alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Rubi Figueroa MARCANO, also known as Hiram Camano, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 02-1560.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Sept. 4, 2003.

*109John Burke, Brooklyn, NY, for Defendant-Appellant.

Jonathan S. Abernethy, Assistant U.S. Attorney (James B. Comey, U.S. Attorney, on the brief; Gary Stein, Assistant U.S. Attorney, of counsel), Southern District of New York, New York, NY, for Appellee.

PRESENT: MESKILL, MINER, and STRAUB, Circuit Judges.

SUMMARY ORDER

Rubi Figueroa Marcano appeals from the sentence imposed on him by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Naomi Reice Buchwald, Judge), following his plea of guilty to one count of passport fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1542, and one count of illegally re-entering the United States after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. §§ 1326(a) and(b). We affirm.

At sentencing, Marcano sought a downward departure pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 5H1.4, which provides that “an extraordinary physical impairment may be a reason to impose a sentence below the applicable guideline range.” Marcano alleged that gunshot wounds dating from 1992 and 1996 have caused him to suffer “constant numbness, extreme shooting pain, muscle loss, and the ability to stand, all in his right leg.” The District Court denied the downward departure because it found that Marcano’s alleged impairment was not sufficiently extraordinary, and thereafter sentenced Marcano to an incarcerative term of 57 months, the bottom of the applicable guideline range.

Marcano’s sole argument on appeal is that his sentence is invalid because, “while the [District] Court and the Government responded to Appellant’s departure motion to the extent that it was based upon his *current medical condition,*i.e., treatment would be provided as necessary, they failed to recognize Marcano’s right to a departure based upon [the Bureau of Prison]’s failure to treat him *in the past.’’*Appellant’s Br. at 8 (emphasis added). This failure of treatment by the BOP allegedly occurred during Marcano’s detainment in July 1996 in the District of Rhode Island, where he was charged with and eventually convicted of a prior instance of illegal re-entry.

*110Our review of the record convinces us that Marcano failed to raise below the argument that the BOP’s past failure of treatment serves as an independent basis for a downward departure. Although Marcano did point to his past experience with the BOP, it was only to underscore his contention that the BOP was ill-equipped to treat his *current*medical condition. Having thus failed to raise before the District Court the specific ground for departure he now presses on appeal, and there being no showing of plain error-indeed, Marcano has not cited a single case in which a downward departure was granted solely on the basis of a defendant’s failure to receive appropriate medical treatment while imprisoned on a prior, unrelated offense-Marcano cannot succeed in this line of argument. *See United States v. Miller,*263 F.3d 1, 4 (2d Cir.2001) (per curiam).

The judgment of the District Court is hereby AFFIRMED.
* Pursuant to 5 TH CIR. R. 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 5 TH C IR. R. 47.5.4.

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-51491 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. MICHAEL STEVEN QUESADA Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:05-CR-2756-1 Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Michael Steven Quesada has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Quesada has not filed a response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR. R. 42.2. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D October 25, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk
Email completed form to jsc-exhibits-desk@mail.nasa.gov Page 1 of 2

 Johnson Space Center (JSC) Digital Exhibits – Loan Program

Requester Information

First Name: Last Name:

Email: Phone:

Organization/Company:

City: State:

Event Information

Event Name:

Write a brief description of your event:

What is the projected attendance of your event?

Will admission be charged for this event?
Email completed form to jsc-exhibits-desk@mail.nasa.gov Page 2 of 2

 Johnson Space Center (JSC) Digital Exhibits – Loan Program

How do you plan to use the exhibit in your program or event?

How long will the exhibit be on display?

Will the exhibit exceed 20% of the total space at the event?

Available Artifacts

Select Artifacts (You will receive an email with a link to download artifacts)

 Gold Visor (Artifact #1)

 No Visor (Artifact #2)
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2249 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2249

To amend the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act to provide for 
                      emergency food and shelter.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 29, 2004

 Ms. Collins (for herself and Mr. Lieberman) introduced the following 
      bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                          Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act to provide for 
                      emergency food and shelter.

    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 ``Emergency Food and Shelter Act of 
2004''.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    Section 322 of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act (42 
U.S.C. 11352) is amended to read as follows:

``SEC. 322. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    ``There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this title 
$160,000,000 for fiscal year 2005, $170,000,000 for fiscal year 2006, 
and $180,000,000 for fiscal year 2007.''.

SEC. 3. NAME CHANGE TO NOMINATING ORGANIZATION.

    Section 301(b) of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act 
(42 U.S.C. 11331(b)) is amended by striking paragraph (5) and inserting 
the following:
            ``(5) United Jewish Communities.''.

SEC. 4. PARTICIPATION OF HOMELESS INDIVIDUALS ON LOCAL BOARDS.

    Section 316(a) of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act 
(42 U.S.C. 11346(a)) is amended by striking paragraph (6) and inserting 
the following:
            ``(6) guidelines requiring each local board to include in 
        their membership not less than 1 homeless individual, former 
        homeless individual, homeless advocate, or recipient of food or 
        shelter services, except that such guidelines may waive the 
        requirement of this paragraph for any board that is unable to 
        meet such requirement if the board otherwise consults with 
        homeless individuals, former homeless individuals, homeless 
        advocates, or recipients of food or shelter services.''.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.3

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

            Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 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/A of the Company
      for the quarterly period ended October 30, 2004 (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: April 28, 2005                       /s/ Richard S. Wallington
                                                  -------------------------
                                                  Richard S. Wallington
                                                  Chief Financial Officer

            The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany
the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and is not being filed for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and
is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether
made before or after the date hereof, regardless of the general incorporation
language in such filing.

                                       33
DENY and Opinion Filed May 9, 2022 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-22-00229-CV 

IN RE HEARTLAND EXPRESS, INC. OF IOWA, Relator 

Original Proceeding from the 95th District Court 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. DC-18-00697-D 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Justices Osborne, Partida-Kipness, and Smith 

Opinion by Justice Smith 

Before the Court is relator’s March 18, 2022 petition for writ of mandamus. 

In the petition, relator challenges the trial court’s order granting real party in 

interest’s motion to compel discovery. 

Entitlement to mandamus relief requires relator to show that the trial court 

clearly abused its discretion and that relator lacks an adequate appellate remedy. In 

re Prudential Ins. Co., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). 

Based on our review of the petition, response, reply, and the record, we conclude 

that relator has failed to demonstrate an abuse of discretion. See TEX. R. APP. P. 

52.8(a). 

 
 –2– 

Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus, and we lift the stay 

issued by this Court’s March 18, 2022 order. 

220229F.P05 

/Craig Smith/ 

CRAIG SMITH 

JUSTICE
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Richard RUNYON, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 02-4905.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted July 2, 2003.

Decided Aug. 28, 2003.

*260William D. Levine, St. Clair & Levine, Huntington, West Virginia, for Appellant. Kasey Warner, United States Attorney, Steven I. Loew, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

Richard Runyon appeals his convictions and sentence for conspiracy to commit bank fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 371 (2000); two counts of aiding and abetting bank fraud, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 1344 (2000); and one substantive count of bank fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1344 (2000). Runyon claims, in part, that the district court erred in rejecting his plea agreement with the Government without giving a reason for such rejection.

However, our review of the record discloses no improper motivation for the rejection of the plea agreement. Accordingly, we conclude that any error in failing to disclose the reasons for rejection of the plea agreement is harmless.

We affirm the judgment of the district court. 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.

*AFFIRMED.*
<PAGE>
                                  EXHIBIT 99.1

                            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 accompanying Annual Report of Nimbus Group, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2002, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, ILIA LEKACH, Principal 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, to the best of my knowledge, 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 fully presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


By: /s/ ILIA LEKACH
    ---------------
    ILIA LEKACH
    Principal Executive Officer
    April 15, 2003

                                       49
8:30 to 8:40 AM Welcome and Announcements

8:40 - 9:10 AM Armstrong Flight Research Center (AFRC) Welcome/ 

Aeronautics Overview

9:10 to 10:10 AM Sustainable Flight Demonstrator Award

10:10 to 11:20 AM ARMD FY24 Budget Overview

11:20 AM to 12:30 PM Lunch (non-public)

12:30 - 1:30 PM ULI Award Round 6

1:30 to 1:35 PM Public Comment Period

1:35 to 2:00 PM Committee Deliberations

2:00 to 2:30 PM Work Plan and Schedule Review

2:30 PM Adjourn

22-Mar-23

JOIN VIRTUALLY Click here to join the meeting 

Meeting ID: 235 739 862 281 

Passcode: 9zHqUB 

JOIN BY PHONE

US Toll: +1 256-715-9946,,792224456# 

Phone Conference ID: 792 224 456# 

NAC Aeronautics Committee Public Agenda (FINAL)

Wednesday, March 22, 2023

Armstrong Flight Research Center

Wednesday, March 22 (Sessions are public except as noted)
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, : No. 64 EM 2023

V. RICHARD NICOLETTI, Plaintiff Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Trial Division No. CP-51-CR-0009325-2021 Defendant. : Change ofVenue

ORDER AND NOW, this 28th day ofAugust 2023, the Honorable Roxanne E. Covington of the Court ofCommon Pleas ofPhiladelphia County having certified to this Court an Order for change of venue in the above matter pursuant to Pa.R.Crim.P. 584, it is hereby ORDERED thatthis case is transferred to the Court ofCommon Pleas of Dauphin County pursuant to Pa.R.Crim.P. 584.

ChiefJustice Debra Todd
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ravi Chankar, Appellant.

[787 NYS2d 654]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (William Wetzel, J.), rendered on or about November 18, 2002, unanimously affirmed.

Application by appellant’s counsel to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see Anders v California,*386 US 738 [1967]; *People v Saunders,*52 AD2d 833 [1976]). We have reviewed this record and agree with appellant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous points which could be raised on this appeal.

Pursuant to Criminal Procedure Law § 460.20, defendant may apply for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals by making application to the Chief Judge of that Court and by submitting such application to the Clerk of that Court or to a Justice of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of this Department on reasonable notice to the respondent within 30 days after service of a copy of this order, with notice of entry.

Denial of the application for permission to appeal by the judge or justice first applied to is final and no new application may thereafter be made to any other judge or justice. Concur—Saxe, J.P., Friedman, Sullivan, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.
#### In the Matter of John Barbalious et al., Respondents, v Exterior Wall Systems, Inc., Appellant.

[787 NYS2d 715]

In a proceeding pursuant to CFLR article 75 to stay arbitration of an agreement dated October 9, 2001, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Bucaria, J.), entered February 20, 2004, which granted the petition to stay the arbitration and denied the motion to compel arbitration.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion to compel arbitration is granted, the petition is denied, and the processing is dismissed.

Under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court erred in granting the petition to stay the arbitration *(see Matter of Liebhafsky [Comstruct Assoc.],*62 NY2d 439 [1984]). Contrary to the Supreme Court’s determination, the provision requiring submission of claims to the architect within 21 days, although termed a condition precedent, is a matter of contract interpretation for the arbitrator to resolve *(see Matter of Calvin Klein, Inc. [Winter Assoc.],*204 AD2d 149 [1994]; *Matter of Spencer-Van Etten Cent. School Dist. [Auchinachie & Sons],*179 AD2d 855 [1992]). Schmidt, J.P., Adams, Santucci and Luciano, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2197 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

  2d Session
                                S. 2197

 To amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act 
  to clarify the status of certain communities in the western Alaska 
                  community development quota program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 11, 2004

 Ms. Murkowski (for herself and Mr. Stevens) introduced the following 
 bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, 
                      Science, and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act 
  to clarify the status of certain communities in the western Alaska 
                  community development quota program.

    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 ``CDQ Community Preservation Act''.

SEC. 2. WESTERN ALASKA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT QUOTA PROGRAM.

    (a) Eligible Communities.--Section 305(i)(1) of the Magnuson-
Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1855(i)) is 
amended adding at the end the following:
            ``(E) A community shall be eligible to participate in the 
        western Alaska community development quota program under 
        subparagraph (A) if the community was--
                    ``(i) listed in table 7 to part 679 of title 50, 
                Code of Federal Regulations, as in effect on January 1, 
                2004; or
                    ``(ii) approved by the National Marine Fisheries 
                Service on April 19, 1999.''.
    (b) Conforming Amendment.--Such section is further amended, in 
paragraph (B), by striking ``To'' and inserting, ``Except as provided 
in subparagraph (E), to''.
                                 <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**




The
      undersigned hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
      adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to
      their knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period
      ended June 29, 2008 of Sport Chalet, Inc. (the "Company") fully complies with
      the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
      of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in such periodic report
      fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
      of operations of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in such
      report.




Date:  August
      12, 2008




/s/
                Craig L. LevraChairman
                of the Board,Chief
                Executive Officer and President/s/
                Howard K. KaminskyExecutive
                Vice President-Finance,Chief
                Financial Officer and Secretary




A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      Sport Chalet, Inc. and will be furnished to the Securities and Exchange
      Commission or its staff upon request.
NASA EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS

We believe if you take care of the people, they will take care of the mission. We offer fantastic benefits to engage our employees both
in and out of the office. For a more comprehensive list of benefits for federal workers, visit the Office of Personnel Management’s
website: https://www.opm.gov/

HEALTH &
INSURANCE

You may be eligible to enroll in

+ Health insurance (employees may
choose from several different plans)

+ Dental insurance
+ Vision insurance
+ Life insurance

+ Federal Long Term Care
Insurance

+ Flexible spending accounts
(including Health Care FSA, Limited
Expense HCFSA, Dependent Care
FSA)

in addition, the NASA Employees
Benefit Association provides low
cost, high quality life insurance and
voluntary benefits for NASA
employees

*

COMPENSATION &
RECOGNITION

In addition to your benefits package,

NASA employees are also eligible
for

+ Competitive salary

+ Comprehensive retirement plan
(matching)

+ Monetary and non-monetary
awards and recognition

Free or subsidized parking and
transit assistance

+ Membership in various Federal
Credit unions

+ Scholarship programs for NASA
dependents

+ Federal Workers’ Compensation

al

CAREER &
DEVELOPMENT

We offer career-long learning
opportunities such as

+ Career counseling

+ Tuition assistance

+ Extensive onsite training, and
other educational programs

+ Opportunity to take on new roles
across the agency

We support a diverse and inclusive
community through Special
Emphasis Programs and Employee
Resource Groups. These groups
support professional development
across nine critical segments of our
workforce

+ African American

+ American Indian/Alaska Native
+ Asian American/Pacific Islander
+ Hispanic/Latino

+ Individuals with Disabilities

+ Lesbian

+ Gay

+ Bisexual

+ Transgender & Allies

+ Veterans

+ Women

+ Young Professionals

LIFE & FAMILY

We're committed to providing
flexibility to focus on what matters
most—both at work and at home. We
offer:

+ Flexible work hours

+ Telecommuting options

+ Employee Assistance Program

+ Most NASA locations offer onsite or
nearby childcare facilities

Leave: We offer a generous leave
program including

+ 10 paid holidays per year

+ Annual leave*

+ Sick LeaveTMTM

+ Paid Parental Leave

+ Voluntary Leave Transfer Program

“For full-time employees, annual
leave is accrued at the following
rate:

+ Less than 3 years of federal
service: 13 days per year

+ 3-14 years: 20 days per year
+ 15+ years: 26 days per year

“Full-time employees earn 4 hours
of sick leave for each two week pay
period