alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 227 (Tuesday, November 25, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 70264]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-27932]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 8953]


Determination

    Pursuant to the authority vested in the Secretary of State by the 
Foreign Missions Act, 22 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), and 
delegated to me as the Under Secretary of State for Management in 
Delegation of Authority No. 198, dated September 16, 1992, and 
consistent with my March 9, 2014 determination that the Taipei Economic 
and Cultural Representative Office in the United States (TECRO), 
including its subsidiary offices known as Taipei Economic and Cultural 
Offices (TECOs) and its personnel, is a ``foreign mission'' within the 
meaning of the Act (22 U.S.C. 4302(a)(3)(A)), I hereby confirm and 
determine that it is reasonably necessary to achieve the purposes set 
forth in 22 U.S.C. 4304(b), to require that TECRO, its subsidiary 
offices, persons duly notified to and accepted by AIT as designated 
employees of TECRO at its primary office or one of its subsidiary 
offices, including the heads of such offices, and family members of 
such designated employees who enjoy any immunity from legal process in 
the United States, shall be subject to the requirements regarding 
liability insurance set forth in 22 CFR part 151, and shall obtain from 
the Office of Foreign Missions driver licenses, title and registration 
documents, license plates and other such requisites for the operation, 
ownership, or maintenance of a motor vehicle. I further confirm and 
determine that the Office of Foreign Missions is authorized to issue 
driver's licenses to immediate family members of TECO designated 
employees who do not enjoy any immunity from legal process. This 
determination shall not apply with respect to any person who is a 
national of, or is permanently resident in, the United States.

    Dated: October 29, 2014.
Patrick F. Kennedy,
Under Secretary for Management.
[FR Doc. 2014-27932 Filed 11-24-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-35-P
Affiliate Members

October 2023

Human Factor Task Group

AFFILIATES

Mohammed Almazrouei

Jason Chin

Michael Freeman 

Bethany Growns

Hilary Hamnet

Moa Liden

Sherry Nakhaeizadeh

Niki Osborn

Joseph Russo

Alicia Wilcox
##### 



EXHIBIT 31.1 CERTIFICATE OF
PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER 1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Koger Equity, Inc.:2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of
a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were
made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects
the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant
as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4.
    
    The Companys other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 a.
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,
to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including
its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;b.
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of
the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; andc.
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants
most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably
likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over
financial reporting; and
 5.
    
    The companys other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,
to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 a.
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; andb.
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting.
 Dated: May 4, 2004
    /s/ Thomas J. CrockerThomas J. CrockerChief
Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
Koger Equity, Inc.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM UNAUDITED
INTERIM STATEMENTS FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED NOVEMBER 30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10QSB FOR THE
QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED NOVEMBER 30, 2000.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             JUN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-2000
<CASH>                                       1,073,840
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  107,597
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    267,395
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,605,048
<PP&E>                                       2,045,354
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,775,554
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,101,549
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          171,624
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           535
<OTHER-SE>                                  35,352,380
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,101,549
<SALES>                                        176,724
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               176,724
<CGS>                                          247,420
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  247,420
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,031,717
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,416
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,073,203)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,073,203)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,073,203)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.04)


</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES Of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Jose GUTIERREZ-LOPEZ, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 04-50156.

D.C. No. CR-03-00809-IEG.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 6, 2004.*

Decided Dec. 13, 2004.

Orlando Gutierrez, Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for PlaintiffAppellee.

Sylvia Baiz, San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before GOODWIN, WALLACE, and TROTT, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM**

Jose Gutierrez-Lopez appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to being a deported alien found in the United States in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.

*581Gutierrez-Lopez contends that in light of *Blakely v. Washington,*— U.S. -, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004), the federal Sentencing Guidelines are unconstitutional as a whole. This contention is foreclosed by *United States v. Ameline,*376 F.3d 967, 981-82 (9th Cir.2004) (declining invitation, after holding that *Blakely*does apply to sentence enhancements based on facts determined by the district judge, to declare Guidelines unconstitutional as a whole).

Gutierrez-Lopez also contends that the illegal reentry guideline, U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2, under which he received a 16-level enhancement based on a prior conviction for a crime of violence, should be stricken following *Blakely*and *Apprendi v. New Jersey,*530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), because that guideline is not severable from other guideline provisions whose constitutionality is undermined by *Blakely.*This contention lacks merit. *See United States v. Quintana-Quintana,*383 F.3d 1052 (9th Cir.2004) (order) (holding that recidivism enhancements under § 2L1.2 remain constitutional after *Blakely).*

We lack jurisdiction to review the district court’s denial of Gutierrez-Lopez’s request for a downward departure based on cultural assimilation because there is no indication in the record that the district court believed it lacked the discretion to depart on that ground. *United States v. Pizzichiello,*272 F.3d 1232, 1239 (9th Cir. 2002).

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.
JPEG 2000

Profile for 1000ppi

Fingerprint Compressio

Gaithersburg, MD

April, 2005

Tom H

thopper@

www.mitre.org/work/tech_papers/tech_papers_04/lepley_finger
Compression Requirem

• Efficiency – Image Quality• Backward Compatibility (500 p• Independent compression rati

( 500 @ 15:1 & 1000 @ 15:1 )

• Certification procedure
Wavelet Transform
Wavelet Transform

5-level 
WSQ
6-level WSQ
JPEG 2000

• Excellent image quality • Similar to WSQ• Already a standard• Includes required functionality • Quality and resolution scalabilit• COTS support
Profile for 1000 ppi

Fingerprint Images

• Insure image quality• Interoperability• Transcoding to 500 ppi WS• Certification criteria

Restricted subset of the JPEG 20parameter settings
1000ppi J2K < 15:1
J2K 5-level 5:1 
500ppi Image
WSQ
```

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 Quarterly Report of Cryocon, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, J. Brian Morrison,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350,
as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the
best of my knowledge and belief:

     (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 fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of
          the Company.

/s/ J. Brian Morrison

J. Brian Morrison
Chief Executive Officer

Date May 20, 2003
```
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-11756

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ENRIQUE LOPEZ LARA, also known as Juan Francisco Martinez Reyes,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:16-CR-175-1

Before DAVIS, CLEMENT and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Enrique Lopez Lara appeals his conditional guilty plea to one count of 

making a false claim to United States citizenship in violation of 18 U.S.C. 

§ 911. His plea agreement reserved his right to appeal the district court’s order 

denying his motion to suppress evidence regarding his true identity as a citizen 

of Mexico.

 

* 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

March 9, 2018

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 16-11756 Document: 00514379949 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/09/2018
No. 16-11756

2

Lopez Lara argues on appeal that the district court erred by denying his 

motion to suppress. He contends that federal agents detained him at an airport 

without reasonable suspicion, in violation of the Fourth Amendment, and that 

the evidence obtained as a result should have been suppressed. He concedes, 

however, as he did in the district court, that his argument is foreclosed by 

United States v. Roque-Villanueva, 175 F.3d 345, 346 (5th Cir. 1999), and he

raises the issue to preserve it for further review.

The Government has moved for summary affirmance or, alternatively, 

for an extension of time to file a brief on the merits. This court has held that 

even if there was a Fourth Amendment violation, evidence of an alien’s identity 

is not suppressible. See United States v. Hernandez-Mandujano, 721 F.3d 345, 

351 (5th Cir. 2013); Roque-Villanueva, 175 F.3d at 346. Thus, Lopez Lara’s

argument is in fact foreclosed. See Roque-Villanueva, 175 F.3d at 346.

Accordingly, summary affirmance is appropriate. See Groendyke 

Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969). The Government’s 

motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and its alternative motion for 

an extension of time to file a brief on the merits is DENIED. The judgment of 

the district court is AFFIRMED. 

 Case: 16-11756 Document: 00514379949 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/09/2018
#### SMITH v. N.C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION

No. 102P97

Case below: 125 N.C.App. 212

Petition by plaintiff for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 8 May 1997.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

OSAYANSE OBARGHEDO, AKA Abu,

AKA Thomas Lester, AKA John Price,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 13-50094

D.C. No. 2:12-cr-00186-ABC-1

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Audrey B. Collins, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted August 28, 2014

Pasadena, California

Before: O’SCANNLAIN, RAWLINSON, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

Appellant Osayanse Obarghedo (Obarghedo) appeals his conviction and

sentence for possession of fifteen or more unauthorized access devices. We affirm.

FILED

OCT 03 2014

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

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

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
1. The district court acted within its discretion when it denied

Obarghedo’s third motion to substitute counsel. See United States v. MendezSanchez, 563 F.3d 935, 944 (9th Cir. 2009).

2. The district court did not clearly err when it denied Obarghedo’s

motion to dismiss the information based on alleged Speedy Trial Act violations. 

After an evidentiary hearing, the district court determined that Obarghedo failed to

provide “direct [or] indirect support for his contention that prosecutors conspired

with [immigration authorities] to extend his detention until an indictment could be

returned.” United States v. Pena-Carrillo, 46 F.3d 879, 883 (9th Cir. 1995). 

3. The district court acted within its discretion when it excluded the

voicemail purportedly from Obarghedo’s cousin because Obarghedo failed to

prove his cousin’s unavailability. Moreover, Obarghedo failed to demonstrate the

requisite corroborating circumstances clearly indicating the statement’s

trustworthiness as required by Fed. R. Evid. 804(b)(3). See United States v.

Gadson, Nos. 12-30007, 12-30047, – F.3d –, 2014 WL 4067203, at *5-*6 (9th Cir.

Aug. 19, 2014). 

2
4. The district court did not clearly err in its calculation of the financial

institutions’ actual losses and corresponding restitution. See United States v.

Armstead, 552 F.3d 769, 778-79 (9th Cir. 2008), as amended (recognizing that the

district court may consider uncharged conduct in calculating a reasonable estimate

of the amount of loss). 

5. The district court’s upward departure in Obarghedo’s criminal history

category was substantively reasonable because it was based on Obarghedo’s

extensive criminal history, his fraudulent conduct, recidivism concerns, and the

need for deterrence. See United States v. Ellis, 641 F.3d 411, 413, 420-21 (9th Cir.

2011). Obarghedo’s procedural challenges—based on the district court’s failure to

state in writing the basis for its departure and the district court’s consideration of

evidence of immigration and mortgage fraud introduced at Obarghedo’s trial—also

fail. See id. at 422. 

AFFIRMED.

3
<PAGE>   1





                                                                     EXHIBIT 5.1

                                 April 23, 1998

Source Media, Inc.
5400 LBJ Freeway, Suite 680
Dallas, Texas  75240

         Re:     Registration Statement on Form S-3

Ladies and Gentlemen:

         We have examined the Registration Statement on From S-3 to be filed by
you with the Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof
(the "Registration Statement") in connection with the registration under the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended, of up to 2,773,500 shares of your Common
Stock (the "Shares").  All of the Shares are issued and outstanding and may be
offered for sale for the benefit of the selling shareholders named in the
Registration Statement.  We understand that the Shares are to be sold from time
to time in the over-the-counter-market at prevailing prices or as otherwise
described in the Registration Statement.  As your legal counsel, we have also
examined the proceedings taken by you in connection with the issuance of the
Shares.

         It is our opinion that the Shares when issued upon the valid exercise
of the Warrants against valid payment therefor shall be validly issued, fully
paid and non-assessable.

         We consent to the use of this opinion as an exhibit to the
Registration Statement and further consent to the use of our name under the
caption "Validity of the Shares" appearing in the Prospectus constituting a
part of the Registration Statement, and any amendments thereto.


                                  Very truly yours,
                                  
                                  THOMPSON & KNIGHT
                                  A Professional Corporation
                                  
                                  
                                  
                                  By:   /s/ Michael L. Bengtson           
                                        ----------------------------------
                                        Michael L. Bengtson, Shareholder
EXHIBIT 99.1

                           VITRIX, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY

                            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  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-QSB of Vitrix,  Inc. (the
"Company")  for the quarter ended March 31, 2003,  as filed with the  Securities
and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof  (the  "Report"),  I,  Thomas  S.
Bednarik,  President  and  Chief  Executive  Officer  of the  Company,  certify,
pursuant  to 18  U.S.C.  ss.  1350,  as  adopted  pursuant  to  ss.  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 the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and result of  operations of the
Company.

By: /s/ Thomas S. Bednarik
    ------------------------------
    Thomas S. Bednarik
    President and Chief Executive Officer
    May 15, 2003
<PAGE>
                                    (CONT'D)

                           VITRIX, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY

                            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  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-QSB of Vitrix,  Inc. (the
"Company")  for the quarter ended March 31, 2003,  as filed with the  Securities
and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, Craig J. Smith,
Vice President - Finance and  Administration  and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and result of  operations of the
Company.

By: /s/ Craig J. Smith
    ------------------------------
    Craig J. Smith
    Vice President - Finance and Administration and Chief Financial Officer
    May 15, 2003
Exhibit 13.6



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



In connection with the accompanying Annual Report on Form 20-F of Inmarsat Investments Limited (the
Company) for the annual period ended 31 December 2006 (the Periodic Report), I, Rick Medlock, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, 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 the best of my knowledge the Periodic Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the
Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



By:

/s/     RICK
MEDLOCKRick Medlock Chief Financial Officer




Date: 29 April 2008