate farm loans (percent)Total
                  Q1
                  Q2
                  Q3
                  Q4
                  Total
                  Q1
                  Q2
                  Q3
                  Q41992
          44
          7
          11
          16
          10
          .232
          .038
          .058
          .079
          .0491993
          24
          2
          4
          7
          11
          .121
          .010
          .018
          .035
          .0541994
          10
          1
          1
          3
          6
          .048
          .003
          .003
          .013
          .0261995
          12
          0
          3
          6
          4
          .055
          -.001
          .011
          .027
          .0161996
          7
          0
          1
          2
          4
          .031
          .000
          .003
          .009
          .0171997
          16
          -1
          0
          3
          14
          .064
          -.003
          -.001
          .010
          .0541998
          6
          -1
          3
          0
          5
          .022
          -.004
          .009
          .000
          .0161999
          15
          0
          3
          5
          7
          .051
          -.001
          .011
          .015
          .0222000
          12
          -12
          3
          8
          14
          .037
          -.037
          .009
          .022
          .0402001
          42
          10
          9
          5
          17
          .123
          .030
          .027
          .014
          .0492002
          35
          8
          6
          5
          16
          .097
          .022
          .017
          .014
          .0412003
          32
          4
          6
          8
          14
          .082
          .010
          .015
          .021
          .034 Note. Components might not sum to totals because of rounding.
Quarterly data are as of end of quarter.
   n.a. Not available.


Statistical releases

---

Home Economic research and data  Accessibility Contact Us  Last update: December 30, 2003
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

M. Regina Fahy, et al.

v. Civil No. 05-cv-097-SM

Commissioner, New Hampshire

Department of Safety

O R D E R

 The court requests the parties to submit memoranda (ten page

limit) by November 10, 2005 addressing the following questions:

1. Can the documents sought be compelled from AAMVA by

Rule 45 subpoena duces tecum? 

2. a. If not, why not?

b. If so, how can the Commissioner of the New

Hampshire Department of Safety assert a “law enforcement

investigative techniques . . . privilege” over documents

subject to such a subpoena. 

SO ORDERED.

____________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: October 24, 2005

cc: Stephanie Anne Bray, Esq.

 Melanie Marie Chaput, Esq.

 Nancy J. Smith, Esq.

 Christine C. Wellington, Esq.

Case 1:05-cv-00097-SM Document 28 Filed 10/24/05 Page 1 of 1
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 187 (Thursday, September 25, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 55520]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-22295]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism; Notice of 
Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), 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 material, 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 on Alcohol Abuse and 
Alcoholism Special Emphasis Panel; T32 Institutional Training Grant 
Applications Review.
    Date: November 6, 2008.
    Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Hilton Washington/Rockville, 1750 Rockville Pike, 
Rockville, MD 20852.
    Contact Person: Lorraine Gunzerath, PhD, MBA, Scientific Review 
Officer, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, Office 
of Extramural Activities, Extramural Project Review Branch, 5635 
Fishers Lane, Room 3043, Bethesda, MD 20892-9304, 301-443-2369, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#4e22293b20342b3c2f0e232f27226020272660292138"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a1cdc6d4cfdbc4d3c0e1ccc0c8cd8fcfc8c98fc6ced7">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.271, 
Alcohol Research Career Development Awards for Scientists and 
Clinicians; 93.272, Alcohol National Research Service Awards for 
Research Training; 93.273, Alcohol Research Programs; 93.891, 
Alcohol Research Center Grants, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: September 17, 2008.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. E8-22295 Filed 9-24-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Kelly A. A,yotte, Attorney

General for the State of New Ham sp hire ,

Plaintiff

Case No. 07-cv-415-SM

V.

Customized Structures, Inc. ,

Defendant

ORDER

The court has been advised that Customized Structures, Inc. has filed for relief under the

Bankruptcy Code .

There appears to be no further reason to maintain the file as an open one for statistical

purposes. The Clerk is instructed to statistically close the case.

Nothing contained in this Order shall be considered a dismissal or disposition of this

matter, and should further proceedings become necessary, any party may move to reopen .

SO ORDERED.

January 9, 200 8

cc: Steven M. Notinger, Esq.

Peter C.L. Roth, Esq.

Michael S. Askenaizer, Esq., Chapter 7 Trustee

Case 1:07-cv-00415-SM Document 12 Filed 01/09/08 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND 

EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Plaintiff,

v.

HOR CHONG (DAVID) BOEY,

Defendants

 Civ. No. 01:07-00039-SM

MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AGAINST HOR CHONG (DAVID) BOEY AND 

FOR A PERMANENT INJUNCTION, DISGORGEMENT, CIVIL PENALTIES AND AN

OFFICER AND DIRECTOR BAR

The Plaintiff, Securities and Exchange Commission respectfully moves this court for 

default judgment against defendant Hor Chong (David) Boey under Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b). This 

Motion is supported by the Memorandum submitted herewith and the Declaration of Nancy 

Gegenheimer.

Respectfully submitted, July 1, 2013.

/s/ Nancy J. Gegenheimer 

Nancy J. Gegenheimer

Leslie Hughes

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Securities and Exchange Commission

1801 California Street, Suite 1500

Denver, CO 80202

Phone: 303.844.1000 Fax: 303.844.1068

Case 1:07-cv-00039-SM Document 361 Filed 07/01/13 Page 1 of 3
2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on July 1, 2013, I sent a true copy of the foregoing pleading by 

electronically mailing it through the ECF system to the following persons:

John Richard Baraniak, Jr. jbaraniak@choate.com (Counsel for Patel)

Diana K. Lloyd dlloyd@choate.com (Counsel for Patel)

Peter Bryan Moores pmoores@choate.com (Counsel for Patel)

Jeffrey B. Rudman jeffrey.rudman@wilmerhale.com (Counsel for Jaeger)

Jonathan A. Shapiro jonathan.shapiro@wilmerhale.com (Counsel for Jaeger)

Miranda Hooker miranda.hooker@wilmerhale.com (Counsel for Jaeger)

Peter A. Spaeth peter.spaeth@wilmerhale.com (Counsel for Jaeger)

Bruce A. Singal bsingal@dbslawfirm.com (Counsel for Kay)

John C. Kissinger jkissinger@nkms.com (Counsel for Kay)

Michelle R. Peirce mpeirce@dbslawfirm.com (Counsel for Kay)

Victor W. Dahar vdaharpa@worldnet.att.net (Counsel for Skubisz)

Ann Pauly apauly@gtmllp.com (Counsel for Skubisz)

Mark B. Dubnoff mdubnoff@eapdlaw.com (Counsel for Barber)

Richard McCarthy rmccarthy@eapdlaw.com (Counsel for Barber)

Mark B. Dubnoff mdubnoff@eapdlaw.com (Counsel for Barber)

Michael D. Ramsdell mramsdell@krhlaw.com (Counsel for Barber)

Andrew Good ag@gscboston.com (Counsel for Shanahan)

Philip G. Cormier pc@gscboston.com (Counsel for Shanahan)

Steven M. Gordon sgordon@shaheengordon.com (Counsel for Kirkpatrick)

Lucy J. Karl lkarl@shaheengordon.com (Counsel for Kirkpatrick)

Case 1:07-cv-00039-SM Document 361 Filed 07/01/13 Page 2 of 3
3

Kevin E. Sharkey kjs5@verizon.net (Counsel for Collins)

Jennifer M. Ryan jryan@dwyercollora.com (Counsel for Collins)

Maria R. Durant mdurant@dwyercollora.com (Counsel for Collins)

William H. Kettlewell wkettlewell@dwyercollora.com (Counsel for Collins)

William Contolo wcintolo@aol.com (Counsel for Boey)

S/ Nicole L. Nesvig

Case 1:07-cv-00039-SM Document 361 Filed 07/01/13 Page 3 of 3
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Company's audited financial statements for the period ended December 31,
1995 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial
statements and notes thereto.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                       2,538,002
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   84,168
<ALLOWANCES>                                    16,608
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                78,581
<PP&E>                                         686,460
<DEPRECIATION>                                 214,943
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,818,575
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          871,632
<BONDS>                                        319,521
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                 17,544,715
<COMMON>                                        17,422
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,818,575
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   161,701
<SALES>                                        322,778
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,378,221
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              33,514
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,088,957)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,088,957)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.33)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### Victor ALCOCER, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Ernest C. ROE, Warden, Respondent—Appellee.

No. 02-16071.

D.C. No. CV-99-06341-AWI.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 10, 2003.*

Decided March 18, 2003.

Before CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM**

California state prisoner Victor Alcocer appeals pro se from the denial of his habeas corpus petition, challenging his conviction for attempted murder and assault with a deadly weapon. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.

Alcocer contends that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury’s verdicts, because there was no proof that the handgun he used was operable.1 We review the district court’s ruling de novo, *Dows v. Wood,*211 F.3d 480, 484 (9th Cir.2000), and conclude that this contention lacks merit. Based on the victim’s testimony, a reasonable fact finder could have concluded that the firearm was loaded and that Alcocer expected it to fire. *See Jackson v. Virginia,*443 U.S. 307, 324, 326, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979) (articulating standard for evaluating sufficiency of the evidence for habeas review, and rejecting requirement that prosecution disprove all contrary theories). The state courts’ conclusions were neither contrary to nor an unreasonable application of *Jackson,*and the district court properly denied the petition. *See Woodford v. Visciotti,*537 U.S. 19, 123 S.Ct. 357, 361, 154 L.Ed.2d 279 (2002) (per curiam).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

1

. The state points out that the only aspect of operability Alcocer presented to the California Supreme Court was whether the firearm was loaded. We are permitted, however, to reject petitioner’s unexhausted claim on the merits. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(2).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL INFORMATION
EXTRACTED FROM THE CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND THE CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                       4,746,683
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               21,387,915 
<ALLOWANCES>                                 3,434,014 
<INVENTORY>                                 13,574,861
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            47,753,113
<PP&E>                                      13,652,914
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,418,469
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              73,534,237
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       39,690,720
<BONDS>                                      5,636,127
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       101,156
<OTHER-SE>                                  28,076,066
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                73,534,237
<SALES>                                     27,833,042
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            27,833,042
<CGS>                                       13,487,514
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               13,487,514
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            18,531,200
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               862,698
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,221
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (5,040,149) 
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,565,230
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (6,605,379)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (6,605,379)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.71)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.71)
        

</TABLE>
B.2. Delinquent Non-real-estate Farm Loans Held by Insured Commercial Banks

Share of outstanding farm production

Estimated volume (billions of dollars) loans (percent)

Nonperforming Nonperforming 

Past due Past due

30 to 89 Past due 30 to 89 Past due

days, 90 days, Non- days, 90 days, NonPeriod Total accruing Total accruing accruing Total accuring Total accruing accruing

1994...... .8 .3 .4 .1 .3 2.0 .9 1.1 .2 .9

1995...... .8 .4 .4 .1 .3 2.1 .9 1.1 .3 .9

1996...... 1.0 .5 .5 .1 .4 2.4 1.2 1.3 .3 1.0

1997...... .9 .4 .5 .1 .4 2.0 .9 1.1 .2 .9

1998...... 1.0 .5 .5 .1 .4 2.2 1.0 1.2 .3 .9

1999...... .9 .3 .6 .1 .5 2.1 .8 1.3 .2 1.1

2000...... 1.0 .4 .6 .1 .5 2.1 .9 1.2 .2 1.0

2001...... 1.3 .5 .7 .1 .6 2.7 1.2 1.5 .2 1.3

2002...... 1.2 .5 .7 .1 .6 2.6 1.0 1.6 .3 1.3

2003...... 1.0 .4 .7 .1 .5 2.3 .8 1.5 .3 1.2

2004...... .8 .3 .5 .1 .4 1.6 .5 1.0 .2 .9

1998: Q2... 1.1 .5 .6 .2 .4 2.4 1.1 1.3 .5 .8

 Q3... 1.0 .4 .6 .2 .4 2.1 .8 1.3 .4 .9

 Q4... 1.0 .5 .5 .1 .4 2.2 1.0 1.2 .3 .9

1999: Q1... 1.6 .9 .7 .2 .4 3.7 2.1 1.5 .5 1.0

 Q2... 1.3 .5 .7 .2 .5 2.8 1.2 1.6 .5 1.1

 Q3... 1.0 .4 .6 .2 .5 2.2 .8 1.4 .4 1.0

 Q4... .9 .3 .6 .1 .5 2.1 .8 1.3 .2 1.1

2000: Q1... 1.3 .6 .6 .2 .5 3.0 1.5 1.5 .4 1.1

 Q2... 1.0 .4 .6 .1 .4 2.2 .9 1.3 .3 1.0

 Q3... .9 .3 .6 .1 .5 1.9 .7 1.2 .2 1.0

 Q4... 1.0 .4 .6 .1 .5 2.1 .9 1.2 .2 1.0

2001: Q1... 1.7 1.0 .8 .2 .6 3.9 2.2 1.7 .4 1.3

 Q2... 1.4 .6 .8 .2 .6 2.9 1.2 1.8 .4 1.3

 Q3... 1.3 .5 .8 .2 .7 2.8 1.0 1.8 .4 1.4

 Q4... 1.3 .5 .7 .1 .6 2.7 1.2 1.5 .2 1.3

2002: Q1... 1.7 .9 .8 .2 .6 3.9 2.1 1.8 .4 1.4

 Q2... 1.4 .5 .8 .2 .6 2.9 1.2 1.8 .5 1.3

 Q3... 1.3 .4 .8 .2 .6 2.7 .9 1.8 .4 1.4

 Q4... 1.2 .5 .7 .1 .6 2.6 1.0 1.6 .3 1.3

2003: Q1... 1.7 .9 .8 .2 .6 4.0 2.1 1.9 .4 1.5

 Q2... 1.4 .5 .9 .2 .7 3.1 1.1 2.0 .5 1.5

 Q3... 1.2 .4 .8 .2 .6 2.7 .9 1.8 .4 1.4

 Q4... 1.0 .4 .7 .1 .5 2.3 .8 1.5 .3 1.2

2004: Q1... 1.3 .6 .7 .2 .5 3.0 1.3 1.6 .4 1.2

 Q2... .9 .3 .6 .1 .5 2.1 .7 1.3 .3 1.0

 Q3... .8 .3 .5 .1 .4 1.7 .6 1.1 .2 .9

 Q4... .8 .3 .5 .1 .4 1.6 .5 1.0 .2 .9

2005: Q1... 1.0 .5 .5 .1 .4 2.3 1.2 1.1 .3 .9

 Q2... .8 .3 .5 .1 .4 1.6 .6 1.0 .3 .8

 Q3... .7 .3 .4 .1 .3 1.3 .5 .8 .2 .6

 Note. Data are estimates of the national totals for non-real-estate farm loans. Reported amounts are adjusted to exclude foreign

results for large banks that report farm delinquencies on a consolidated basis and for small banks that are allowed to report

delinquencies according to their internal definition of agricultural loans. Yearly data are as of December 31. Quarterly data

are as of end of quarter.

22
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Criminal No. 03-cr-082-JD

Mohammed Reza Enayat

NOTICE OF RULING

Re: Document No. 84, Motion for Bail/Release Pending Appeal

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3143

Ruling:

The defendant was found guilty by a jury based on

substantial evidence introduced by the government. He

faces deportation and therefore in the opinion of the

court is a flight risk. The appeal is taken in part to

delay his deportation and in the opinion of the court

will not result in reversal, a new trial, a sentence that

does not include incarceration, or a reduced sentence

that will be less than the expected duration of the

appeal process. 

______________________________

Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

United States District Judge

August 1, 2006 

cc: Mohammed Reza Enayat, pro se

Aixa Maldonado-Quinones

Terry L. Ollila, Esquire

U.S. Probation

U.S. Marshal

Case 1:03-cr-00082-JD Document 88 Filed 08/01/06 Page 1 of 1