alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Gregory George SAMUDA, a.k.a. Robert Raymon Biggs, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 12-10761

Non-Argument Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

Nov. 28, 2012.

Michael V. Herskowitz, Lawrence R. Sommerfeld, Sally Yates, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Atlanta, GA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Gregory George Samuda, Lisbon, OH, pro se.

David H. Jones, King, King *&*Jones, PC, Atlanta, GA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before HULL, JORDAN and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

David Jones, appointed counsel for Gregory George Samuda in this direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant and filed a brief pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merits of the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Samuda’s convictions and sentences are

AFFIRMED.
# cpsaat18
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

GILDARDO VAZQUEZ

- MENDEZ,

Petitioner,

v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,

Respondent. No s . 14

- 71255 15

- 72521
Agency No. A200

- 705

- 932

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of Order s of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted October 25, 2016 ** Before: LEAVY, SILVERMAN, and GRABER , Circuit Judges. In these consolidated petitions for review, Gildardo Vazquez

- Mendez, a
native and citizen of M exico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) orde rs dismissing his app eal from an immigration judge’s order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings conducted in absentia , and

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

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

# FILED

NOV 3 2016 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 14

- 71255 & 15

- 72521

denying his subsequent motion to reopen

. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen , and
review de novo constitutional claims. Hernandez

- Velasquez v. Holder, 611 F.3d 1073, 1077 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petitions for review. The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying Vazquez

- Mendez’s first motion to reopen his in absentia removal order, where written notic e of the hearing
was served on hi s attorney of record. See 8 C. F.R. § 1003.23(b)(4)(iii)(A)(2) ; 8 C.F.R. § 1292.5 (a) (permitting notice on alien’s attorney of record); Garcia v. INS, 222 F.3d 1208, 1209 (9th Cir. 2000) (notice to the attorney of record c onstitutes notice to the alien)

. The BIA did not abuse its discretion or violate due process in denying Vazquez

- Mendez’s second motion to reopen, based on ineffective assistance of counsel, for failure to establish prejudice, where he has not shown that the documents submitted with his appeal to the BIA may have affected the outcome of his proceedings. See Martinez

- Hernandez v. Holder , 778 F.3d 1086, 1088 (9th Cir. 2015) ( to establish prejudice, “ a petitioner must show counsel’s performance was so inadequate that it may have affected the outcome of proceedings. ” (quotation m arks and citations omitted))

.3 14

- 71255 & 15

- 72521

In light of this disposition, we do not reach Vazquez

- Mendez’s remaining contentions regarding the alleged conduct of former counsel.
PETITIONS FOR REVIEW DENIED.
30

40

50

60

70

80

1970 1973 1976 1979 1982 1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006

30

40

50

60

70

80

Chart 5-4. The employment-population ratios for adult men 

and women have edged up since mid-2003

Adult men

Adult women

Teenagers

Percent

NOTE: Shaded areas represent recessions. Data are seasonally adjusted.

SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics

Chart 5-4. The employment-population ratios for adult men 

and women have edged up since mid-2003

• The employment-population ratio (the proportion of the population that is 

employed) for adult men has hovered around 72 percent since the early 1980s, 

with the exception of cyclical declines during recessions. The ratio for adult 

women—58.0 percent in 2006—rose markedly over the past several decades 

(although there were also cyclical swings), reflecting the dramatic influx of 

women into the job market. 

• The employment-population ratios for adult men and women declined during 

the 2001 recession, but have edged up since mid-2003.

• The employment-population ratio for teenagers fell steeply from 2000 to 2003, 

and has leveled off since. The teen ratio is more cyclically sensitive than the 

ratio for adults.
Exhibit 32.1

                        CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

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  officers of Seaway Valley
Capital Corporation (the "Company"), certifies that:

1.   The  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the Quarter  ended
     September 30, 2007 (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

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



                            /S/      THOMAS SCOZZAFAVA
                            ---------------------------------
Dated: November 14, 2007             THOMAS SCOZZAFAVA
                                     Chief Financial Officer

This  certification  is made solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C.  Section  1350,
subject  to the  knowledge  standard  contained  therein,  and not for any other
purpose.
FILED

January 28, 1999

Cecil Crowson, Jr.

Appellate C ourt

Clerk

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT KNOXVILLE

In Re: THE ESTATE OF MILDRED M. ) C/A NO. 03A01-9808-CH-00267

VERKSTROM, deceased, )

) SULLIVAN PROBATE

) NO. P-95-7553(L)

--------------------------------------------------)

GORMAN WADDELL, Co-Executor of )

the Estate of Mildred M. Verkstrom, ) SULLIVAN CHANCERY 

) NO. 27243(M)

Plaintiff-Appellee, )

) HON. RICHARD E. LADD,

v. ) CHANCELLOR

)

EDNA M. GODWIN, )

)

Defendant-Appellant, )

--------------------------------------------------)

GORMAN WADDELL, Co-Executor of )

the Estate of Mildred M. Verkstrom, ) SULLIVAN CHANCERY

) NO. 27244(L)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

BERNICE GATES, Co-Executrix, )

and )

BANK OF TENNESSEE, )

)

Defendants. )

O R D E R

This cause was regularly heard and considered by the court. IT IS NOW

ORDERED that the judgment of the Trial Court is affirmed, and the cause remanded. 

The costs of appea l are adjudged to appe llant, for which execution may issue if

nece ssary.

PER CURIUM
**Exhibit 21**

 

Airspan’s Subsidiaries 

 

Airspan Communications (Ireland) Ltd. 

 

Airspan Communications Holdings (Ireland) 

 

Airspan Communications Ltd. 

 

Airspan Networks PTY Ltd (Australia) (Subsidiary of Airspan CommunicationsLtd.) 

 

Airspan Communications (Shanghai) Co. Ltd. 

 

Airspan Networks Eastern Europe Ltd (Subsidiary of Airspan CommunicationsLtd.) 

 

P.T. Airspan Networks Indonesia 

 

Airspan Networks (Israel) Ltd 

 

Airspan Japan Kabushiki Kaisha
##              THE AAL MUTUAL FUNDS

###                                 Form N-SAR for
### IN THE UNI TED STAT ES COURT OFAPPEALS FOR THE FIF TH CIRCU IT

No. 11-10521 Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

v. DANIEL CONTRERAS, Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 6:10-CR-59-1
Before GARZA, SOUTHWICK, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Daniel Contreras has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Contreras has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevan t p ortions of the record reflected therein. We concur with
c o u n s e l ’ s a s s e s s m e nt that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, 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 Februa ry 22 , 20 12 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Purs uant to 5 T H C IR
. R. 47.5 , the cour t has d 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 for th in 5 T H C IR
. R. 47.5 .4. Case: 11-10521 Document: 00511764117 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/22/2012No. 11-10521

counsel is excused from further responsibilities he r e i n, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See5 T H C I R
. R. 42.2.

2 Case: 11-10521 Document: 00511764117 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/22/2012
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5412 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5412

   To correct maps depicting Unit T-10 of the John H. Chafee Coastal 
                       Barrier Resources System.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 19, 2004

  Mr. Ortiz introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                         Committee on Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To correct maps depicting Unit T-10 of the John H. Chafee Coastal 
                       Barrier Resources System.

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

SECTION 1. CORRECTIONS TO MAPS.

    (a) In General.--The Secretary of the Interior shall, before the 
end of the 30-day period beginning on the date of the enactment of this 
Act, make such corrections to the map described in subsection (b) as 
are necessary to ensure that depictions of areas on that map are 
consistent with the depictions of areas appearing on the map entitled 
``Corrections to Coastal Barrier Resources System Map-Unit T-10'', 
dated June __, 2004, and on file with the Secretary and the Committee 
on Resources of the United States House of Representatives.
    (b) Map Described.--The map described in this subsection is the map 
that--
            (1) is included in a set of maps entitled ``Coastal Barrier 
        Resources System'', dated October 24, 1990; and
            (2) is subtitled ``Four Mile Hill Unit TX-16P, North Padre 
        Island Unit T10/T10P''.
    (c) Availability.--The Secretary of the Interior shall keep the map 
described in subsection (b) on file and available for public inspection 
in accordance with section 4(b) of the Coastal Barrier Resources Act 
(16 U.S.C. 3503(b)).
                                 <all>
```
**EXHIBIT 10.38**

 

**Amendment 2 to theLicense AgreementDated May 4, 1999BetweenGeneral Dynamics Information Systems, Inc. (“GDIS”)andConductus, Inc. (“Conductus”)**

 

Section 3.3             Reserved Rights and Limitationsof Conductus is amended to read as follows:

 

3.3.1                        BidsSeparate From GDIS. Conductus will not bid independently of GDIS onGovernment Contracts which are (a) contracts for the delivery of hardware(except as provided in Section 3.3.4); (b) offered for bidding directly to GDISby a government customer; (c) contracts for which GDIS can provide technicalcompetencies which Conductus does not possess; (d) contracts for which GDIS hasaccess to customer or application information which Conductus does not possessor (e) contracts which would benefit from GDIS project management competencieswhich Conductus does not possess.

 

3.3.2                        GovernmentContracts. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Conductus may bid independentlyof GDIS for Government Contracts which are for (a) Small Business InnovativeResearch (“SBIR”) awards; (b) Category 6.1 solicitations as defined under DFAR235.001; or (c) opportunities GDIS elects to pursue with a subcontractor otherthan Conductus.

 

3.3.3                        SpecialConsiderations.  GDIS will promptlyreview all opportunities under Section 3.3.1 (a) for competitive pricingpurposes.  GDIS may choose to allowConductus to bid directly on a given opportunity, particularly those involvingdelivery of hardware for which GDIS provides no substantial contribution.  In such a case, GDIS will indicate its preferenceto bid within two business days after receipt of a written request fromConductus.  If Conductus receives acontract for the delivery of hardware under this Section 3.3.3, it will payGDIS a royalty equal to a sixteen and two-thirds percent (16.67%) of thepurchase order or contract received from the customer.  Payment of the royalty shall be due thirty(30) days after Conductus receives payment for the hardware.

 

3.3.4                        ConductusReferral Rights.  Notwithstandingany other provision of this Agreement, Conductus may bid separately onGovernment Contracts that GDIS elects not to pursue.

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the partieshereto have caused this Amendment to be executed this 9th day of August, 2000.

 
| CONDUCTUS,  INC. |                | GENERAL  DYNAMICS |
|------------------|---------------------|-------------------|
|             |                |              | Government  Systems Corporation |
|             |                |              | General  Dynamics Electronic Systems |
|             |                |              |   |   |
| By:              | /s/ Ron  Wilderink  |              | By: | /s/ Ed  Reioux |   |
|             | Ron  Wilderink      |              |   | Ed Reioux |
|             | VP Finance  and CFO |              |   | Sr.  Subcontract Administrator |
|             |                |              |   |   |
| Date:            | 8/9/00              |              | Date: | 8/9/00 |   |

 

----
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of PRIMEDIA Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2005 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Kelly P. Conlin, Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



|/s/KELLY P. CONLINKelly P. Conlin
Chief Executive Officer and President |  | 
|----------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 
|                                                                        |  | 
|May 10, 2005                                                            |  | 

This certification accompanies each 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.

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.

---



QuickLinks
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED JULY 1, 2000, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-01-2000
<CASH>                                             145
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   62,764<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                    (2,252)<F1>
<INVENTORY>                                     40,816
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               106,177
<PP&E>                                         212,417<F1>
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (98,935)<F1>
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 314,913
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           98,917
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           134
<OTHER-SE>                                      79,990
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   314,913
<SALES>                                        234,925
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               234,925
<CGS>                                          208,274
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  208,274
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                24,073
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              14,899
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (12,321)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    (2,945)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (9,376)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (9,376)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.70)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.70)
<FN>
<F1>* Amounts are reported net of reserves in the Condensed Consolidated Balance
Sheet
</FN>


</TABLE>
THE MCDANIEL LAW FIRM, PC 

54 Main Street 

Hackensack, New Jersey 07601 

(201) 845-3232 

(201) 845-3777 - facsimile 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Baseprotect UG, Ltd. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY 

BASEPROTECT UG, LTD., a German 

Corporation, 

Plaintiff, 

 v. 

JOHN DOES 1-X (such persons being 

presently unknown), 

 Defendants. 

 

Civ. Action. No. 2:11-cv-03621(CCC)(JAD) 

NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL

AS TO IP ADDRESS 24.42.89.124 ONLY

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Plaintiff BASEPROTECT UG, LTD., by its undersigned attorney, hereby voluntarily 

dismisses, without prejudice, the above-captioned matter pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1) as 

to the defendant identified by Internet Protocol address 24.42.89.124 ONLY. No answer or 

motion for summary judgment has been served in this action by this defendant. 

DATED: September 22, 2011 THE MCDANIEL LAW FIRM, P.C. 

 By: 

 Jay R. McDaniel, Esq. 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Baseprotect UG, Ltd.

Case 2:11-cv-03621-CCC -JAD Document 45 Filed 09/22/11 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 417
# Employment Situation

"The Employment Situation (EMPSIT) release contains data from two surveys. The Current Employment Statistics program surveys businesses on a monthly basis and provides data by industry on employment, hours, and earnings of workers on nonfarm payrolls. The Current Population Survey is a monthly survey of households; it provides data on the labor force, employment, unemployment, and persons not in the labor force. Issued monthly. For more information, see www.bls.gov/cps/ and www.bls.gov/ces/. "

- Payroll employment increases by 175,000 in April; unemployment rate changes little at 3.9%
- Payroll employment rises by 303,000 in March; unemployment rate changes little at 3.8%
- Payroll employment rises by 275,000 in February; unemployment rate increases to 3.9%
- Payroll employment rises by 353,000 in January; unemployment rate remains at 3.7%
- Payroll employment increases by 216,000 in December; unemployment rate unchanged at 3.7%
- Payroll employment increases by 199,000 in November; unemployment rate edges down to 3.7%
- Payroll employment rises by 150,000 in October; unemployment rate changes little at 3.9%
- Payroll employment rises by 336,000 in September; unemployment rate unchanged at 3.8%
- Payroll employment increases by 187,000 in August; unemployment rate rises to 3.8%
- Payroll employment rises by 187,000 in July; unemployment rate changes little at 3.5%
- Payroll employment increases by 209,000 in June; unemployment rate changes little at 3.6%
- Payroll employment increases by 339,000 in May; unemployment rate rises to 3.7%
Exhibit 99.2

                            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 accompanying Annual Report of SPEAR & JACKSON,
INC. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending September 30, 2002, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, William Fletcher, principal accounting officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge, 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 fully presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.


                                               /s/ William Fletcher
                                                   ---------------------------
                                          Name:    William Fletcher
                                          Title:   Principal Accounting Officer
                                          Dated:   January 10, 2003