alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the Court has determined that this

opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under

the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

For the Fifth Circuit

No. 96-30019

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee,

VERSUS

JEFFERY R. ACKLEN

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Western District of Louisiana

(93-CV-1043)

August 9, 1996

Before SMITH, DUHÉ, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:1

Acklen pleaded guilty to distribution of methamphetamine and

conspiring to manufacture methamphetamine and was sentenced on the

basis of d-methamphetamine. His motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 was

denied by the district court; and we vacated that judgment and
2United states v. Acklen, 47 F.3d 739 (5th Cir. 1995).

2

remanded.2 On remand, the district court again denied relief. We

affirm.

Originally Acklen claimed trial counsel was ineffective for

failure to contend at sentencing that the drug involved was lmethamphetamine and not d-methamphetamine. He made only conclusory

allegations however. We remanded stating:

On remand, Acklen should tender some specific, verified

basis or evidence, beyond his mere naked assertion or

belief, that the drug was in fact l-methamphetamine. If

Acklen makes such a showing, he may be entitled to

limited discovery and an evidentiary hearing.

On remand, Appellant made no such showing. He simply argued

that since the isomer of the drug could not be identified the rule

of lenity required that the drug be regarded as l-methamphetamine.

The district court recognized that the motion could be denied on

that basis alone and so held. However, it allowed Appellant an

evidentiary hearing at which the evidence established that the drug

involved was made with a precursor chemical that would have

produced a 50-50 mixture of d-methamphetamine and lmethamphetamine. Accordingly, the district court correctly found

that Acklen had failed to show that he had been prejudiced by his

attorney’s failure to raise the issue.

Going even further, the district court held that Acklen also
3

failed to demonstrate prejudice because even had trial counsel

raised the issue, there was no reasonable probability that the

court would have been persuaded to adopt what would have been a

novel argument at that time, citing United States v. Seyfert, 67

F.3d 544, 549 (5th Cir. 1995). We see no error in this holding.

AFFIRMED.
- Langley Home
- About Langley   - Overview
  - Wonder With Langley
  - Leadership and Organizations
  - Doing Business
  - History
  - Media Resources
  - Annual Reports
  - Contact
- Expertise and Capabilities   - Overview
  - Aeronautics Research Directorate
  - Engineering Directorate
  - Research Directorate
  - Research Services Directorate
  - Safety Mission Assurance Center
  - Science Directorate 
  - Space Technology and Exploration Directorate
  - Systems Analysis and Concepts Directorate
- Education and STEM
- Multimedia   - News
  - Images
  - Video
- Visit   - Virtual Tour
  - Visitor Center

# Katherine Johnson: A NASA Trailblazer

## 

#### 

#### 

## Johnson's Incredible Life and Legacy

NASA mathematician, trailblazer in the quest for racial equality, contributor to our nation’s first triumphs in human spaceflight and champion of STEM education, Katherine G. Johnson stands among NASA’s most inspirational figures. Learn more about Katherine Johnson, the NASA Research Mathematician and one of the "Hidden Figures."

Article5 min readKatherine Johnson BiographyArticle5 min readShe Was a Computer When Computers Wore SkirtsArticle3 min readKatherine Johnson: The Girl Who Loved to CountArticle4 min readWho Was Katherine Johnson? (Grades K-4)

## Discover More From NASA

Langley Research Center

The History of NASA Langley Research Center

Explore NASA’s History

Education and STEM at Langley
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. RANDY GELB.

May 19, 1987.

Petition for certification denied. (See 212 *N.J.Super.*582)
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, the undersigned officer of Stonepath
Group, Inc. (the "Company") hereby certifies that the Company's Annual Report on
Form 10-K/A for the period ending December 31, 2003 (the "Report") fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) 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: February 9, 2005                       By: /s/ Jason Totah
                                             -----------------------------
                                             Jason Totah
                                             Chief Executive Officer

     This certification is made solely for purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
subject to the knowledge standard set forth therein, and not for any other
purpose. It is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure
document.

     A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to Stonepath Group, Inc. and will be retained by Stonepath Group,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
**Exhibit 32(a)**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF****CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 1350**

 

 

I, J.M. Haggar, III, Chief Executive Officer of Haggar Corp. (the “Company”), hereby certify that the accompanying report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2005, and filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. I further certify that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Dated: August 9, 2005 |                          |   |
|-----------------------|-------------------------------|--------|
|                  | /s/ J.M. Haggar, III          |   |
|                  | J.M. Haggar, III              |   |
|                  | Chief Executive Officer       |   |
|                  | (principal executive officer) |   |

 

1
EXHIBIT 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Howard W. Robin, Chief Executive Officer of Sirna Therapeutics, Inc. (the Company), and I, Marvin Tancer, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, do hereby certify as follows:



|1. |  | The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2003 (the Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) and 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.
|-- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have executed this Certification this 10thday of November, 2003.



/s/ Howard W. RobinHoward W. Robin President and Chief Executive Officer/s/ Marvin TancerMarvin Tancer Vice President of Operations and Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-K
FOR THE 12 MONTH PERIOD ENDED APRIL 30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FORM 10-K
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> USD

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             MAY-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          55,844
<SECURITIES>                                    19,879
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,172
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (154)
<INVENTORY>                                      2,498
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                84,536
<PP&E>                                           3,931
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (1,625)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  87,194
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            6,249
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            19
<OTHER-SE>                                      80,926
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    87,194
<SALES>                                         25,082
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                25,082
<CGS>                                            9,455
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    9,455
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                19,813
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 183
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,428)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       100
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,910)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,910)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.44)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**








**Section
      1350 Certification of Chief Financial Officer**









In connection with the quarterly report of Nano-Proprietary, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2006, as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Douglas
      P, Baker, the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
      18
      U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002, that:




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




2.     The information contained in this Report fairly
      presents, in all material respects, the financial conditions and results of
      operations of the Company as of the dates and for the periods expressed in
      the
      report.









Date: 
                July 28, 2006
            /s/ Douglas P.
                Baker
              Douglas
                P. Baker
              Chief
                Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.2 

 

**Certification of Executive Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer**

 

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Books-A-Million, Inc. (the “Company”) hereby certifies, to the best of such officer’s knowledge, that:

 

(i)         the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended May 3, 2008 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as        amended; and

 

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

 

| Dated: September 8, 2009 |
|--------------------------|

 

| /s/ Douglas G. Markham                                    |
|-----------------------------------------------------------|
| Douglas G. Markham                                        |
| Executive Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer |
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 09** 
**- 6844** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v.

STANLEY HICKMAN , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis trict of North Carolina , at Raleigh

. Terrence W. Boyle , District Judge. ( 5:93

- cr
- 00144

- BO

- 3 )

Submitted : March 10, 2010 Decided: April 8 , 2010

Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL , Circuit Judges , and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirm ed by un publis hed per curiam opinion

.

Stanley Hickman, Appellant Pro Se. Anne Margaret Hayes, Assistant United States Attorney, Robert Jack Higdon, Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not bindi ng precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Stanley Hickman appeals the district court ’ s order
denying his motion to correct the presentence report. **∗**

AFFIRMED We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,

we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United
States v. Hickman , No. 5:93

- cr
- 00144

- BO

- 3 (E.D.N.C. Mar. 25,
2009) . 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.

**∗** We previously remanded this case for the district court to determine whether Hickman demonstrated excusable neglect or good cause warranting an extension of the appeal period. Without giving Hickman an opportunity to r espond, t he district court found no excusable neglect. B ecause the time limits of Fed. R. App. P. 4(b) are not jurisdictional, United States v. Urutyan , 564 F.3d 679, 683

- 86 (4th Cir. 2009), and the g overnment has not moved to dismiss the appeal , we decli ne to dismiss the appeal as untimely and instead address the merits of the appeal

.
Ex-99.4
Aggregate Statement of Principal and Interest Distribution to
Certificatesholders.

                                                                    Ending
 Class        Interest          Principle          Losses           Balance
-------    ---------------   ----------------   -------------   ----------------

A1            348,800.02                  -               -        5,450,000.00
A10           588,504.46       (588,504.46)               -        9,040,636.01
A11         2,774,908.15                  -               -       39,641,546.00
A12                    -                  -               -        1,468,205.00
A13           196,923.05       (196,923.05)               -        3,025,141.82
A14         1,345,879.40     (1,345,879.40)               -       20,675,469.16
A2          1,259,212.47                  -               -       18,655,000.00
A3          2,676,172.45                  -               -       39,647,000.00
A4            452,317.47                  -               -        6,701,000.00
A5             19,074.96                  -               -                   -
A6          2,055,779.03       7,378,421.07               -       28,144,932.29
A7          2,053,127.19       6,877,643.03               -       26,234,718.31
A8            569,481.98       1,897,308.28               -        7,237,268.30
A9            143,747.48                  -               -                   -
B1            369,215.68          60,615.89               -        5,436,643.96
B2            133,551.36          21,925.75               -        1,966,523.23
B3             70,701.31          11,607.37               -        1,041,065.76
B4             70,701.31          11,607.37               -        1,041,065.76
B5             23,567.10           3,869.13               -          347,021.91
B6             39,279.88           6,448.76               -          578,390.24
PO                     -         177,125.99               -        1,586,394.31
RL                     -                  -               -                   -
RU                  0.60                  -               -                   -
X             449,399.67                  -               -                   -
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Don M. Bailey, hereby certify pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule
15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that the Quarterly Report of Questcor Pharmaceuticals, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2011 fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011 fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and
results of operations of Questcor Pharmaceuticals, Inc.



|                     |  |  |  |  |  |                                                    
|-------------------- |  |  |  |  |  | ---------------------------------------------------
|Date: April 27, 2011 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ Don M. Bailey                                  
|                     |  |  |  |  |  | Don M. Bailey President and
Chief Executive Officer

This certification accompanies the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule
15d-14(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and shall not be deemed filed by Questcor Pharmaceuticals, Inc. for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
# 							Native American Heritage Month						

## Native American Heritage Month

33 Images

Go To Gallery

Go To Gallery

## Latest Content

Explore content related to NASA and Native American Heritage Month.

Native Earth, Native Sky CRS-29 Payload
Article

NASA’s Jeremiah O’Callahan Values Native American Roots and Community Outreach
Article

NASA’s Chas Hoff Connects with his Native American Roots
Article

                            2                        
Next

## Discover More Topics From NASA

LGBTQ PrideHispanic Heritage MonthAsian American and Native Hawaiian Pacific Islander Heritage MonthBlack History MonthWomen's History Month
No. 87-6492.

#### Adams *v.*Department of the Navy.

C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari denied.
Euro Technology Outfitters

            INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THIS STATE OF NEVADA
        20,000,000 SHARES COMMON STOCK AUTHORIZED, $.001 PAR VALUE
THIS
CERTIFIES
THAT                                                   SEE REVERSE FOR
                                                       CERTAIN DEFINITIONS

IS THE OWNER OF


          FULLY PAID AND NON-ASSESSABLE SHARES OF COMMON STOCK OF
                        Euro Technology Outfitters

     transferable on the books of the corporation in person or by duly
 authorized attorney upon surrender of this certificate properly endorsed.
This certificate and the shares represented hereby are subject to the laws
of this State of Nevada, and to the Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws
  of the Corporation, as now hereafter amended.  This certificate is not
 valid unless countersigned by the Transfer Agent.  WITNESS the facsimile
seal of the Corporation and the signature of its duly authorized officers.

DATE

                        Euro Technology Outfitters
                              Corporate Seal
                                  Nevada
                                                              SECRETARY
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

___________________________

No. 02

- 19

- 00451

- CV

___________________________

Original Proceeding

Trial Court No. 1288894

Before Wallach, J.; S udderth, C.J.; and Gabriel, J.

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion 

### I N RE 

### K EVIN 

### P HELPS 

### , Relator2 MEMORANDUM OPINION

The court has considered relator’s petition for writ of mandamus and the real

party in interest ’ s response and is of the opinion that the petition should be dismissed

as moot . Accor dingly, relator’s petition for writ of mandamus is dismissed as moot

.

Per Curiam

Delivered : January 6, 2020
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 207 (Wednesday, October 27, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 66076]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-27131]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission


Combined Notice of Filings <greek-i>2

October 20, 2010.
    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural 
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Docket Numbers: RP10-1018-003.
    Applicants: Paiute Pipeline Company.
    Description: Paiute Pipeline Company resubmits First Revised Sheet 
No. 2 et al., Third Revised Volume No 1-A, to be effective 11/1/2010.
    Filed Date: 10/20/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101020-5004.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 25, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-1274-001.
    Applicants: MIGC LLC.
    Description: MIGC LLC submits tariff filing per 154.203: MIGC LLC 
Revised Order 587-U Compliance Filing to be effective 11/1/2010.
    Filed Date: 10/20/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101020-5052.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, November 1, 2010.

    Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance 
with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 
CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing 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. Such protests 
must be filed on or before 5 p.m. Eastern Time on the specified comment 
date. Anyone filing a protest must serve a copy of that document on all 
the parties to the proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests 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 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 e-mail 
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#95d3d0c7d6dafbf9fcfbf0c6e0e5e5fae7e1d5f3f0e7f6bbf2fae3"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f0b6b5a2b3bf9e9c999e95a38580809f8284b096958293de979f86">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-27131 Filed 10-26-10; 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>