alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 524 

To strengthen the consequences of the fraudulent use of United States or 

foreign passports and other immigration documents. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 3, 2005 

Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mr. SESSIONS) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To strengthen the consequences of the fraudulent use of 

United States or foreign passports and other immigration 

documents. 

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

3 SECTION 1. FRAUDULENT USE OF PASSPORTS. 

4 (a) CRIMINAL CODE.— 

5 (1) SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY.— 

6 Section 1546 of title 18, United States Code, is 

7 amended by striking ‘‘the Commissioner of the Im8 migration and Naturalization Service’’ each place it 

9 appears and inserting ‘‘the Secretary of Homeland 

10 Security’’. 
2 

•S 524 IS

1 (2) DEFINITION OF PASSPORT.—Chapter 75 of 

2 title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding 

3 at the end the following: 

4 ‘‘§ 1548. Definition 

5 ‘‘In sections 1543 and 1544, the term ‘passport’ 

6 means any passport issued by the United States or any 

7 foreign country.’’. 

8 (3) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sec9 tions for chapter 75 of title 18, United States Code, 

10 is amended by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘Sec. 1548. Definition.’’. 

11 (b) IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT.—Section 

12 101(a)(43)(P) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 

13 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(P)) is amended to read as follows: 

14 ‘‘(P) except for a first offense for which an 

15 alien affirmatively shows was committed solely 

16 for the purpose of assisting, abetting, or aiding 

17 only the alien’s spouse, child, or parent to vio18 late a provision of this Act— 

19 ‘‘(i) an offense described in section 

20 1542, 1543, or 1544 of title 18, United 

21 States Code (relating to false statements in 

22 the application, forgery, or misuse of a 

23 passport); 

24 ‘‘(ii) an offense described in section 

25 1546(a) of title 18, United States Code, 
3 

•S 524 IS

1 relating to document fraud used as evi2 dence of authorized stay or employment in 

3 the United States for which the term of 

4 imprisonment is at least 12 months; or 

5 ‘‘(iii) any other offense described in 

6 section 1546(a) of title 18, United States 

7 Code, relating to entry into the United 

8 States, regardless of the term of imprison9 ment imposed.’’. 

10 SEC. 2. RELEASE AND DETENTION PRIOR TO DISPOSITION. 

11 Section 3142(f)(1) of title 18, United States Code, 

12 is amended— 

13 (1) in subparagraph (C), by striking ‘‘or’’ after 

14 the semicolon; and 

15 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

16 ‘‘(E) an offense under section 1542, 1543, 

17 1544, or 1546(a) of this title; or’’. 

Æ
<PAGE>



                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Golf Rounds.com, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended November 30, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), each of the undersigned,
in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to
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 operation of the Company.



Dated:  April 12, 2004                        /s/ John F. McCarthy, III
                                             -------------------------------
                                             John F. McCarthy, III
                                             Chairman and Secretary
                                             (Principal Executive Officer)


Dated:  April 12, 2004                        /s/ Robert H. Donehew
                                             -------------------------------
                                             Robert H. Donehew
                                             President and Treasurer
                                             (Principal Financial Officer)
NOTICE OF CONVERSION PRICE ADJUSTMENT

                         Knightsbridge Fine Wines, Inc.
                             One Kirkland Ranch Road
                             Napa, California 94558

                               September 24, 2004


Gryphon Master Fund, L.P.
100 Crescent Court
Suite 490
Dallas, Texas  75201

Gentlemen:

         Reference is made to that certain 7.5% Senior Secured  Convertible Note
Due 2006, dated April 21, 2004, in the original  principal amount of $5,500,000,
issued by the  undersigned to you (the "Note").  Capitalized  terms used in this
Notice shall have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Note.

         Pursuant to Section  4(c)(v) of the Note, you are hereby  notified that
the Conversion Price has been adjusted pursuant to Section 4(c)(iii) of the Note
as a result of the  issuance by the Company of shares of Common  Stock or Common
Stock Equivalents pursuant to that certain Stock Purchase Agreement,  dated June
__, 2004, between the Company and Armadillo  Investments Plc. The Company hereby
confirms  that the  Conversion  Price  under the Note after such  adjustment  is
$0.55.

                                          Very truly yours,

                                          KNIGHTSBRIDGE FINE WINES, INC.



                                          By:
                                             -----------------------------------
                                                   Joel Shapiro, President & CEO
#### Elliott *v.*Parker.

A landlord cannot take a lien for supplies already furnished to his tenant by a third person on the tenant’s credit. Consequently, a special contract for such a lien, executed by the tenant in writing and assigned by the landlord after the supplies to which the contract relates have all been furnished by the assignee, has no validity as against other creditors of the tenant. That the special contract was agreed upon and the writing prepared for execution and the assignment of it promised before the supplies were furnished, would make no difference, inasmuch as, under the statute, no lien which the landlord can assign can be created except by special contract in writing; and there can be no contract in writing before the writing is actually executed by the necessary parties thereto. *Judgment affirmed,.*

July 16, 1894.

*Certiorari.*Before Judge Richard II. Clark. Rock-dale superior court. October term, 1893.

*621King was tenant of Yeal, and wished to buy goods of Elliott in the spring of 1890. Elliott refused to credit him, but saw Yeal, and there was an agreement by Yeal, Elliott and King, that Yeal would transfer to Elliott a landlord’s lien for supplies, if Elliott would sell King the goods on the lien. This was an unsigned written obligation to pay Yeal, landlord, or order, $50 for provisions furnished to make King’s crops that year on the premises occupied by King as the tenant of Yeal, and giving Yeal or order a lien on the crops as provided by the act of February 25, 1875. Elliott furnished King the goods on the faith of the lien and agreement to the amount of $50, which he would not have done but for the agreement and lieu; none of which $50 has been paid. He sold King the goods, and not Yeal for King. Elliott thought the lien was signed the day it bears date, until in the fall of 1890 when he found it was not, and then sent and got King to sign it and Yeal to sign the transfer. This transfer was to Elliott or order, “under and according to acts of General Assembly of Georgia in 1875, relating to transfer of landlord’s liens, I guarantee the payment of the within obligation and hereby waive my claim for rent on said tenant until this debt is paid without recourse.” Signed, “ W. S. Yeal, landlord.” The lien was signed and transferred after Yeal was garnished in the suit in favor of Parker against King. On January 11,1891, Parker obtained judgment against King in a magistrate’s court, and also against Yeal as garnishee. On the same day Yeal answered the garnishment and offered the money to the court, but it was not finally paid in until April 11,1891. This money arose from proceeds of the crop of King made on Yeal’s land in 1890. Elliott foreclosed the alleged landlord’s transferred lien; and on an issue between Elliott and Parker, on a motion to distribute the money, a jury in the justice’s court found for Parker, which finding was sustained on *certiorari.*

*622George W. Gleaton, for plaintiff in error.

J. N. Glenn, *contra.*
#### Netologic, Inc., Doing Business as Investars, Appellant-Respondent, v Goldman Sachs Group, Inc., Respondent-Appellant, and Wall Street on Demand, Inc., Respondent, et al., Defendant.

[972 NYS2d 33]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Barbara R. Kapnick, J.), entered April 4, 2011, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint to the extent of dismissing the claims for breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and breach of confidentiality, and denied the motion as to the claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, unanimously modified, on the law, to reinstate the causes of action for breach of contract and dismiss the claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiffs second cause of action should be reinstated to the extent that it sounds in breach of contract, since plaintiff has sufficiently pled that defendant Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (Goldman) breached its duty under the parties’ licensing and distribution agreement (LDA) to engage in “commercially reasonable efforts” to sell plaintiff’s product to Goldman’s own customers *(see JFK Holding Co. LLC v City of New York,*98 AD3d 273, 276-278 [1st Dept 2012]). Plaintiff has likewise sufficiently pleaded that Goldman breached the LDA’s confidentiality provisions, warranting reinstatement of that claim.

Plaintiffs claim for breach of the implied covenant of good *434faith and fair dealing, however, should be dismissed as duplicative of its contract claims, since both claims “arise from the same facts and seek the identical damages for each alleged breach” *(Amcan Holdings, Inc. v Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce,*70 AD3d 423, 426 [1st Dept 2010] [citation omitted], *lv denied*15 NY3d 704 [2010]).

The motion court properly dismissed plaintiffs cause of action for unjust enrichment, as duplicative of its claims for breach of contract *(see Clark-Fitzpatrick, Inc. v Long Is. R.R. Co.,*70 NY2d 382 [1987]). Concur — Andrias, J.P., Sweeny, Acosta, Saxe and Clark, JJ.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-50528

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

TOMAS LUNA VARELA,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 2:13-CR-577-1

Before KING, JOLLY, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Mexican national Tomas Luna Varela (Luna) appeals the 36-month 

within-guidelines sentence he received following his conviction for illegal 

reentry, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Luna contends that his sentence is 

substantively unreasonable because it is greater than necessary to achieve the 

purposes of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), particularly given his age and the attendant 

low risk of recidivism. He concedes that a presumption of reasonableness 

* 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 31, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 14-50528 Document: 00512987300 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/31/2015
No. 14-50528

applies to his within-guidelines sentence but urges, for the first time, that no 

such presumption should apply because the illegal reentry guideline is not 

empirically supported and overstates the seriousness of the offense. 

As Luna concedes, his argument that the presumption of reasonableness 

should not apply because the illegal reentry guideline is not empirically 

supported is foreclosed. United States v. Mondragon-Santiago, 564 F.3d 357, 

366-67 (5th Cir. 2009). His challenge to the illegal reentry guideline on the 

ground that it overstates the seriousness of the offense is similarly unavailing. 

See United States v, Juarez-Duarte, 513 F.3d 204, 212 (5th Cir. 2008); United 

States v. Aguirre-Villa, 460 F.3d 681, 683 (5th Cir. 2006).

