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

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

May 20, 2009

THOMAS K. KAHN

CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 08-14527

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 87-00516-CR-WPD

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JOSE ANTONIO DOYHARZABAL,

Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Florida

_________________________

(May 20, 2009)

Before BIRCH, CARNES and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Jose Antonio Doyharzabal appeals pro se the district court’s denial of his
motion for reconsideration of its order denying his petition for a writ of audita

querela. He contends that a writ of audita querela is the only remaining avenue by

1

which he can challenge the constitutionality of his sentence and seek retroactive

application of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005).

We “review de novo the question of whether a prisoner may challenge his

sentence by filing a motion for a writ of audita querela.” United States v. Holt, 417

F.3d 1172, 1174 (11th Cir. 2005) (per curiam).

Audita querela is “an ancient writ used to attack the enforcement of a

judgment after it was rendered.” Id. Although we have noted that “federal courts

may properly fill the interstices of the federal postconviction remedial framework

through remedies available at common law,” id. at 1175 (quotation omitted), a writ

of audita querela may not be granted where the “relief [sought] is cognizable under

[28 U.S.C.] § 2255.” Id. Here the relief that Doyharzabal seeks—vacating his

sentence as unconstitutional—falls within the scope of § 2255. Therefore, he

2

 Doyharzabal had previously filed an unsuccessful 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate 1

his conviction, which the district court denied. 

 Section 2255 provides, in relevant part: 2

A prisoner in custody under sentence of a court established by Act of Congress claiming

the right to be released upon the ground that the sentence was imposed in violation of the

Constitution . . . or that the sentence was in excess of the maximum authorized by

law . . . may move the court which imposed the sentence to vacate, set aside or correct

the sentence.

2
cannot seek relief from his sentence under a writ of audita querela. The district

court properly denied his motion.

AFFIRMED.

28 U.S.C. § 2255(a). 

3
Exhibit 31.1



I, Michael C. Mauer, Chief Executive
Officer of CM Finance Inc certify that:



1. I have reviewed
this annual report on Form 10-K of CM Finance Inc;



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 registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4. The registrant’s
other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)) for the registrant 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 registrant, 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 registrant’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 registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the
registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that
has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;
and



5. The registrant’s
other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,
to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’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 registrant’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 registrant’s
internal control over financial reporting.



Dated this 30th day of August 2016.



|    |  |                                                  | 
|--- |  | ------------------------------------------------ | 
|By: |  | /s/    Michael
        C. Mauer                 
|    |  | Michael C. Mauer
        Chief Executive Officer
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2477 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to establish a Department of Veterans 

Affairs Medal for Distinguished Public Service to honor veterans who 

make remarkable and distinguished contributions to their communities. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 8, 2011 

Mr. MCINTYRE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to establish a Department of Veterans Affairs Medal for Distinguished 

Public Service to honor veterans who make remarkable 

and distinguished contributions to their communities. 

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

3 SECTION 1. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDAL 

4 FOR DISTINGUISHED PUBLIC SERVICE. 

5 (a) ESTABLISHMENT.—Subchapter II of chapter 5 of 

6 title 38, United States Code, is amended by adding at the 

7 end the following new section: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2477 IH

1 ‘‘SEC. 533. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDAL 

2 FOR DISTINGUISHED PUBLIC SERVICE. 

3 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may award a 

4 decoration called the ‘Department of Veterans Affairs 

5 Medal for Distinguished Public Service’ to a veteran de6 scribed in subsection (b). 

7 ‘‘(b) VETERAN DESCRIBED.—A veteran described in 

8 this subsection is a veteran whom the Secretary deter9 mines has, during the period after the date of the vet10 eran’s discharge or release from the active military, naval, 

11 or air service— 

12 ‘‘(1) made remarkable and distinguished con13 tributions to the community of the veteran; and 

14 ‘‘(2) exemplified the virtues of honor, duty, and 

15 commitment to service that originally led the veteran 

16 to service in the Armed Forces. 

17 ‘‘(c) POSTHUMOUS AWARD.—The Secretary may 

18 award the medal under this section to a veteran described 

19 in subsection (b) who is deceased. 

20 ‘‘(d) REGULATIONS.—The Secretary may prescribe 

21 regulations to carry out this section.’’. 

22 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections 

23 at the beginning of such chapter of such title is amended 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 2477 IH

1 by inserting after the item relating to section 532 the fol2 lowing new item: 

‘‘533. Department of Veterans Affairs Medal for Distinguished Public Service.’’. 

Æ 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit

__________________________ 

ELMER R. CALDWELL, 

Claimant-Appellant, 

v.

Eric K. Shinseki, SECRETARY OF VETERANS 

AFFAIRS,

Respondent-Appellee. 

__________________________ 

2013-7106

__________________________ 

Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for 

Veterans Claims in No. 11-3431, Judge Coral W. Pietsch.

__________________________ 

ON MOTION

__________________________ 

O R D E R

The Secretary of Veterans Affairs moves for a 22-day

extension of time, until September 3, 2013, to file his 

response brief.

Upon consideration thereof, 

IT IS ORDERED THAT: 

Case: 13-7106 Document: 9 Page: 1 Filed: 08/08/2013
CALDWELL V. SHINSEKI 2

The motion is granted.

 FOR THE COURT

 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole 

 Daniel E. O’Toole

 Clerk

s27 

Case: 13-7106 Document: 9 Page: 2 Filed: 08/08/2013
ex10_1-f8k01042012.htm


Exhibit 10.1







SWANK, INC.


90 PARK AVENUE


NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10016


 



 




	 	 	 	Effective January 1, 2012	 	 












                            


Mr. James E. Tulin


c/o Swank, Inc.


8800 North Gainey Center Drive


Scottsdale, Arizona 85258


 


Dear Mr. Tulin:


 


 


Reference is made to the Amended and Restated Employment Agreement dated as of January 10, 2008, between Swank, Inc. (the “Corporation”) and you (as amended to date, the “Employment Agreement”).


 


 


This will confirm that the term of the Employment Agreement is hereby extended for an additional one (1) year period, commencing on January 1, 2012 and ending on December 31, 2012 (the “Extension Period”). Except as modified and amended by this letter, the Employment Agreement shall remain and continue in full force and effect on and after the date hereof.


 


 


This letter may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall he deemed an original and all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same agreement.  This letter shall be governed by, and construed and enforced in accordance with, the laws of the State of New York, without regard to principles of conflicts of law (other than Section 5-1401 of the New York General Obligations Law).


 


 


If the foregoing correctly sets forth our understanding and agreement, kindly countersign this letter in the space provided below.


 



 



	 	 	 	Very truly yours,	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	

SWANK, INC.

	 	 



 



	 	 	 	By:	/s/ Jerold R. Kassner	 
	 	 	 	 	

Name: Jerold R. Kassner

	 
	 	 	 	 	

Executive Vice President and

	 
	 	 	 	 	

Chief Financial Officer

	 









 


ACCEPTED AND AGREED:




 







/s/ James E. Tulin


James E. Tulin
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-40525

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

WILFREDO YSAEL BARRIOS-CINTO,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:15-CR-1292-1

Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Wilfredo Ysael 

Barrios-Cinto 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). Barrios-Cinto has not filed a response. 

We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record 

reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal 

 

* 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

August 18, 2017

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 16-40525 Document: 00514122358 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/18/2017
No. 16-40525

2

presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s 

motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further 

responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 16-40525 Document: 00514122358 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/18/2017
1 Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the Court ha s determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS For the Fifth Circuit

No. 98-30906 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

VERSUS RONALD D. MCGLOTHURN,
Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana

(94-CR-50084-1) March 25, 1999 Before DAVIS, DUHÉ, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: 1 Court-appointed counsel for Ronald D. McGlothurn has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as required by A nders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). McGlothurn has not filed a
response. Our independent review of the brief and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, the motion for leave
to withdraw is GRANTED, c ounsel is excused form further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED.
The jurisdictional is sue is pretermitted. U nited States v. Weathersby , 958 F.2d 65, 66 (5th Cir. 1992).2
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. § 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Sirona Dental Systems, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Simone Blank, Chief Financial 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, that:

1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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



|               |  |  |  |                                                                               
|-------------- |  |  |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|August 3, 2010 |  |  |  | /S/ SIMONE BLANK                                                              
|               |  |  |  | Simone Blank                                                                  
|               |  |  |  | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
(Chief Financial Officer)

A signed original of this written statement required by section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature
that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Sirona Dental Systems, Inc. and will be retained by Sirona Dental Systems, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# United States Court of Appeals **for the Fifth Circuit**

No. 21-40815 Summary Calendar

United States of America,

Plaintiff—Appellee ,

versus
Danilo Jose Galo-Lopez,

Defendant—Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:21-CR-1057-1

Before King, Costa, and Ho, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam: * The Federal Public Defender appo inted to represent Danilo Jose Galo-Lopez 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). Ga lo-Lopez has not f iled a response.

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED April 8, 2022 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 21-40815 Document: 00516273267 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/08/2022No. 21-40815

2 We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appe llate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED , counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED

. See
5th Cir. R. 42.2. Case: 21-40815 Document: 00516273267 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/08/2022
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. William ORLEANS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 07-4470.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Dec. 28, 2007.

Decided: Jan. 11, 2008.

James Wyda, Federal Public Defender, Matthew G. Kaiser, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellant. Hollis Raphael Weisman, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.

Before TRAXLER, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

William Orleans appeals from the revocation of his probation and the imposition of a sixty-day sentence. Orleans’ counsel has filed an *Anders*
      ***
      **brief, stating that *573there are no meritorious issues for appeal but questioning whether Orleans’ sentence was plainly unreasonable. Although informed of his right to do so, Orleans has declined to file a pro se supplemental brief. We affirm.

We review a sentence imposed upon revocation of probation to determine whether the sentence is plainly unreasonable. *United States v. Moulden,*478 F.3d 652, 656 (4th Cir.2007). In doing so, we first assess whether the sentence is unreasonable, using a more deferential standard as to issues of fact and the district court’s exercise of discretion than that applied in reviewing a Guidelines sentence. *Id.*If we find the sentence to be reasonable, the inquiry ends. *Id.*at 657. If we find the sentence unreasonable, we must then decide whether it is plainly so. *Id.*“[T]he sentencing court retains broad discretion to revoke a defendant’s probation and impose a term of imprisonment up to the statutory maximum.” *Id.*

We conclude that Orleans’ sentence is procedurally reasonable because, although Orleans’ offense is not covered by the Sentencing Guidelines, *see U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual*§ 1B1.9 (2006), the district court expressly considered the arguments raised by Orleans as well as other relevant factors. It is substantively reasonable because the district court articulated its reasons for selecting the sentence, namely, Orleans’ repeated failure to comply with court orders and traffic laws. In addition, the sentence is substantially below the statutory maximum of six months.

Accordingly, we affirm the revocation of Orleans’ probation and his sentence. This court requires that counsel inform his client in writing of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If the client requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on the client. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*

*Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).
ex10_2.htm








Exhibit 10.2


 


SOUTH JERSEY INDUSTRIES, INC.


 


SCHEDULE OF OFFICER AGREEMENTS


 


Pursuant to Rule 12b-31, the following sets forth the material details which differ in the Officer Employment Agreements, the form of which is filed herewith as Exhibit 10.1.


 



	
Name

	
Capacities in Which Served

	
Date of 


Agreement

	  	
Minimum 


Base 


Salary

	  	  	
Targeted 


Performance 


Based 


Annual Cash 


Award*

	  	  	
Targeted 


Long-


Term 


Incentive 


Plan 


Award*

	  
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  
	
Edward J. Graham

	
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer, South Jersey Industries, Inc.; President and Chief Executive Officer, South Jersey Gas Company

	
1/1/12

	  	
$

	
670,000

	  	  	
$ 

	
495,00

	  	  	
$

	
660,000

	  
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  
	
David A. Kindlick

	
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, South Jersey Industries, Inc.; Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, South Jersey Gas Company

	
1/1/12

	  	
$

	
300,000

	  	  	
$

	
141,750

	  	  	
$

	
190,000

	  
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  
	
Michael Renna

	
Vice President, South Jersey Industries, Inc.; President, South Jersey Energy Solutions; President, South Jersey Energy Company

	
1/1/12

	  	
$

	
300,000

	  	  	
$

	
160,000

	  	  	
$

	
190,000

	  
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  
	
Jeffrey E. DuBois

	
Vice President, South Jersey Industries, Inc.; Senior Vice President, Chief Operating Officer, South Jersey Gas Company

	
1/1/12

	  	
$

	
280,000

	  	  	
$

	
140,000

	  	  	
$

	
170,000

	  
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  
	
Kevin D. Patrick

	
Vice President, Research & Corporate Development, South Jersey Industries, Inc.

	
1/1/12

	  	
$

	
244,000

	  	  	
$

	
106,313

	  	  	
$

	
133,000

	  










*  Payable only if performance criteria are attained.
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

Notice is hereby given that Svoboda Capital Fund IV SBIC, L.P., One North Franklin Street, Suite 1500, Chicago, IL 60606, a Federal Licensee under the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, as amended (“the Act”), in connection with the financing of a small concern, has sought an exemption under Section 312 of the Act and Section 107.730, Financings which Constitute Conflicts of lnterest of the Small Business Administration (“SBA”) Rules and Regulations (13 CFR 107.730). Svoboda Capital Fund IV SBIC, L.P. proposes to provide equity security financing to Bully Pulpit Interactive, LLC, 1140 Connecticut Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20036 (“BPI”).

The financing is brought within the purview of § 107.730(a) and (d) of the Regulations because Svoboda Capital Fund IV, L.P. an Associate of Svoboda Capital Fund IV SBIC, L.P., owns more than ten percent of BPI, and therefore this transaction is considered a financing of an Associate requiring prior SBA approval.

Notice is hereby given that any interested person may submit written comments on the transaction, within fifteen days of the date of this publication, to the Associate Administrator for Investment, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 Third Street SW., Washington, DC 20416.

Dated: September 6, 2017.

A. Joseph Shepard,

Associate Administrator , Office of Investment and Innovation.

[FR Doc. 2017-19485 Filed 9-13-17; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE P