alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to 5TH 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 25, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 02-41745

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

DAVID LEON-SANCHEZ, also known as

Carmelo Reina-Deleon,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. B-02-CR-373-1

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

Before DeMOSS, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

 David Leon-Sanchez appeals the sentence imposed following

his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United States

after deportation/removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. LeonSanchez complains that his sentence was improperly enhanced

pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) based on a prior conviction. He

argues that the sentencing provision is unconstitutional. LeonSanchez thus contends that his sentence should not exceed the
No. 02-41745

-2-

maximum terms of imprisonment and supervised release prescribed

in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). 

In Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235

(1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in

8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of

separate offenses. The Court further held that the sentencing

provisions do not violate the Due Process Clause. Id. at 239-47. 

Leon-Sanchez acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by

Almendarez-Torres, but asserts that the decision has been cast

into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). 

He seeks to preserve his argument for further review. 

Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi,

530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984

(5th Cir. 2000). This court must follow Almendarez-Torres

“unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule

it.” Dabeit, 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and

citation omitted). The judgment of the district court is

AFFIRMED.

The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of

filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks

that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED. 

AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-1859

FANTU A. KERKERO,

Petitioner,

versus

ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration

Appeals. (A96-281-611)

Submitted: April 18, 2007 Decided: May 1, 2007

Before MOTZ, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Solomon Bekele, LAW OFFICES OF SOLOMON & ASSOCIATES, Silver Spring,

Maryland, for Petitioner. Rod J. Rosenstein, United States

Attorney, Larry D. Adams, Assistant United States Attorney,

Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Fantu A. Kerkero, a native and citizen of Ethiopia,

petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration

Appeals affirming without opinion the Immigration Judge’s denial of

her applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection

under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). 

To obtain reversal of a determination denying eligibility

for relief, an alien “must show that the evidence he presented was

so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the

requisite fear of persecution.” INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S.

478, 483-84 (1992). We have reviewed the evidence of record and

conclude that Kerkero fails to show that the evidence compels a

contrary result. Having failed to establish eligibility for

asylum, Kerkero cannot meet the higher standard to qualify for

withholding of removal. Chen v. INS, 195 F.3d 198, 205 (4th Cir.

1999); INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. 421, 430 (1987). Finally,

our review discloses that Kerkero did not show eligibility for CAT

relief because she did not demonstrate that it is more likely than

not that she will be tortured if removed to Ethiopia. See 8 C.F.R.

§ 1208.16(c)(2) (2006). 

Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. 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.

PETITION DENIED
2019 Stakeholder Meeting HIGHLIGHTS

Attendee Breakdown

Attendee Satisfaction

Full over

PAPERLESS

70

6

over 50

new improved

DEMOS

Total 482 attendees

days

meeting

presentations CONCURRENT

Spread Video Recordings with YOU

CAN

PSCR

van

&

RESEARCH

heard

demonstrations

FEATURED

LEVEL OF

BREAKOUT

REGISTRATION PROCESS

PRESENTERS/SPEAKERS

CONFERENCE MATERIALS

QUALITY OF AUDIO/VIDEO

MEETING ROOM SETUP

ON-SITE ASSISTANCE

PRE-CONFERENCE ASSISTANCE 

VIA PHONE OR EMAIL

TECHNICALITY SESSION

ACROSS

RESEARCH

PORTFOLIO

AREAS

MEETING TRACKS

FORMAT

FOR

EACH

(21%)

(71%)

(08%)

 in 

the

what

you

onsite

WE WENT

98.9

ACADEMIA

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

PUBLIC SAFETY/STATE/LOCAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRY

OTHER (NON-PROFIT COMPANIES AND RESEARCH LABS)

2%

35%

17%

24%

22%

Increased

98.9

97.5

96.8

98.9

93.6

98.5

from 

84 in 

2018

VIA
MEETING APP

SOCIAL MEDIA

Total Instagram & 

Twitter Posts by year

A 271%

increase!

493 30.8k 396.7

Downloads Total

Interactions

HOURS

open

#PSCR2018 #PSCR2019

2019

259

703

2018

#

Increased

Most used features

from 

AGENDA 

FEEDBACK

SURVEYS 

SESSION

DESCRIPTIONS 

SOCIAL MEDIA

ACTIVITY FEEDS

427 in 2018 

TOTAL NUMBER TWITTER CONTRIBUTors

WITH THE HASHTAG

average followers

per twitter

#PSCR2019

687 160 

4,480 5,200 

 OF TWEETS

contributors

impressions

average

per tweet
What attendees are saying

attendee Recommendations

What does PSCR mean to you?

Innovation organized

well-run

collaboration

community

USEFUL

RELEVANT

INTERESTING

FUTURISTIC

CUTTING EDGE

DEDICATION

EDUCATIONAL

technology

informative

networking

2018 2019 2020

RECOMMENDATIONS:

we improve each year

thanks to your feedback

Included networking 

hour into the agenda

Source: PSCR 2019 Conference Survey

Increased proximity of 

meeting rooms

Expanded viewing times 

for demos

Featured technicality 

level per session 

Additional time engaging 

with demos

Continue to involve public safety in 

presentations

Repeat successful features from 2019

“I think the 

demonstrations allowed for 

the best exchange of ideas

between myself (a public safety 

professional) and the awardees.”

“Amazing collection of 

innovators, academia,

industry, and gov’t researchers.”

“I got the most benefit 

from the keynote speakers

and panel discussions held 

every morning.”

“I greatly enjoyed the level 

of cutting edge technology

discussed in the talks and the 

opportunity to speak 

face-to-face with people 

involved in the research.”
T he Honorable Garnett Thomas Eisele, United States District Judge for th e 1 Eastern District of Arkansas. United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 97-3485

___________ T. N. Wilson, individually and as * next friend of Thomas Wilson, * deceased; Sue Harness, * * Appellants, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Arkansas. Kent Williams, Individually and in * his official capacity as Lieutenant * [UNPUBLISHED] Sheridan Arkansas Police Department; * Sheridan Arkansas Police Department, * * Appellees. *

___________ Submitted: April 7, 1998 Filed: May 8, 1998

___________ Before BOWMAN, Chief Judge, WOLLMAN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. T.N. Wilson and Sue Harness, parents of Thomas Wilson, deceased, appealfrom the District Court’s adverse grant of summary judgment in their 42 U.S.C § 1983 1-2-

(1994) action. After carefully reviewing the record and the parties’ submissions, we conclude the District Court did not commit error in granting summary judgment for the reasons it stated. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
PROPOSED 

TECHNICAL CHANGETO ANSI/NIST-ITL 1-2Based on the development of the BioCTS for AN-2011 software 
Overall Theme 

• The Proposed changes address instances where 

interpretations may lead to a lack of interoperabilbetween two organizations who interpret it differe

• Focus on making definitive choices when these instance• Aligning sections of the text that refer to the same conce
No definitive definition for “positive in

• Some groups count 0+ as a positive integer. • Some groups count 1+ as a positive integer. • Closest thing to a definition is held within a note t

specifies “zero or positive integer” indicating that part of “positive integers”. 

• Propose a definite definition of positive integers. 
No definite way to round values 

• Occurs when a field can only be an integer, but th

to populate the field is a calculation that may be a integer value. 

• Round up? • Round down? • Truncate? 

• Example: PNG images can contain the scale reso

Pixels Per Meter – and AN-2011 can only be in PInches or Pixels Per Centimeter. 
Fixing of Valid Values 

• Several tables have more broad valid values than • Proposed changes to align the values. • Example: 

• Bits Per Pixel is defined in the table as “Positive integer”• Bits Per Pixel is defined in the text as having a minimum • Solution: Fix the table to be 8 <= BPX <= 99. 
Proposed Changes to some Cardina

Values • Some Cardinality values in Annex G did not matc

values in the Tables. 

• This is a problem when Annex G is more restrictiv

the Tables in the base standard. 

• Example: When Annex G specifies a field as Mandatory, 

Table specifies it as optional. 

• Proposed changes to align the cardinalities in An

match what they are in the base standard tables. 
A Modification to the definition of Su

• Subfields can contain a single information item (b

Field 10.026). 

• Propose to change the definition of subfield from • “is the subfield used for multiple entries of an II or an IF” • to • “is the subfield used for one or more entries of an II or an 
Modifications Proposed to the Schema w

is MORE restrictive than the Base Stand• In some cases the XML Schema is MORE restric

the base standard. 

• Problem: 

• Traditional File to XML File = Not Working • XML File to Traditional File = Working 

• Proposed change to add an additional simple typ

union-ed with the existing enumerated type 

• Example: 

• Base Standard: Field 1.004 can be user-defined, contain

characters 1 to 16 in length 

• XML Schema: The values are in an enumerated list, not 

for a user-defined value 
Contact 

• BioCTS Team • Email: biocts@nist.gov • Website: http://www.nist.gov/itl/csd/biometrics/ansi-nist.cf
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-15-00288-CR

PHILIP H. MOSLEY,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 19th District Court

McLennan County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014-931-C1

ORDER

Appellant’s motion for extension of time to file his motion for rehearing is granted. 

Appellant’s motion for rehearing is due March 13, 2017.

PER CURIAM

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Scoggins

Motion granted

Order issued and filed February 22, 2017
H. Res. 159

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

June 4, 1997.

Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule

XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the

Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of

the bill (H.R. 1757) to consolidate international affairs agencies, to authorize appropriations for the Department of State

and related agencies for fiscal years 1998 and 1999, and for

other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. General debate shall be confined to the bill and

shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by

the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee

on International Relations. After general debate the bill shall

be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. The

bill shall be considered by title rather than by section. Each

title of the bill shall be considered as read. The Chairman of

the Committee of the Whole may: (1) postpone until a time

during further consideration in the Committee of the Whole

a request for a recorded vote on any amendment; and (2) re-
2

•HRES 159 EH

duce to five minutes the minimum time for electronic voting

on any postponed question that follows another electronic

vote without intervening business, provided that the minimum

time for electronic voting on the first in any series of questions shall be fifteen minutes. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and

report the bill to the House with such amendments as may

have been adopted. The previous question shall be considered

on the bill and amendments thereto of final passage without

intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or

without instructions.

SEC. 2. After disposition of H.R. 1757 it shall be in

order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 1758) to ensure

that the enlargement of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) proceeds in a manner consistent with the United States interests, to strengthen relations between the United States and Russia, to preserve the prerogatives of the

Congress with respect to certain arms control agreements,

and for other purposes. The bill shall be debatable for one

hour equally divided and controlled by the Chairman and

ranking minority member of the Committee on International

Relations. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill to final passage without intervening motion

except one motion to recommit.
3

•HRES 159 EH

SEC. 3. (a) In the engrossment of H.R. 1757, the Clerk

shall—

(1) await the disposition of H.R. 1758 pursuant to

section 2 of this resolution;

(2) add the text of H.R. 1758, as passed by the

House, as new matter at the end of H.R. 1757;

(3) conform the title of H.R. 1757 to reflect the addition of the text of H.R. 1758 to the engrossment;

(4) assign appropriate designations to titles within

the engrossment; and

(5) conform provisions for short titles within the engrossment.

(b) Upon the addition of the text of H.R. 1758 to the

engrossment of H.R. 1757, H.R. 1758 shall be laid on the

table.

Attest:

Clerk.
Exhibit 23.1














CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT
REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





We hereby
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
Forms S-8 (No. 333-146485 and No. 333-157955) of Index Oil and Gas Inc. of our
report, which includes an explanatory paragraph regarding the substantial doubt
about the Company's ability to continue
as a going concern, dated July 10, 2009 relating to the consolidated
financial statements, which is included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended March 31, 2009.











/s/ RBSM
      LLP




New York,
New York


July 10,
2009
**Exhibit 31.2**

** **

**CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

 

I, Steven Tanner, certifythat:

 

1.             I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K of Real Mex Restaurants, Inc.;

 

2.             Based on my knowledge, this report does not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3.             Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, andother financial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.             The registrant’s other certifying officer and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have:

 

a)Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

b)Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and

 

c)Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscalquarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annualreport) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.             The registrant’s other certifying officer and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee ofregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

 

a) Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

 

b) Anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.

 

Date: March 26,2008

 
| /s/ Steven Tanner       |   |   |
|-------------------------|--------|--------|
| Steven Tanner           |   |   |
|                    |   |   |
| Chief Financial Officer |   |   |

 

 

----
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Rachael Whitefield","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/rachaellwhitefield-2-2-2\/","title":"Jessica Watkins","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"UmNSMDgbCk\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/people\/jessica-watkins\/\">Jessica Watkins<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/people\/jessica-watkins\/embed\/#?secret=UmNSMDgbCk\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Jessica Watkins” — NASA\" data-secret=\"UmNSMDgbCk\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/jsc2017e118354_0.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":750}
H. Res. 498

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

July 15, 1998.

Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule

XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the

Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of

the bill (H.R. 4104) making appropriations for the Treasury

Department, the United States Postal Service, the Executive

Office of the President, and certain Independent Agencies,

for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1999, and for other

purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with.

Points of order against consideration of the bill for failure to

comply with section 306 of the Congressional Budget Act of

1974 are waived. General debate shall be confined to the bill

and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled

by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. After general debate the bill shall

be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule.

Points of order against section 628 for failure to comply with

clause 2 of rule XXI are waived. During consideration of the
2

•HRES 498 EH

bill for amendment, the Chairman of the Committee of the

Whole may accord priority in recognition on the basis of

whether the Member offering an amendment has caused it to

be printed in the portion of the Congressional Record designated for that purpose in clause 6 of rule XXIII. Amendments so printed shall be considered as read. The Chairman

of the Committee of the Whole may: (1) postpone until a time

during further consideration in the Committee of the Whole

a request for a recorded vote on any amendment; and (2) reduce to five minutes the minimum time for electronic voting

on any postponed question that follows another electronic

vote without intervening business, provided that the minimum

time for electronic voting on the first in any series of questions shall be 15 minutes. At the conclusion of consideration

of the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report

the bill to the House with such amendments as may have

been adopted. The previous question shall be considered as

ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage

without intervening motion except one motion to recommit

with or without instructions.

Attest:

Clerk.