Luna has failed to rebut the presumption of reasonableness attached to 

his within-guidelines sentence. The district court’s comments at sentencing 

clearly demonstrate that it considered Luna’s age, along with other 

circumstances, including his criminal past, in imposing sentence where it did 

within the guidelines range. Luna does not point to any overlooked or 

improperly considered factors, and his mere disagreement with the propriety 

of the sentence imposed does not establish that his sentence is unreasonable. 

See United States v. Cooks, 589 F.3d 173, 186 (5th Cir. 2009); see also United 

States v. Campos-Maldonado, 531 F.3d 337, 339 (5th Cir. 2008). His challenge 

to his sentence is essentially a request to have this court reweigh the 

sentencing factors, which this court will not do. See Gall v. United States, 552 

U.S. 38, 51-52 (2007). 

AFFIRMED.

2

 Case: 14-50528 Document: 00512987300 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/31/2015
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Small Business Administration

# ACTION:

Notice and request for comments. 

# SUMMARY:

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the Small Business Administration's intentions to request approval on a new and/or currently approved information collection. 

# DATES:

Submit comments on or before March 23, 2009. 

# ADDRESSES:

Send all comments regarding whether this information collection is necessary for the proper performance of the function of the agency, whether the burden estimates are accurate, and if there are ways to minimize the estimated burden and enhance the quality of the collection, to David Becker, Acting Chief Financial Officer, Office of the Chief Financial Officer, Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, 6th Floor, Washington, DC 20416. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        David Becker, Acting Chief Financial Officer, Office of the Chief Financial Officer, 202-205-6122,                         *david.becker@sba.gov*; Curtis B. Rich, Management Analyst, 202-205-7030                         *curtis.rich@sba.gov*.                     

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

SBA will use data from (1) recipients of SBA-backed loans or SBIC financing to access customers satisfaction & perception of program impact and (2) 7(a) lenders to examine factors used to determine if credit elsewhere requirements are met. 

*Title:*                     “An Assessment of Small Business Administration Loan and Investment Performance.”                 

*Description of Respondents:*                     This survey will be administered to a random sample of businesses assisted under various SBA programs.                 

*Form Numbers:*                     2284, 2285.                 

*Annual Responses:*                     1.                 

*Annual Burden:*                     346.                 

Jacqueline White, 

Chief, Administrative Information Branch.

 [FR Doc. E9-1116 Filed 1-16-09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
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 Report of
Acquired Sales Corp. a Nevada corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the
period ending September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the “Report”) I, Gerard M. Jacobs, Principal Financial Officer
hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to my knowledge:





a.
            The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d));
      and





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








/s/ Gerard M.
Jacobs


Gerard M.
Jacobs


(Principal
Financial Officer)





Dated
December 30, 2008
EXHIBIT
32.1




CERTIFICATION PURSUANT
TO




18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350




AS ADOPTED PURSUANT
TO





SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In
connection with the Annual Report of JAG MEDIA, Inc. on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2009 and for the period from February 16, 2007 (date of
inception) through December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, in the capacities
and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies 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 his knowledge:




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 operation of the Company.





/s/ CHARLES STIDHAM
              Charles
      Stidham
              CEO
              Dated:
      March 12, 2010
              
              /s/ CHARLES
      STIDHAM
              Charles
      Stidham
              CFO
              Dated:
      March 12, 2010




This
certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
**Form 52-109F1 — Certification of Annual Filings**     I, Linda Gilbert, Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer of Envoy Communications GroupInc., certify that:1. I have reviewed the annual filings (as this term is defined in Multilateral Instrument 52-109*Certification of Disclosure in Issuers’ Annual and Interim Filings*) of Envoy Communications GroupInc. (the issuer) for the period ended September 30, 2005;2. Based on my knowledge, the annual filings do not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact required to be stated or that is necessary to make a statement notmisleading in light of the circumstances under which it was made, with respect to the periodcovered by the annual filings;3. Based on my knowledge, the annual financial statements together with the other financialinformation included in the annual filings fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the issuer, as of the date and for the periodspresented in the annual filings;4. The issuer’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting for the issuer,and we have:(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused them to be designed underour supervision, to provide reasonable assurance that material information relating to theissuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which the annual filings are being prepared;(b) designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused it to be designedunder our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability offinancial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes inaccordance with the issuer’s GAAP; and(c) evaluated the effectiveness of the issuer’s disclosure controls and procedures as of theend of the period covered by the annual filings and have caused the issuer to disclose inthe annual MD&A our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures as of the end of the period covered by the annual filings based on suchevaluation; and5. I have caused the issuer to disclose in the annual MD&A any change in the issuer’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the issuer’s most recent interim period thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the issuer’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.Date: December 23, 2005      Signed by Linda Gilbert
EXHIBIT 32.1
                                                                    ------------


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In  connection  with  the  Quarterly  Report  of REGENT  TECHNOLOGIES, INC. (the
"Company") on  Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010  as  filed with
the  Securities and Exchange Commission on the  date hereof (the "Report"), each
of the undersigned  does 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 his
knowledge:

     (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.

Dated:   November 10, 2010

/s/ David A. Nelson
--------------------------------------------------------
David A. Nelson
Chief Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer