alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Candido PEREZ-GUZMAN, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 05-50758

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Oct. 30, 2006.

*387Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Bowen W. Sutton, Law Offices of Bowen W. Sutton, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before DeMOSS, STEWART and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Candido Perez-Guzman (Perez) pleaded guilty to count 2 of an indictment charging him with conspiracy to harbor illegal aliens. Perez was sentenced to a 49-month term of imprisonment and to a three-year period of supervised release. Perez contends that his guilty plea was not knowing and voluntary and that the factual basis of his guilty plea was not sufficient to establish that he conspired to harbor illegal aliens. We review this issue for plain error. *See United States v. Vonn,*535 U.S. 55, 59, 122 S.Ct. 1043, 152 L.Ed.2d 90 (2002).

Perez’s argument is based upon his numerous equivocations during the rearraignment and, specifically, on the fact that he denied having personal knowledge of some of the facts recited in the plea agreement. This argument is without merit. Each time Perez equivocated, the magistrate judge confirmed again that Perez was admitting the elements of the offense. *See*8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(iii) & (v); *United States v. De Jesus-Batres,*410 F.3d 154, 160 (5th Cir.2005), *cert. denied,*— U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 1020, 163 L.Ed.2d 865, *and cert. denied,*— U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 1021, 163 L.Ed.2d 865, *and cert.*denied, - U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 1022, 163 L.Ed.2d 865 (2006). At no point does Perez contend that there was a reasonable probability that he would not have entered the plea but for error on the part of the district court. *See United States v. Dominguez Benitez,*542 U.S. 74, 83, 124 S.Ct. 2333, 159 L.Ed.2d 157 (2004). Perez has not shown that the district court plainly erred in accepting his guilty plea. *See Vonn,*535 U.S. at 59, 122 S.Ct. 1043.

Perez contends that the district court erred in deviating from the guideline range because he groped a female victim. The district court articulated its reasons for its three-month deviation adequately and the non-guidelines sentence reasonably reflected the statutory sentencing fac*388tors. *See United States v. Smith,*440 F.3d 704, 707-08 (5th Cir.2006).

AFFIRMED.

*

 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.
**EXHIBIT32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION

 

 

(PURSUANTTO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)

 

(Subsections (a) and (b)of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)

 

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, UnitedStates Code), the undersigned officer of Apogee Technology, Inc., a Delawarecorporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify, that:

 

The quarterly report on Form 10QSB for the quarterended September 30, 2004 (the “Form 10QSB”) of the Company fully complies withthe requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, and the information contained in the Form 10QSB fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.

 

 
| Dated: November 15, 2004 |   | /s/ Herbert M. Stein                                                                                                                     |
|--------------------------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                     |   | Herbert M. Stein                                                                                                                         |
|                     |   | Chairman of the Board, President, Chief Executive  Officer and Treasurer (principal financial officer and principal accounting  officer) |

 

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company andwill be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

** **

----
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                              Exhibit 12(a)

                                Entergy Arkansas, Inc.
             Computation of Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges and
       Ratios of Earnings to Combined Fixed Charges and Preferred Dividends



                                                              1994     1995     1996     1997    1998     1999
<S>                                                         <C>      <C>       <C>      <C>       <C>      <C>
Fixed charges, as defined:
  Total Interest Charges                                    $110,814 $115,337  $106,716 $104,165  $96,685  $97,023
  Interest applicable to rentals                              19,140   18,158    19,121   17,529   15,511   17,289
                                                            ------------------------------------------------------

Total fixed charges, as defined                              129,954  133,495   125,837  121,694  112,196  114,312

Preferred dividends, as defined (a)                           23,234   27,636    24,731   16,073   16,763   17,836
                                                            ------------------------------------------------------

Combined fixed charges and preferred dividends, as defined  $153,188 $161,131  $150,568 $137,767 $128,959 $132,148
                                                            ======================================================

Earnings as defined:

  Net Income                                                $142,263 $136,666  $157,798 $127,977 $110,951  $69,313
  Add:
    Provision for income taxes:
       Total                                                  29,220   72,081    84,445   59,220   71,374   54,012
    Fixed charges as above                                   129,954  133,495   125,837  121,694  112,196  114,312
                                                            ------------------------------------------------------
Total earnings, as defined                                  $301,437 $342,242  $368,080 $308,891 $294,521 $237,637
                                                            ======================================================
Ratio of earnings to fixed charges, as defined                  2.32     2.56      2.93     2.54     2.63     2.08
                                                            ======================================================

Ratio of earnings to combined fixed charges and
 preferred dividends, as defined                                1.97     2.12      2.44     2.24     2.28     1.80
                                                            ======================================================


------------------------
(a) "Preferred dividends," as defined by SEC regulation S-K, are computed by
    dividing the preferred dividend requirement by one hundred percent (100%)
    minus the income tax rate.
</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 113 (Monday, June 15, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 28277]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-13928]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Sensory System for Critical Infrastructure 
Defect Recognition, Visualization and Failure Prediction

    Notice is hereby given that, on April 14, 2009, pursuant to Section 
6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 
15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Sensory System for Critical 
Infrastructure Defect Recognition, Visualization and Failure Prediction 
(``Sensory System'') has filed written notifications simultaneously 
with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing 
(1) the identities of the parties and (2) the nature and objectives of 
the venture. The notifications were filed for the purpose of invoking 
the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to 
actual damages under specified circumstances.
    Pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act, the identities of the parties 
to the venture are: ELXSI, Orlando, FL; Louisiana Tech University, 
Ruston, LA; and Beyond Vision, LLC, Ruston, LA. The general area of 
Sensory System's planned activity is to develop a novel, deep-
penetrating scanning system based on ultrawideband radar for inspecting 
buried infrastructure such as pipelines, tunnels, and culverts that can 
detect fractures, quantify corrosion and determine the presence of 
voids in the surrounding soil to ``see'' beyond the structure to 
prevent accidents. The technology provides analysis which cannot be 
detected by current pipe inspection. The sensory system would be used 
by dull engineers to rehabilitate and replace critical non-conductive 
infrastructure such as concrete bridges, concrete dams, sea walls, 
highways, runways and non-ferrous pipelines. The activities of this 
joint venture project will be partially funded by award 
<greek-i>7ONANB9H9009 from the Technology Innovation Program, National 
Institute of Standards and Technology, U.S. Department of Commerce.

Patricia A. Brink,
Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. E9-13928 Filed 6-12-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                            2781
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     3
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     4
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                       5031
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                             130
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                               140
<LOANS>                                          30253
<ALLOWANCE>                                        477
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   41231
<DEPOSITS>                                       33820
<SHORT-TERM>                                      1309
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                               1005
<LONG-TERM>                                       1227
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              500
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           395
<OTHER-SE>                                        2975
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                   41231
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                   2657
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  325
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    24
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                  3006
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                 924
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                1137
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                             1869
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      155
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  19
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                   1617
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    908
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         564
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       564
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.89
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.86
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    5.24
<LOANS-NON>                                        185
<LOANS-PAST>                                        41
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     5
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   505
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      209
<RECOVERIES>                                        55
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  477
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                               477
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                             87
        

</TABLE>
solarmax_ex1025.htm

  EXHIBIT 10.25
  
 David Hsu
  
 August 12, 2022
  
 SolarMax Technology, Inc.
 3080 12th Street
 Riverside, California 92507
 Attn: Stephen Brown, CFO
  
 Re: Salary Deferral
  
 Ladies and Gentlemen:
  
 In order to aid SolarMax Technology, Inc., I have, since 2019, deferred a portion of my compensation.  As of the date of this letter, August 12, 2022, I have deferred a total of $1,190,585 (the “Deferred Compensation”) in salary and bonus to which I was entitled under my employment agreement with SolarMax.  This amount reflects salary and bonus that I have deferred during 2019, 2020, 2021 and 2022.  In connection with SolarMax’ proposed public offering, I agree that the Deferred Compensation shall be paid to me as follows.  Commencing on the first to occur of (i) one year from the date of the final prospectus relating to SolarMax’ initial public offering or (ii) January 1, 2024, SolarMax will pay the Deferred Compensation in twelve equal monthly installments, without interest with the first installment being paid on the date set forth in this sentence.  This agreement is subject to completion of SolarMax’ initial public offering by December 31, 2022, and, if the initial public offering is not completed by that date, this agreement shall terminate and be of no force and effect.
  
 	  
	 Very truly yours,
	  

	  
	  
	  

	  
	 /s/ David Hsu
	  


     
 AGREED TO:
  
 SOLARMAX TECHNOLOGY, INC.
  
 	 By:
	 /s/ Stephen Brown
	  

	  
	 Stephen Brown, CFO
No. 5024.

(Court of Appeal, Parish of Orleans.)

#### IN RE CURATORSHIP OF JOHN W. WARD, AN ABSENTEE.

Cage, Baldwin & Crabites for appellee.

Chas. Schneidau for appellant.

Johnston Armstrong for appellant.

DUFOUR, J.

This is a rule taken against Mrs. Ward the curatrix of the absentee, by John Ward alleging himself to be the “son and prospective heir of the absentee,” to compel her to report and inventory as belonging to the estate the sum of $904, which is claimed by her as seperate and paraphernal property.

*422May 16, 1910.

The evidence shows that the money had been inherited from her mother and invested by her in real estate of which she retained the administration. The act of purchase signed by the husband declares the funds to be paraphernal.

The credit portion of the purchase price was paid by the rents, and the remaining portion of the rents was used in paying insurance premiums on the life of John Ward, the mover herein.

The money in question herein resulted from a loan she made on that policy.

Two propositions are clear.

The first is that, under the circumstances, the money is paraphernal; the second that the son is without interest as “prospective heir” during his father’s life to question the acts of the tutrix.

Nemo est haeres viventis.

Judgment reversed and mover’s demand is rejected at his costs in both courts.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
     financial statements contained in the Registrant's Quarterly Report on 
     Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 1996 and is qualified in
     its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                             147,894
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       16,385
<ALLOWANCES>                                         8,192
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   156,087
<PP&E>                                                   0
<DEPRECIATION>                                           0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     170,233
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              151,398
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                            31,247
<OTHER-SE>                                         888,094
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       170,233
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    80,105
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                            0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    16,477
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                       475
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   6,416
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     56,737
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 56,737
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                        56,737
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                            0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            0
        


</TABLE>
----

----

| 1.   | The Report 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. |
|----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                 | Atlas Mining Company |
|--------------------------------------|----------------------|
|                                 |                 |   |
| Date:   September 30, 2009 | By:                  | /s/ CHRISTOPHER T. CARNEY |
|                                 |                 | Christopher T. Carney |
|                                 |                 | Interim Chief Financial Officer |

----
Exhibit 23

Consent of Independent Public Accountants

               As  independent  public  accountants,  we hereby  consent  to the
          incorporation   of  our  report   included  in  this  Form  10-Q  into
          Industries'  previously  filed  Form S-8  Registration  Statement  No.
          33-30619;  Form S-8  Registration  Statement  No.  33-30621;  Form S-8
          Registration Statement No. 333-08263;  Form S-8 Registration Statement
          No. 333-19981; Form S-8 Registration Statement No. 333-19983; Form S-8
          Registration Statement No. 333-19985;  Form S-3 Registration Statement
          No. 333-22347; Form S-3 Registration Statement No. 333-26847; Form S-3
          Registration  Statement  No.  333-39911  and  Form  S-4A  Registration
          Statement No. 333-50537.

                                   /s/ Arthur Andersen LLP

Chicago, Illinois

May 13, 1998
o

APR15 aJ05

Joanne Willis Newton, Senior Staff Attorney

California Indian Legal Services

609 South Escondido Boulevard

Escondido, California 92025

RE: Amendment to the Pauma-Yuima Band of Mission Indians

Dear Ms. Newton:

This letter responds to your request to the National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC)

to reviewand approvethe recent amendmentsto the Pauma-YuimaBand of Mission Indians.

(Band) Gaming Ordinance. The amendments, regulations and resolutions were received by the

NIGC on January 21,2005.

Thisletter constitutes approval under the Indian GamingRegulatory Act. 25 D.S.C. § 2701 et seq.

Approval does not constitute approval of specific games. In addition, the amendments are

approved for gaming only on Indian lands, as defined in the IGRA, over which the Band

exercisesjurisdiction.

NATIONALHEADQUARTERS 1441 L St. NW, Suite 9100, Washington, DC 20005 Tel: 202.632]003 Fax: 202.632]066 WWW.NIGC.GOV

REGIONAl OFFICESPortland.OR;Sacramento,CA;Phoenix,Al.;St. Paul.MN;Tulsa,OK
NIGC FY21 GGR Distribution Map

@NIGCgov

Alaska

Texas

Utah

Montana

California

Arizona

Idaho

Nevada

Oregon

Iowa

Colorado

Kansas

Wyoming

New Mexico

Missouri

Minnesota

Nebraska

Oklahoma

South Dakota

Washington

Arkansas

North Dakota

Louisiana

Illinois

Ohio

Florida

Alabama Georgia

Wisconsin

Virginia

Indiana

Michigan

Mississippi

Kentucky

Tennessee

Pennsylvania

North

Carolina

South

Carolina

West

Virginia

New Jersey

Maine

New York

Vermont

Maryland

New Hampshire

Connecticut

Delaware

Massachusetts

Rhode Island

Portland

Phoenix

St. Paul

Tulsa OK City $3.2B (‘20=$2.4B)

50 ops (‘20=52 ops)

$8.1B (‘20=$5.8B)

42 ops (‘20=43 ops)

$4.8B (‘20=$3.7B)

99 ops (‘20=103 ops)

FY21 GGR = $39B, 

510 submissions

$3.0B (‘20=$2.1B)

70 ops (‘20=74 ops)

Rapid City

$0.4B (‘20=$0.2B)

41 ops (‘20=42 ops)

$3.2B (‘20=$2.1B)

74 ops (‘20=76 ops)

$4.4B (‘20=$3.1B)

56 ops (‘20=57 ops)

Washington DC 

Sacramento

$11.9B (‘20=$8.4B)

78 ops (‘20=77 ops)
II 

Calendar No. 12 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 34 

To prevent the Federal Communications Commission from repromulgating 

the fairness doctrine. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 6, 2009 

Mr. DEMINT (for himself, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. THUNE, Mr. ALEXANDER, Mr. 

BARRASSO, Mr. BOND, Mr. BROWNBACK, Mr. CHAMBLISS, Mr. COBURN, 

Mr. CORNYN, Mr. CRAPO, Mr. ENSIGN, Mr. ENZI, Mr. GRAHAM, Mrs. 

HUTCHISON, Mr. ISAKSON, Mr. KYL, Mr. LUGAR, Mr. MARTINEZ, Mr. 

MCCONNELL, Mr. ROBERTS, Mr. SESSIONS, Mr. VITTER, Mr. 

VOINOVICH, and Mr. WICKER) introduced the following bill; which was 

read the first time 

JANUARY 7, 2009 

Read the second time and placed on the calendar 

A BILL 

To prevent the Federal Communications Commission from 

repromulgating the fairness doctrine. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Broadcaster Freedom 

5 Act of 2009’’. 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
2 

•S 34 PCS

1 SEC. 2. FAIRNESS DOCTRINE PROHIBITED. 

2 Title III of the Communications Act of 1934 is 

3 amended by inserting after section 303 (47 U.S.C. 303) 

4 the following new section: 

5 ‘‘SEC. 303A. LIMITATION ON GENERAL POWERS: FAIRNESS 

6 DOCTRINE. 

7 ‘‘Notwithstanding section 303 or any other provision 

8 of this Act or any other Act authorizing the Commission 

9 to prescribe rules, regulations, policies, doctrines, stand10 ards, or other requirements, the Commission shall not 

11 have the authority to prescribe any rule, regulation, policy, 

12 doctrine, standard, or other requirement that has the pur13 pose or effect of reinstating or repromulgating (in whole 

14 or in part) the requirement that broadcasters present op15 posing viewpoints on controversial issues of public impor16 tance, commonly referred to as the ‘Fairness Doctrine’, 

17 as repealed in General Fairness Doctrine Obligations of 

18 Broadcast Licensees, 50 Fed. Reg. 35418 (1985).’’. 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS

rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
Calendar No. 12 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 34 

A BILL 

To prevent the Federal Communications Commission from repromulgating the fairness doctrine. 

JANUARY 7, 2009 

Read the second time and placed on the calendar 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS