alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23
- 7256

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. BOBBIE RAY EDWARDS, a/k/a Tank , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Newport News

. Arenda L. Wright Allen , District Judge. ( 4:11

- cr - 00055

- AWA

- DEM

- 10; 4:22

- cv - 00057

- AWA )

Submitted : February 22, 2024 Decided: February 27, 2024

Before NIEMEYER and HEYTENS , Circuit Judges , and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge

. Dismissed in part and affirmed in part by un published per curiam opinion

. Bobbie Ray Edwards, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-7256 Doc: 5 Filed: 02/27/2024 Pg: 1 of 32 PER CURIAM: Bobbie Ray Edwards seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion as successive and unauthorized and denying his motion for an audio recording. The denial of a § 2255 motion is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)( B ). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). When , as here, the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Gonzalez v. Thaler , 565 U.S. 134, 140

- 41 (2012) (citing Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473,
484 (2000))

. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Edwards has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss this part of the appeal. Turning to the rest of the appeal, for which Edwards does not need a certificate of appealability, see Harbison v. Bell , 556 U.S. 180, 183 (2009) , we discern no reversible error in the district court’s decision to deny Edwards’ motion for an audio recording. We therefore affirm this part of the court’s order. United States v. Edwards , No. 4:11

- cr 00055

- AWA

- DEM (E.D. Va. Nov. 8, 2023). USCA4 Appeal: 23-7256 Doc: 5 Filed: 02/27/2024 Pg: 2 of 33 We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED IN PART, AFFIRMED IN PART USCA4 Appeal: 23-7256 Doc: 5 Filed: 02/27/2024 Pg: 3 of 3
cc: Hon. Michael Villani, District Judge Judith Scrase Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith, LLP/Las Vegas Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA
(01 I947A aCCV , 2
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2


                              L Q CORPORATION, INC.
                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 L Q Corporation, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Melvyn Brunt,
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.

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.





Dated: May 15, 2006


                                                     /s/ Melvyn Brunt
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                     Melvyn Brunt
                                                     Chief Financial Officer
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.2
 
                           EDUCATIONAL MEDICAL, INC.
 
                 COMPUTATION OF HISTORICAL NET INCOME PER SHARE
 
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                                SIX MONTHS
                                               THREE MONTHS    THREE MONTHS     SIX MONTHS        ENDED
                                                   ENDED           ENDED           ENDED        SEPTEMBER
                                               SEPTEMBER 30,   SEPTEMBER 30,   SEPTEMBER 30,       30,
                                                   1996            1995            1996            1995
                                               -------------   -------------   -------------   ------------
<S>                                            <C>             <C>             <C>             <C>
Primary and fully diluted:
  Weighted average common stock and common
     stock equivalents outstanding during the
     period..................................     4,674,557       3,636,815       4,674,557      3,636,815
  Effect of common stock equivalents issued
     subsequent to August 7, 1995 computed in
     accordance with the treasury stock
     method as required by the SEC(1)........       112,000         112,000         112,000        112,000
                                                 ----------      ----------      ----------     ----------
                                                  4,786,557       3,748,815       4,786,557      3,748,815
                                                 ==========      ==========      ==========     ==========
Net income...................................   $   313,231     $   227,078     $   378,742     $  164,959
                                                 ==========      ==========      ==========     ==========
Net income per share of common stock.........   $       .07     $       .06     $       .08     $      .04
                                                 ==========      ==========      ==========     ==========
</TABLE>
 
---------------
 
(1) Pursuant to Securities and Exchange Commission Staff Accounting Bulletin No.
     83, Common Stock equivalents issued at prices below the initial public
     offering price per share of $10 ("cheap stock") during the twelve month
     period immediately preceding the initial filing date of the Company's
     Registration Statement for its public offering have been included as
     outstanding for all periods presented prior to the initial public offering.
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas** MEMORANDUM OPINION
N o. 04

- 16

- 00372

- CR Ricardo CORONADO , Appellant

v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 399th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2014CR8371 Honorable Ray Olivarri, Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM Sitting: Marialyn Barnard, Justice Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice Delivered and Filed: August 3, 2016
APPEAL DISMISSED Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, appellant Ricardo Coronado pleaded guilty to the offense of indecency with a chil d

- contact . As part of his plea

- bargain, appellant signed a separate “Waiver of Appeal.” The trial court imposed sentence and signed a certificate stating that this “is a plea

- bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal” and “the defendant has waived the right of appeal.” See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 25.2(a)(2). After appellant timely filed a notice of appeal, the clerk sent copies of the certification and notice of appeal to this court. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P.04

- 16

- 00632

- CR

- 2

- 25.2(e). The clerk’s record, which includes the plea bargain agreement and the trial court’s Rule 25.2(a)(2) certification, has been filed. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 25.2(d). The clerk’s record establishes the punishment assessed by the court does not exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by the defendant. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P

. 25.2(a)(2). The clerk’s record also does not indicate the trial court gave appellant permission to appeal. After reviewing the clerk’s record, the trial court’s certification therefore appears to

accu rately reflect that this is a plea bargain case and appellant does not have a right to appeal. See
Dears v. State , 154 S.W.3d 610 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (holding that court of appeals should review clerk’s record to determine whether trial court’s certifi cation is accurate). This court must dismiss an appeal “if a certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the record.” T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 25.2(d).
On June 22, 2016 , we gave appellant notice that the appeal would b e dismissed unless written consent to appeal and an amended certification showing appellant has the right to appeal were signed by the trial judge and made part of the appellate record by July 22, 2016

. See T EX
. R.
A PP
. P. 25.2(d); 37.1; Daniels v. State , 110 S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 2003, order), disp. on merits , No. 04

- 03

- 00176

- CR, 2003 WL 21508347 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio July 2, 2003, pet. ref’d) (not designated for publication). Neither written permission to appeal nor an amended certification showing appellant has the right to appeal has been filed. We therefore dismiss this appeal.
PER CURIAM Do Not Publish
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2000 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000             DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000             MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                          46,206                  15,497
<SECURITIES>                                   106,211                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,108                     508
<ALLOWANCES>                                       125                     294
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               154,004                  15,968
<PP&E>                                           8,638                   2,445
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,322                     774
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 162,279                  17,729
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,277                   4,260
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                            22                       4
<OTHER-SE>                                     151,850                (17,855)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   162,279                  17,729
<SALES>                                            231                     259
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,995                     531
<CGS>                                               18                      46
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      679                     201
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                10,938                   4,606
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     9                      93
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  45                      51
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (6,524)                 (4,143)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (6,524)                 (4,143)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,524)                 (4,143)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.30)                  (1.39)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.30)                  (1.39)


</TABLE>
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v.

IGNACIO GONZALEZ, AKA Pelon,

Defendant

- Appellant. No. 20

- 10236

D.C. No. 4:16

- cr

- 00382

- HSG

- 14

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr., District Judge, Presiding

Submitted November 9, 2020 * *

Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, TASHIMA and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.

Ignacio Gonzalez appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion

for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i)

. We have

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we vacate and remand.

Gonzalez argues that , in light of the COVID

- 1 9 pandemic and his health

* 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 17 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 20

- 10236

conditions , the district court should have granted compassionate release. The

parties agree, and the record reflects

, that the district court incorrectly concluded

that Gonzalez had not submitted evidence of his obesity. Because the court might

have reached a different conclusion as to whether Gonzalez had demonstrated an

“extraordinary and compelling reason” for reducing his sentence

, 18 U.S.C.

§ 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) , had it considered Gonzalez’s obesity in combination wit h his

other health problems, we vacate the district court’s order and remand for further

proceedings.

VACATED AND REMANDED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF THRIFT MANAGEMENT, INC. FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH
31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                         895,697
<SECURITIES>                                 1,408,885
<RECEIVABLES>                                  264,887
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    152,735
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,722,204
<PP&E>                                         392,628
<DEPRECIATION>                                 125,174
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,270,283
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          466,913
<BONDS>                                          8,535
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      2,500
<COMMON>                                        21,150
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,771,185
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,270,283
<SALES>                                      1,820,550
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,820,550
<CGS>                                          848,376
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  848,376
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               849,197
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 354
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                139,001
<INCOME-TAX>                                    71,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    68,001
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.03
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 186 (Wednesday, September 27, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 45027]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-20673]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding 
Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for 
approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 
1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part 225), and all other 
applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company 
and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the 
power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the 
banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, 
including the companies listed below.
    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings 
required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the 
Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The applications will also be available 
for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested 
persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated 
in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the 
acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether 
the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards 
in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, 
nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these 
applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the 
offices of the Board of Governors not later than October 23, 2017.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (David L. Hubbard, Senior 
Manager) P.O. Box 442, St. Louis, Missouri 63166-2034. Comments can 
also be sent electronically to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#8ecde1e3e3ebe0fafda0effefee2e7edeffae7e1e0fdcefdfae2fda0e8fceca0e1fce9"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="cc8fa3a1a1a9a2b8bfe2adbcbca0a5afadb8a5a3a2bf8cbfb8a0bfe2aabeaee2a3beab">[email protected]</span></a>:
    1. First Capital, Inc., Corydon, Indiana; to become a bank holding 
company through the conversion of its subsidiary, First Harrison Bank, 
Corydon, Indiana, to a state-chartered commercial bank.
    B. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (Gerald C. Tsai, Director, 
Applications and Enforcement) 101 Market Street, San Francisco, 
California 94105-1579:
    1. First Choice Bancorp, Cerritos, California; to become a bank 
holding company by acquiring First Choice Bank, Cerritos, California.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 22, 
2017.
Yao-Chin Chao,
Assistant Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2017-20673 Filed 9-26-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6210-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2744 

To prohibit discrimination in Federal assisted health care services and research programs on the basis of sex, race, color, national origin, sexual 

orientation, gender identity, or disability status. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 8, 2009 

Ms. RICHARDSON (for herself, Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida, Mrs. 

CHRISTENSEN, Mr. COHEN, Mr. CONYERS, Mr. FILNER, Ms. KILPATRICK

of Michigan, Mrs. MALONEY, Ms. NORTON, Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD, and 

Ms. BORDALLO) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To prohibit discrimination in Federal assisted health care 

services and research programs on the basis of sex, race, 

color, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity, 

or disability status. 

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 ‘‘Equal Rights for 

5 Health Care Act Title 42’’. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

2 

•HR 2744 IH

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON DISCRIMINATION IN FEDERAL AS2 SISTED HEALTH CARE SERVICES AND RE3 SEARCH PROGRAMS ON THE BASIS OF SEX, 

4 RACE, COLOR, NATIONAL ORIGIN, SEXUAL 

5 ORIENTATION, GENDER IDENTITY, OR DIS6 ABILITY STATUS. 

7 No person in the United States shall, on the basis 

8 of sex, race, color, national origin, sexual orientation, gen9 der identity, or disability status, be excluded from partici10 pation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to dis11 crimination under any health care service or research pro12 gram or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. 

Æ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS