alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# United States Court of Appeals **For the Eighth Circuit**

___________________________ No. 18-3615

___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee
v. David Giannetto lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant

____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids

____________ Submitted: July 19, 2019 Filed: July 24, 2019 [Unpublished]

____________ Before SHEPHERD, GRASZ, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.

____________ PER CURIAM. David Giannetto directly appeals after he pleaded guilty to bank fraud and the district court 1 sentenced him to a within-Guidelin es prison term. His counsel has

1 The Honorable Linda R. Reade, United St ates District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa.moved for leave to withdraw, and has f iled a brief under Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that the sentence wa s unreasonable. Giannetto has filed a pro se brief, claiming ineffective assistance of counsel. Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court did not impose a substantively unreasonable sentence. See United States v. Feemster , 572 F.3d 455, 461-62 (8th Cir. 2009) (sentences are revi ewed for substantive reasonableness under deferential abuse of discreti on standard; abuse of discre tion occurs when court fails to consider relevant factor, gives significan t weight to improper or irrelevant factor, or commits clear error of judgment in we ighing appropriate factors). The record establishes that the district court adequate ly considered the sentencing factors listed in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). See United States v. Wohlman , 651 F.3d 878, 887 (8th Cir. 2011) (court need not mechanically recite § 3553(a) factors, so long as it is clear from record that court actually considered them in determining sentence). We decline to consider Giannetto’s pro se ineffective-a ssistance-of-counsel claim on direct appeal. See United States v. Ramirez-Hernandez , 449 F.3d 824, 826-27 (8th Cir. 2006) (ineffective-assistance claims are best litigat ed in collateral pro ceedings, where record can be properly developed). We have also in dependently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and we find no non-frivolous i ssues for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

______________________________

-2-
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                          36,190
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  254,789
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     34,306
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               325,285
<PP&E>                                       1,692,113
<DEPRECIATION>                             (1,628,181)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 507,434
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          729,248
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       994,655
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,269,558)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   507,434
<SALES>                                        752,870
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               781,977
<CGS>                                          432,299
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  725,534
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 6,125
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 50,318
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    50,318
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .05
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>

Exhibit 31.2 CFO Certification

I, Gordon F. Lee, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Form 10-KSB of Bentley Communications Corp.;

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 small business
issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) 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 small business issuer 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 small business issuer, 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 small business issuer'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; and

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business
issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal
quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting; and

5. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of
the small business issuer'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 small business issuer's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting.

Date:October 13, 2003


/s/ Gordon F. Lee
-----------------
Gordon F. Lee
Chief Financial Officer
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 11-3875

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the Western * District of Missouri. Carl R. Todd, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: May 23, 2012 Filed: June 25, 2012

___________ Before WOLLMAN, MELLOY, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. In this direct criminal appeal, Car l Todd challenges a money judgment in an order of forfeiture issued by the district court 1 after he pled guilty to conspiracy to commit mail fraud, wire fraud, and interstate transportation of stolen property. His counsel has moved to withdr aw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967).

1 The Honorable Gary A. Fenner, United St ates District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court committed no error in issuing the order of forfeiture. SeeUnited States v. Molina , 172 F.3d 1048, 1057 (8th Cir. 1999) (it is well-established that memb er of conspiracy is responsible for all reasonably foreseeable acts or omissions of others in furtherance of conspiracy); see also United States v. Van Nguyen , 602 F.3d 886, 903 (8th Ci r. 2010) (factual findings relating to forfeiture are reviewed for clear error; forfeiture itself is reviewed de novo). We also conclude that the district court di d not plainly err in or dering restitution. See United States v. Louper-Morris , 672 F.3d 539, 566 (8th Cir. 2012) (where defendant does not challenge restitution order at sent encing, restitution order is reviewed for plain error); United States v. Moser , 168 F.3d 1130, 1132 (8th Cir. 1999) (unless defendant objects to specific factual allegati on contained in presentence report, court may accept that fact as true for sentencing purposes).
Having reviewed the record i ndependently under Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues for app eal. We note, however, that the written judgment contains a typographical error that is inconsistent with the district court’s oral pronouncement of Todd’s sentence, and we therefore instruct the district court to modify the written judgment to reference “monthly payments of either $500 or 10 percent of gross income, whichever is greater, while on supervision.” See United States v. Mayo , 642 F.3d 628, 633 (8th Cir. 2011) (when oral sentence and written judgment conflict, oral sentence controls).
We affirm the judgment as modified, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

______________________________

-2-
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1915 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Library of Congress, 

Books for the Blind and Physically Handicapped, Salaries and Expenses 

for fiscal year 2024. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 29, 2023 

Mr. BIGGS (for himself, Mr. ROSENDALE, Mr. GAETZ, Mr. GOOD of Virginia, 

Mr. ROY, and Mr. CRANE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on House Administration 

A BILL 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Library of Congress, Books for the Blind and Physically 

Handicapped, Salaries and Expenses for fiscal year 

2024. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR 

4 LIBRARY OF CONGRESS, BOOKS FOR THE 

5 BLIND AND PHYSICALLY HANDICAPPED, SAL6 ARIES AND EXPENSES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024. 

7 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

8 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise availVerDate Sep 11 2014 01:54 Apr 14, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H1915.IH H1915

pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 1915 IH

1 able for Library of Congress, Books for the Blind and 

2 Physically Handicapped, Salaries and Expenses for fiscal 

3 year 2024 may not exceed $52,783,000. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
ex-10.26

 EXHIBIT 10.26
 

 KEY LINK ASSETS CORP.
 EXTENSION AGREEMENT
 

 

 WHEREAS, Key Link Assets Corp., a Delaware corporation (“Maker”), and Shawn P. Clark (“Payee”), are parties to promissory notes (“Notes”) as follows:
 

 (a)
 Promissory Note dated December 21, 2012 in the principal amount of $4,030; 
 (b)
 Promissory Note dated March 9, 2013 in the principal amount of $1,500;
 (c)
 Promissory Note dated January 24, 2013 in the principal amount of $3,000, of which $1,450 has been repaid; 
 (d)
 Promissory Note dated May 31, 2013 in the principal amount of $580 
 (e)
 Promissory Note dated September 29, 2013 in the principal amount of $3,178.
 (f)
 Promissory Note dated November 12, 2013 in the principal amount of $1,050
 (g)
 Promissory Note dated February 19, 2014 in the principal amount of $5,290
 (h)
 Promissory Note dated March 13, 2014 in the amount of $500
 (i)
 Promissory Note dated May 23, 2014 in the amount of $340
 (j)
 Promissory Note dated July 22, 2014 in the amount of $6,110
 (k)
 Promissory Note dated August 20, 2014 in the amount of $600
 (l)
 Promissory Note dated November 7, 2014 in the amount of $2,000
 (m)
 Promissory Note dated November 24, 2014 in the amount of $850
 (n)
 Promissory Note dated March 2, 2015 in the amount of $772
 (o)
 Promissory Note dated March 20, 2015 in the amount of $3.020
 (p)
 Promissory Note dated May 5, 2015 in the amount of $2,750
 (q)
 Promissory Note dated June 24, 2015 in the amount of $975
 

 WHEREAS, the parties desire to extend the Maturity Dates of the Notes and ratify and affirm the remaining provisions of the Notes.
 

 NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED BETWEEN THE PARTIES AS FOLLOWS:
 

 1.
 The Maturity Dates of the Notes shall be extended to June 30, 2017.
 

 2.
 All other terms and provisions of the Notes are hereby ratified and affirmed.
 

 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have caused this Extension Agreement to be duly executed as of June 29, 2015.
 

 	 	 	
	 MAKER:
	  
	 PAYEE: 

	  
	  
	  

	 KEY LINK ASSETS CORP.
	  
	  

	 A Delaware corporation
	  
	  

	  
	  
	  

	 By /s/ Shawn P. Clark
	  
	 /s/ Shawn P. Clark

	 Its Chief Executive Officer
	  
	 Shawn P. Clark
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1


  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
                                   PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


            Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, in accordance with 18
U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, in his capacity as an officer of MicroIslet, Inc. (the "Company"), that,
to his knowledge, the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-KSB for the period
ended December 31, 2006, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information
contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operation of the Company as of the dates and
for the periods presented in the financial statements included in such report.



Dated: April 6, 2007


            /s/ James R .Gavin III
            ----------------------
            James R .Gavin III, M.D., Ph.D., President and Chief Executive
            Officer
            (Principal Executive Officer)


Dated: April 6, 2007


            /s/ Kevin A. Hainley
            --------------------
            Kevin A. Hainley, Interim Chief Financial Officer
            (Principal Financial Officer)
Pursuant to5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 , th e co urt has determined that this opinionsho uld not * be publishe d an d is not precede nt except und er the limit ed circu mstance s set forth in 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 .4. 

### INTHE UNI TED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHE FIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 08- 20224 Su m m ar y Cal endar

UN I TE D S TA TE S OF AM ERI CA P l ai n t i f f

- A pp el l ee

v. CHRI S TOP HER AL AN RAM I REZ D e fe nda nt

- Appe l l ant

A pp ealf

rom t h e U n i t ed S t ates D i st ri ctC ou rt f or t h e Sou t h ern D i st ri ctof T exas U S D C N o . 4 :06 -C R -3 8 0 -1

B ef ore D AV IS, G A R Z Aan d P R A D O , C i rcui tJu dg es. P E R C U R I A M: * T h e att orney a pp oi n t ed to represent C h ri st oph er Al an Ram i r e z ha s m oved f o rl e av e t o w i t h draw a n d has f i l e d a b r i e f

i n a c c o r da nc e w i t h A nder s v. C a lif o rn ia , 3 8 6 U. S

. 7 3 8 ( 1 9 6 7 )

. Ra m i r e z h a s n o t f i l e d a r e s p o n s e . O ur i nde pe nde ntr e vi e w o f t he r e c o r d a nd c o uns e l ’ s b r i e f di s c l o s e s no no nf

r i vo l o us is s u e fo ra p p e a l. A c c o r d i n g ly , co u n s e l’ s m o tio n fo rle a v e to w ith d r a w is GRANTED, c o u n s e l i s e x c u s e d f r o m f u r t h e r r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s h e r e i n , a nd t he A P P E A L IS D IS M IS S E D

. S ee 5 T H C IR
. R. 42. 2. United States Court of App eals Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D June 9, 20 09 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I Clerk
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ivan Martinez, Appellant.

[824 NYS2d 711]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael E. Ambrecht, J.), rendered January 6, 2005, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4V2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s arguments for a reduced penalty under the Drug *264Law Reform Act (L 2004, ch 738) are without merit *(People v Utsey,*7 NY3d 398 [2006]). Concur—Andrias, J.P., Saxe, Marlow, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.
Abatem e nt Order filed June 27 , 2019

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 18

- 00835

- CR

____________ AMIT DINESH PATEL , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 434th Judicial District Court

Fort Bend County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 13

- DCR

- 064467

ABATEMENT ORDER
On June 12, 2019, appellant and the State filed a joint motion to abate the appeal and remand for plea negotiations. The parties state that they have reach an agreement regarding appellant’s prob ation, which they intend to present to the trial court for approval. The parties contend appellant will dismiss the appeal if the trial court approves a punishment of “shock probation.” The motion is GRANTED. The trial court is ordered to hold a hearing on the parties’ agreement within 60 days from the date of this order. A hearing record and a supplemental clerk’s record reflecting the trial court’s judgment and any documents filed pursuant to the plea negotiations are to be filed within 15 days of that he aring.The appeal is abated, treated as a closed case, and removed from this Court’s

active docket. The appeal will be reinstated on this Court’s active docket when the hearing record and supplemental clerk’s record are filed with this Court . The
Court will also consider an appropriate motion to reinstate the appeal filed by either party, or the Court may reinstate the appeal on its own motion.

PER CURIAM

Panel Consists of Justices Wise, Jewell, and Hassan.
DISMISS and Opinion Filed July 2, 2024 

# S

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-24-00070-CV JILL BURCH-JOHNSON, INDEPENDEN T EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF JACKIE LEE BURCH, DECEAS ED AND JILL BURCH-JOHNSON, INDIVIDUALLY, Appellant V. 21ST MORTGAGE CORPORATION, Appellee On Appeal from the 296th Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 296-03831-2022 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Smith, Miskel, and Breedlove Opinion by Justice Smith Appellant’s brief in this case is overdue . After appellant failed to respond to our inquiry regarding the reporter’s record , we ordered the appeal submitted without a reporter’s record and for appellant’s brie f to be filed by May 16, 2024. By postcard dated May 20, 2024, we informed appella nt her brief was overdue and directed appellant to file a brief with in ten days. We ca utioned appellant that failure to do so would result in the dismissal of this appeal without further notice. See T EX
. R. A PP
.–2– P. 38.8(a)(1). To date, appellant has not filed a br ief nor otherwise corresponded with the Court regarding the stat us of this appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 38.8 (a)(1); 42.3(b), (c).

240070F.P05 /Craig Smi t h / CRAIG SMITH JUSTICE–3– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT
JILL BURCH-JOHNSON, INDEPENDENT EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF JACKIE LEE BURCH, DECEASED AND JILL BURCH-JOHNSON, INDIVIDUALLY, Appellant
No. 05-24-00070-CV V.
21ST MORTGAGE CORPORATION, Appellee On Appeal from the 296th Judicial District Court, Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 296-03831- 2022. Opinion delivered by Justice Smith. Justices Miskel and Breedlove participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opini on of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED

. Judgment entered July 2, 2024
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2095 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for District of Columbia, 

Federal Payment for the DC Courts, Capital Improvements for DC 

courthouse facilities for fiscal year 2024. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 29, 2023 

Mr. BIGGS (for himself, Mr. ROSENDALE, Mr. GAETZ, Mr. GOOD of Virginia, 

Mr. ROY, and Mr. CRANE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Accountability 

A BILL 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for District of Columbia, Federal Payment for the DC Courts, 

Capital Improvements for DC courthouse facilities for 

fiscal year 2024. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 2095 IH

1 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR 

2 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, FEDERAL PAYMENT 

3 FOR THE DC COURTS, CAPITAL IMPROVE4 MENTS FOR DC COURTHOUSE FACILITIES 

5 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024. 

6 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

7 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise avail8 able for District of Columbia, Federal Payment for the 

9 DC Courts, Capital Improvements for DC courthouse fa10 cilities for fiscal year 2024 may not exceed $25,953,000. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2295 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Related Agency and 

Food and Drug Administration, Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, for fiscal year 2024. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 29, 2023 

Mr. BIGGS (for himself, Mr. ROSENDALE, Mr. GAETZ, Mr. GOOD of Virginia, 

Mr. ROY, and Mr. CRANE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Related Agency and Food and Drug Administration, Department of Health and Human Services, Food and 

Drug Administration, for fiscal year 2024. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2295 IH

1 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR 

2 RELATED AGENCY AND FOOD AND DRUG AD3 MINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 

4 AND HUMAN SERVICES, FOOD AND DRUG AD5 MINISTRATION, FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024. 

6 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

7 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise avail8 able for Related Agency and Food and Drug Administra9 tion, Department of Health and Human Services, Food 

10 and Drug Administration, for fiscal year 2024 may not 

11 exceed $5,584,965,000. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS