alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### IN THE UNI TED STATES COURT OFAPPEALS FOR THE FIF TH CIRCU IT

No. 10-10742 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

v. DANIEL SANTILLAN-HERNANDEZ, Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:10-CR-30-1

Before JOLLY, GARZA, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Daniel Santillan-Hernandez appeals the 90-month term of imprisonment imposed after he pleaded guilty o f b e i n g found in the United States without permission, following removal. See 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) & (b). He contends that the district court plainly erred by enhancing his sent e n c e p u r s uant to United States Sentencing Guideline § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C) based on a determination that his 1989 California state court conviction of selling or transporting marijuana was an aggravated felony. U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f A p p ea l s F i ft h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D July 6, 20 11 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Purs uant to 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5 , the cour t hasd ete rm inedt hat this op inion sho uld not * be publ ish ed and is not pr ece dent excep t unde r the lim ite d cir cum st ance s se t forth in 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5 .4. Case: 10-10742 Document: 00511530628 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/06/2011No. 10-10742

We agree with Santillan-H e r n a ndez that the district court plainly erred in finding based on th e presentence report that his prior conviction under California Health & Safety Code § 11360(a) was an aggravated felony. See United States v. Ibarra-Luna , 628 F.3d 712, 716 (5th Cir. 2010). Nevertheless,

we also agree with the Government that Santillan-Hernandez has not shown a reasonable probability that his sentence would have been lower absent the district court’s consideration of th e incorrect advisory guidelines range. See U n i t ed States v. Dickson , 632 F.3d 186, 191 (5th Cir. 2011), petition fo r c e r t

. filed , (Apr. 27, 2011) (No. 10-10278); United States v. Davis , 602 F.3d 643, 648-49 (5th Cir. 2010). In the instant case, the district cou rt determined that a sentence within the incorrectly calculated guideline range was inappropri a t e in light of Santill an - H ern an dez’s serious criminal history and potential for recidivism. For those same reasons a sentence within the lower correctly calculated range would have been insufficient. Moreover, the district court ’ s s t atements, clearly explaining its methodology for arriving at a reasonable sentence, indicate that the incorrectly calculated range did not influence the sentence imposed. Santillan-Hernandez has not demon s trated a reasonable probability that, but for the dist ri c t c o u rt ’ s errors, he would have received a shorter sentence. See United States v. Blocker , 612 F.3d 413, 416 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 131 S. Ct. 623 (2010). AFFIRMED.

2 Case: 10-10742 Document: 00511530628 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/06/2011
#### Silvia Moreno, Appellant, v Luz Dary Gomez, Respondent, et al., Defendants.

[872 NYS2d 143]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Nelson, J.), entered August 27, 2007, as granted that branch of the motion of the defendant Luz Dary Gomez which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against her.

*612Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The defendant Luz Dary Gomez demonstrated her prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by establishing that the codefendant Marvin A. Matamoros violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1141 when he made a left turn directly into the path of Gomez’s oncoming vehicle (see *Maloney v Niewender,*27 AD3d 426 [2006]; *Moreback v Mesquita,*17 AD3d 420, 421 [2005]; *Casaregola v Farkouh,*1 AD3d 306 [2003]). Gomez, who had the right-of-way, was entitled to anticipate that Matamoros would obey the traffic laws which required him to yield *(see Agin v Rehfeldt,*284 AD2d 352 [2001]; *Cenovski v Lee,*266 AD2d 424 [1999]).

In opposition to this prima facie showing, the plaintiff failed to demonstrate the existence of a triable issue of fact as to whether Gomez was comparatively negligent. Contrary to the plaintiffs contention, there is no evidence in the record that Gomez violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1123 (b) when she passed to the right of a vehicle that was about to make a left turn in the intersection. Rivera, J.E, Angiolillo, Eng and Belen, JJ., concur.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

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

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

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

FRANCISCO MENDOZA TORRES; 

SUSANA ZEPEDA ESQUIVEL, a.k.a.

Susanna Cepeda-Quivil,

 Petitioners,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 09-73986

Agency Nos. A075-771-014

 A075-771-015

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted June 15, 2011** 

Before: CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

Francisco Mendoza Torres and Susana Zepeda Esquivel, natives and citizens

of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order

dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying their

FILED

JUN 29 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 09-73986

applications for cancellation of removal. We review de novo claims of due process

violations in removal proceedings. Colmenar v. INS, 210 F.3d 967, 971 (9th Cir.

2000). We deny the petition for review.

Petitioners’ claim that the IJ violated their due process rights by exhibiting

bias and interrupting their testimony fails because the proceedings were not so

fundamentally unfair that they were prevented from reasonably presenting their

case, and they failed to demonstrate prejudice. See id. at 971-72; Lata v. INS, 204

F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring prejudice for a petitioner to prevail on a

due process claim). 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
Exhibit 99(b)

Independent Accountants' Report

The Board of Directors

Household Finance Corporation:

We have examined management's assertion that the servicing of consumer automobile finance receivables owned by Household Automotive Trust III, Series 1999-1 has been conducted by Household Finance Corporation, as Master Servicer, in compliance with the terms and conditions as set forth in Articles IV and V of the Master Sale and Servicing Agreement dated June 1, 1999 (the Agreement), as supplemented, as of and for the year ended December 31, 2003. Household Finance Corporation's management is responsible for the assertion.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management's assertion based on our examination.
Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting that the servicing of receivables has been conducted in compliance with the terms and conditions as set forth in Articles IV and V of the Agreement, as supplemented, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, management's assertion that the servicing of the receivables has been conducted by Household Finance Corporation, as Master Servicer, in compliance with the terms and conditions as set forth in Articles IV and V of the Master Sale and Servicing Agreement dated June 1, 1999, as supplemented, as of and for the year ended December 31, 2003 is fairly stated, in all material respects.
This report is intended solely for the information and the use of the addressee, the trustee(s), rating agencies, and others, as applicable, in accordance with the Agreement.

 

/s/ KPMG LLP

Chicago, Illinois

February 28, 2004

 

Management Assertion

 

As of and for the year ended December 31, 2003, the servicing of consumer automobile finance receivables owned by Household Automotive Trust III, Series 1999-1 has been conducted by Household Auto Finance, a division of Household Finance Corporation, in its capacity as subservicer for Household Finance Corporation, as Master Servicer, in compliance with the terms and conditions as set forth in Articles IV and V of the Master Sale and Servicing Agreement dated June 1, 1999, as supplemented.

 

 

/s/ Tim Condon 
/s/ John O'Brien
Tim Condon
John O'Brien
Chief Financial Officer -
Group Director-Asset Management-
Household Auto Finance
Household Auto Finance    
February 28, 2004
February 28, 2004
Date
Date
Exhibit
32.1




Certification
of Principal Executive Officer


Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350


As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002




Pursuant
to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of
section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersigned
officer of Mandalay Media, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), does
hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that:





The
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2008 of the
Company (the “Form 10-Q”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the information
contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




Date: February
20, 2009




/s/
      James LefkowitzJames
      LefkowitzPresident(Principal
      Executive Officer)





A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and shall be
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
#### Michael A. PLANTE, Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF the AIR FORCE, Respondent.

No. 2006-3371.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Dec. 11, 2007.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of Michael A. Plante’s unopposed motion to voluntarily dismiss this petition for review,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) The motion is granted.

(2) Each side shall bear its own costs.
----

|   | 1. | The                Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the period ended                September 30, 2007, (the "Quarterly Report"), fully complies with                the                requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities                Exchange                Act of 1934, as amended; |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 2. | The                information contained in the Quarterly Report fairly presents, in                all                material respects, the financial condition and results of operations                of                the Company. |
|--------|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Dated:     November                13, 2007 |   |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                                                 |   |
|                                                                 |   |
| /s/                Paul O. Koether                                   |   |
| Paul                O. Koether                                       |   |
| Chief                Executive Officer                               |   |
|                                                                 |   |
|                                                                 |   |
| /s/                Bryan P. Healey                                   |   |
| Bryan                P. Healey                                       |   |
| Chief                Financial Officer                               |   |

----
EXHIBIT 32.2

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 Tellabs, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended June 29, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Timothy J. Wiggins, the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to and for purposes of 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 the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ Timothy J. Wiggins 
|Timothy J. Wiggins     
|Chief Financial Officer
|Date: August 7, 2007   

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will
be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
amsc-ex101_232.htm


Exhibit 10.1

Fiscal 2015 Executive Incentive Plan. On June 23, 2015, the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of American Superconductor Corporation (the “Committee”) and the Board of Directors of American Superconductor Corporation (the “Company”) approved an executive incentive plan for the Company’s fiscal year ending March 31, 2016 (“fiscal 2015”). Participants in the plan include the Company’s chief executive officer and all other executive officers. Pursuant to the plan, the Committee designated for each executive officer a target cash incentive amount, expressed as a percentage of the officer’s base salary. The Committee is responsible for determining the payout under the plan to each executive officer except the chief executive officer. The Board of Directors of the Company determines the payout under the plan for the chief executive officer, taking into account the recommendation of the Committee. 

The amount of the incentive award actually paid to each executive officer may be less than or greater than the executive’s target cash incentive, with the amount capped at 200% of the target incentive. For each executive officer, individual incentive awards will be determined following the end of fiscal 2015 based on the following factors and their corresponding weightings: 

 


	
 
	
•
	
 
	
the Company’s net loss before stock-based compensation, amortization of acquisition-related intangibles, restructuring and impairment charges, consumption of zero cost-basis inventory, non-cash interest expense, change in fair value of derivatives and warrants, and other unusual charges, net of any tax effects related to these items for fiscal 2015 as compared to the established target – 40% 




 


	
 
	
•
	
 
	
the executive’s achievement of other financial objectives relating to ending cash balance, revenues, operating expenses and orders during fiscal 2015 as compared to the established target – 40% 




 


	
 
	
•
	
 
	
the executive’s individual and overall contribution during fiscal 2015 towards the achievement of the Company’s financial and non-financial objectives (subjective performance measure) – 20% 




The following table sets forth each executive officer’s target cash incentive for fiscal 2015: 

 


	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 

	
Executive Officer
	
  
	
Title
	
  
	
Target Incentive
as % of
Base Salary
	
 
	
 
	
Target Incentive
	
 

	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 

	
Daniel P. McGahn
	
  
	
President and Chief Executive Officer
	
  
	
 
	
100
	
% 
	
 
	
$
	
500,000
	
  

	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 

	
David A. Henry
	
  
	
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
	
  
	
 
	
60
	
% 
	
 
	
$
	
187,200
	
  

	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 

	
James F. Maguire
	
  
	
Executive Vice President, Operations
	
  
	
 
	
75
	
% 
	
 
	
$
	
221,250
Ecolomondo Corporation Inc.: Exhibit 10(ii) - Filed by newsfilecorp.com






ADDENDUM TO A LETTER OF INTENT OF MAY 14, 2014 

	AGREEMENT BETWEEN: 	Matzel Group, Matzel Industries LLC
  
	  	- AND - 
	  	ECOLOMONDO CORPORATION INC.
  


Matzel Industries LLC and Ecolomondo Corporation Inc. (“the
Parties”) agreed to enter into a transaction for the sale of a thermal
decomposition plant in New Jersey (USA), pursuant to the Letter Of Intent signed
by the Parties on May 14, 2014.

In said Letter Of Intent, second paragraph of page 1, the
Parties “agree that the Turnkey Agreement must be executed and delivered by the
Parties thereto no later than August 30, 2015 (the “Closing Date”); or this LOI
will terminate in accordance with section 11 hereof.” 

Article 11 is written as follows: “Termination. This LOI will
terminate on August 31st, 2015 unless a Turnkey Agreement is signed
by the Parties and a corresponding Notice to Proceed is issued to Ecolomondo.
This date may be extended by mutual written agreement of the Parties.” 

In conformity with Article 11, and with clear understanding by
the Parties, Matzel Group and Matzel Industries LLC and Ecolomondo Corporation
Inc. agree to extend the termination date of August 31st, 2015 to
March 31, 2016. 

Signed by the parties, this 24th day of July, 2015:


	 	 
	  /s/ Elio Sorella                                           
       	  /s/ Greg Matzel                                         
      
	Ecolomondo Corporation Inc. 	Matzel Group, Matzel Industries LLC 
	Elio Sorella 	Greg Matzel
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-28-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             SEP-29-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-28-1996
<CASH>                                         578,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,576,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                     9,000
<INVENTORY>                                  1,749,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,186,000
<PP&E>                                       3,843,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,007,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,912,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,437,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  2,583,000
<COMMON>                                     3,103,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  31,262,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,912,000
<SALES>                                      3,245,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,245,000
<CGS>                                        1,519,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,365,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (8,000)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (118,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (118,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (118,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit
32(e)


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


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


FOR PPL
ELECTRIC UTILITIES CORPORATION'S 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31,
2008





In
connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of PPL Electric Utilities
Corporation (the "Company") for the quarter ended March 31, 2008, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Covered
Report"), I, the principal executive officer of the Company, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, hereby certify that:





·
            The
      Covered Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
      15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;
    and·
            The
      information contained in the Covered Report fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
      the Company.











Date:  May
      2, 2008
            /s/  David
      G. DeCampliDavid
      G. DeCampli
              President
              PPL
      Electric Utilities Corporation








A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 2 (Monday, January 5, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 274-275]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-30851]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 8992]


Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations: ``Buddhist Art of Myanmar'' Exhibition

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: 
Pursuant to

[[Page 275]]

the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 
985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the 
Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681, 
et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of Authority No. 234 
of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 of August 28, 
2000 (and, as appropriate, Delegation of Authority No. 257 of April 15, 
2003), I hereby determine that the objects to be included in the 
exhibition ``Buddhist Art of Myanmar,'' imported from abroad for 
temporary exhibition within the United States, are of cultural 
significance. The objects are imported pursuant to loan agreements with 
the foreign owners or custodians. I also determine that the exhibition 
or display of the exhibit objects at the Asia Society Museum, New York, 
New York, from on or about February 10, 2015, until on or about May 10, 
2015, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be 
determined, is in the national interest. I have ordered that Public 
Notice of these Determinations be published in the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including 
lists of the exhibit objects, contact Julie Simpson, Attorney-Adviser, 
Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-
632-6467). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, SA-5, L/PD, 
Fifth Floor (Suite 5H03), Washington, DC 20522-0505.

    Dated: December 19, 2014.
Kelly Keiderling,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and 
Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2014-30851 Filed 1-2-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P