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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.

RANDY MACARIO ANCHETA,

Defendant - Appellant.

No. 24-2027

D.C. No.

3:12-cr-00015-HDM-CLB -1

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Nevada

Howard D. McKibben, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted August 20, 2024**

Before: S.R. THOMAS, RAWLINSON, and COLLINS, Circuit Judges.

Randy Macario Ancheta appeals pro se from the district court’s order 

denying his motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). 

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Ancheta argues that he presented extraordinary and compelling reasons for 

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

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

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

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

FILED

AUG 27 2024

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 24-2027

compassionate release, including that he is serving an unusually long sentence, has

caretaking responsibilities, has suffered abuse in prison, and has rehabilitated. The 

district court concluded that, even if Ancheta had shown extraordinary and 

compelling reasons, the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors did not support relief given the 

violent nature of the underlying offenses. This was not an abuse of discretion. See 

United States v. Keller, 2 F.4th 1278, 1281, 1284 (9th Cir. 2021) (stating standard 

of review and explaining that a district court may deny compassionate release on 

the basis of the § 3553(a) factors alone); see also United States v. Robertson, 895 

F.3d 1206, 1213 (9th Cir. 2018) (the district court abuses its discretion only if its 

decision is illogical, implausible, or not supported by the record). Moreover, 

contrary to Ancheta’s contention, the government’s failure to make arguments 

regarding the § 3553(a) factors and Ancheta’s rehabilitation did not require the 

district court to conclude that those factors weighed in Ancheta’s favor.

AFFIRMED.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya

Civil Action No. 11–cv–02721–MSK–KMT

BRUCE W. JONES,

Plaintiff,

v. 

MARK KELLAR, individually and in his official capacity as the health service Administrator at

FCI-Florence,

LISA MCDERMOTT, individually and in her official Capacity as Assistant Health Services

Administrator at FCI-Florence,

PETER BLUDWORTH, individually and in his official capacity as associate warden at FCIFlorence,

MIKE GOODIN, individually and in his official capacity as chief parmacist at FCI-Florence,

DR. DAVID ALFRED, individually and in his official capacity as clinical director of FCIFlorence,

DR. GEORGE SANTINI, individually and in his official capacity as staff Physician at FCIFlorenece,

CARI RITTER, individually and in her official capacity as mid-level Provider, at FCI-Florence,

MRS. A. VINYARD, individually and in her official capacity as Physician assistant at FCIFlorence,

GILBERTA TRUJILLO, individually and in her official capacity as secretary of medical at FCI

Florence,

BARBRA BATULIS, individually and in her official capacity as Pueblo Alpha unit Counsel at

FCI Florence,

MR. GRIFFIN, individually and in his official capacity as Correctional Officer at FCI-Florence,

JOHN DOE, individually and in his official capacity as Chief Health Programs at North Central

Region, Leavenworth, Kansas, and

DR. JAMES PELTON, individually and in his official capacity as Region Medical Director at

North Central Region, Leavenworth, Kansas,

Defendants.

MINUTE ORDER

ORDER ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KATHLEEN M. TAFOYA

Case 1:11-cv-02721-MSK-KMT Document 62 Filed 04/26/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
2

Plaintiff’s “Motion for Sanctions for Tampering, Delaying and Denying Legal Mail” (Doc. No.

60, filed April 25, 2012) is DENIED. The issues about which Plaintiff complains are unrelated

to the allegations in his Amended Prisoner Complaint. (Doc. No. 27.) In addition, the court

declines to interfere in the day-to-day activities of prison administration. To the extent Plaintiff

wishes to amend his complaint, he must file a motion pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2) and

attach the proposed amended complaint to the motion. The proposed amended complaint must

stand alone; it must contain all of the plaintiff’s claims. 

Dated: April 26, 2012

Case 1:11-cv-02721-MSK-KMT Document 62 Filed 04/26/12 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
#### Hadassah Thompson BOYER, as Executrix, etc., et al., Appellants, v. Leo J. WEGMAN, Treasurer of the State of Iowa, et al.

No. 11050.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Nov. 9, 1937.

Don Barnes and C. E. Richman, both of Cedar Rapids, Iowa, for appellants.

I. H. Van Winkle, Atty. Gen., State of Oregon, Dean H. Dickinson, of Portland, Or., Casper Schenk and John H. Mitchell, both of Des Moines, Iowa, Charles W. Wilson, of Spencer, Iowa, and Carl W. Kirwin, of Cedar Rapids, Iowa, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal docketed and dismissed without costs to either party in this court, attorney fee having been waived, pursuant to stipulation of parties.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7401

SABASTIAN HASKINS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus PAGE TRUE, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (CA-01-1667-AM) Submitted: February 6, 2003 Decided: February 12, 2003 Before WILKINS, MICHAEL, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Sabastian Haskins, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Sabastian Haskins seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as untimely filed his petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a habeas corpus proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). When, as here, a district court dismisses a § 2254 petition solely on procedural grounds, a certificate of appealability will not issue unless the petitioner can demonstrate both “(1) ‘that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right’ and (2) ‘that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling.’” Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 684 (4th Cir.) (quoting Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)), cert. denied , 534 U.S. 941 (2001). We have reviewed the record and conclude for the reasons stated by the district court that Haskins has not made the requisite sh owing. SeeHaskins v. True , No. CA-01-1667-AM (E.D. Va. filed May 29, 2002, entered May 30, 2002). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<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>                                          15,516
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    9,514
<ALLOWANCES>                                       825
<INVENTORY>                                     23,285
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                53,341
<PP&E>                                         281,262
<DEPRECIATION>                                  76,666
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 279,368
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           63,173
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      21,947
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   279,368
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               712,415
<CGS>                                          582,043
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  664,378
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                13,632
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              15,131
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  7,202
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              7,202
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,202
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
#### Max CALDWELL v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June Term 1953.

Certiorari denied without opinion.
#### BARNES v. BARNES.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June Term 1953.

Dismissed without opinion.
Exhibit 99.3

LOGO

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PETROLEUM ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS

As independent petroleum engineers, we hereby consent to the inclusion of the information included in this Form 20-F with respect to the
Fayetteville Shale oil and gas reserves of BHP Billiton Petroleum as of June 30, 2011. We hereby further consent to all references to our firm included in this Form 20-F and to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
Forms 20-F of such information.



NETHERLAND, SEWELL & ASSOCIATES, INC.By:

/s/ C.H. (Scott) Rees IIIC.H. (Scott) Rees III, P.E.
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer


Dallas, Texas

August 19, 2011



Please be advised that the digital document you are viewing is provided by Netherland, Sewell &
Associates, Inc. (NSAI) as a convenience to our clients. The digital document is intended to be substantively the same as the original signed document maintained by NSAI. The digital document is subject to the parameters, limitations, and conditions
stated in the original document. In the event of any differences between the digital document and the original document, the original document shall control and supersede the digital document.
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
**1137 KA 11-01039**  PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., FAHEY, SCONIERS, WHALEN, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,
V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
JASON LAWSON, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. (APPEAL NO. 9.)

LINDA M. CAMPBELL, SYRACUSE, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. WILLIAM J. FITZPATRICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SYRACUSE (VICTORIA M. WHITE OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Onondaga County Court (Jeffrey R. Merrill, A.J.), rendered October 5, 2010. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of burglary in the third degree. It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Same Memorandum as in People v Lawson ([appeal No. 7] ___ AD3d ___ [Jan. 2, 2015]).

Entered: January 2, 2015 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                   APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                     DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                                   120
<SECURITIES>                                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                                          1,343
<ALLOWANCES>                                               0
<INVENTORY>                                            1,767
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                       3,472
<PP&E>                                                23,260
<DEPRECIATION>                                         7,090
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                        19,693
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                  3,058
<BONDS>                                                    0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                      0
<PREFERRED>                                                1
<COMMON>                                                  69
<OTHER-SE>                                            16,565
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                          19,693
<SALES>                                                 5,132
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                        5,132
<CGS>                                                   4,227
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                           4,227
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                        5,018
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                        214
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                        (4,327)
<INCOME-TAX>                                               (3)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                    (4,324)
<DISCONTINUED>                                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                             0
<CHANGES>                                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                                           (4,324)
<EPS-BASIC>                                             (0.33)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                           (0.33)


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.2

               CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                       AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


The undersigned  hereby certifies in her capacity as Chief Financial  Officer of
Belrose Capital Fund LLC (the Fund), that based on her knowledge:

(a)  the Annual Report of the Fund on Form 10-K for the year ended  December 31,
     2004 (the Report) fully complies with the  requirements of Section 13(a) of
     the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(b)  the information  contained in the Report fairly  presents,  in all material
     respects, the financial condition and the results of operations of the Fund
     for such period.



Date:  March 15, 2005




                                     /s/ Michelle A. Green
                                     ---------------------
                                     Michelle A. Green
                                     Chief Financial Officer





A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided  to the Fund  and will be  retained  by the Fund and  furnished  to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
`[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1396 Referred in House (RFH)]







110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1396


_______________________________________________________________________


                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           December 17, 2007

             Referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT


 
 To authorize a major medical facility project to modernize inpatient 
wards at the Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Atlanta, 
                                Georgia.

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

SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF MAJOR MEDICAL FACILITY PROJECT, ATLANTA, 
              GEORGIA.

    The Secretary of Veterans Affairs may carry out a major medical 
facility project for modernization of inpatient wards at the Department 
of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Atlanta, Georgia, in an amount not 
to exceed $20,534,000.

            Passed the Senate December 13, 2007.

            Attest:

                                                NANCY ERICKSON,

                                                             Secretary.`
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to the incorporationby reference in Amendment No. 1 to Registration Statement Nos. 333-163856-01 and 333-163856 of First National Master Note Trust and First National Funding LLC on Form S-3 of our reports dated March 26, 2012, relating toManagement’s Report on Assessment of Compliance with Servicing Criteria Pursuant to Item 1122 of Regulation AB for First National Bank of Omaha, appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of First National MasterNote Trust and First National Funding, LLC for the year ended December 31, 2011. 

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Omaha, Nebraska 

March 26,2012
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                         482,064
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,587,616
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     79,759
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,248,771
<PP&E>                                       2,784,044
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,989,043
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,604,077
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          183,791
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     2,813,248
<OTHER-SE>                                     607,038
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,604,077
<SALES>                                        922,050
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,181,598
<CGS>                                        1,351,915
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               409,046
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,375
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                478,985
<INCOME-TAX>                                    55,192
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   423,793
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit  4.2


 


PROMISSORY NOTE


 


	US $ _550,000__	Date: May 1, 2014


 


FOR
VALUE RECEIVED, Global Food Technologies, Inc, a Delaware corporation (“Maker”) promises to pay _KATHY DAUDISTIEL__,
an individual, (“Holder”) the principal amount outstanding, advanced and loaned under this note up to the sum of Five
Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars_ ($_550,000_) in lawful money of the United States of America, in ONE YEAR
from the date of this note entered above (”Maturity Date”). The term may be extended at each maturity for an additional
year at the option of the Maker unless called for payment by Holder 90 days prior to the next maturity. Such sum outstanding will
bear simple interest at the rate of THREE (3%) per annum computed on a 365 day year. Interest shall be payable in Common Stock
of the Maker at the rate of $2.39 per share and shall be payable at maturity. 


 


This note
is made in response to the advance of $230,000 on this date by Holder. The Holder in good faith will further advance $320,000 in
tranches of $ 80,000 each, due on the first day of each subsequent month. Failure by Holder to make any or all of the additional
advances shall not compromise or invalidate any of the other terms of this note.


 


Maker shall
be liable to Holder only for the sum of the principal advances made and not repaid and the accumulated interest earned thereon.


 


This note
may be prepaid in whole or part at any time without penalty or bonus. 


 


This Note may not be assigned by the Holder
without the prior written consent of Maker.


 


This Note
is convertible in full or in part into fully-paid and non-assessable shares of Common Stock of Maker, at any time at the option
of the Holder. Principal may be converted into shares of Common Stock at the initial conversion price of Two Dollars and Thirty
Nine Cents ($2.39) per share. The conversion price shall be adjusted for any reclassification or recapitalization of its Common
Stock.


 


This note is made and delivered in the
State of California and shall be construed and enforced in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of California.
Any action or proceeding relating to this note will be brought exclusively in the State Courts in Kings County, California.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Promissory
Note is executed on the date first written above.


 


GLOBAL FOOD TECHNOLOGIES, INC.


 


	By:	/s/ Keith Meeks	 
	 	Keith Meeks, President	 
	 	802 N Douty St, Hanford CA 93230