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

No. 10-10569

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

April 21, 2011.

Susan Cowger, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Aaron Wiley, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

William Reynolds Biggs, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Charles M. Bleil, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Dallas, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Sulaimon Olasode appeals the 48-month sentence imposed in connection with his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to possess stolen mail matter and commit fraud and related activity in connection with stolen access devices. For the first time on appeal, Olasode argues that his sentence is procedurally unreasonable because the district court presumed that a sentence within the applicable sentencing guidelines range was reasonable.

Generally, we review the sentence imposed for reasonableness in light of the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). *United States v. Mares,*402 F.3d 511, 519-20 (5th Cir.2005). In reviewing a sentence for reasonableness, we first determine whether the district court’s sentencing decision is procedurally sound and then determine whether the sentence is substantively reasonable. *Gall v. United States,*552 U.S. 38, 49-51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). As Olasode did not preserve his presumption-of-reasonableness argument in the district court, review of the district court’s actions is for plain *401error only. *See United States v. King,*541 F.3d 1143, 1144 (5th Cir.2008).

The Supreme Court has explained that “the sentencing court does not enjoy the benefit of a legal presumption that the Guidelines sentence should apply.” *Rita v. United States,*551 U.S. 338, 351, 127 S.Ct. 2456, 168 L.Ed.2d 203 (2007). A sentencing court cannot require that exceptional circumstances be present to justify imposing a sentence that is outside of the guidelines range. *Gall,*552 U.S. at 47, 128 S.Ct. 586. Contrary to Olasode’s argument, nothing in the district court’s remarks shows that he was required to overcome a presumption that the Guidelines range was reasonable or required to prove “extraordinary circumstances” before the district court would impose a non-Guidelines sentence. Olasode has not established that the district court erred, much less plainly erred, by applying a presumption of reasonableness to his advisory sentencing guidelines range. *See King,*541 F.3d at 1145.

The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cm. 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.
Form of Certificate representing shares of Common Stock



 Exhibit 4.1 
  

					
	NUMBER	  		 	SHARES
	*Specimen*	  	JMP GROUP INC.	 	*Specimen*
			
	INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF	  		 	
	 THE STATE OF DELAWARE
 ON JULY 26, 2004
	  		 	

 THIS CERTIFIES THAT
*[                                        
                                        
                                        
                                ]* 
 is the record holder of
*[                                        
                                        
                                        
                  ] (XXX,XXX)* 
 shares of
Common Stock of 
 JMP Group Inc. 
 transferable only on the books of the Corporation by the holder hereof, in person or by duly authorized attorney, upon surrender of this Certificate properly endorsed or assigned. 
 A full statement of all of the rights, preferences, privileges and restrictions granted to or imposed upon the respective classes and/or series
of shares of stock of the Corporation and upon the holders thereof may be obtained by any shareholder upon request and without charge, at the principal office of the Corporation, and the Corporation will furnish any shareholder, upon request
and without charge, a copy of such statement at the principal office of the Corporation. 
 IN WITNESS
WHEREOF, the said Corporation has caused this Certificate to be signed by its duly authorized officers this [    ] day of [MONTH], 2007. 
  

			
	                                       
                                        
          
 Janet L. Tarkoff, Secretary
	 	                                       
                                        
          
 Joseph A. Jolson, Chief Executive Officer


  

					
	sf-2295515	  	SHARES	 	
		  	 $0.001
 EACH
	 	








 For value Received,
                                        
                                        
                                 hereby sell, assign and transfer unto 
  

  

 Shares of the Common Stock of the within named Corporation, represented by the within Certificate and do hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint 
  

 Attorney to transfer the said shares of said
Common Stock on the books of the said Corporation, pursuant to the provisions of the By-Laws thereof, with full powers of substitution in the premises. 
  

											
		 		 	 Dated    
	 	  
	 	A.D.	 	  

				
		 		 		 	  

				
		 		 	NOTICE:    	 	THE SIGNATURE TO THIS ASSIGNMENT MUST STRICTLY CORRESPOND WITH THE NAME AS WRITTEN UPON THE FACE OF THE CERTIFICATE IN EVERY PARTICULAR AND WITHOUT ALTERATION OR ENLARGEMENT OR
ANY CHANGE WHATEVER.

  

					
	In Presence of:
Exhibit 32.1




CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO




18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,




AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO




SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In connection with the Annual Report of LianDi Clean Technology Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Jianzhong Zuo, the 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:




(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.




/s/ Jianzhong ZuoJianzhong ZuoChief Executive Officer and President(Principal Executive Officer)




June 29, 2011
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
BALANCE SHEETS AND STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS FOUND ON PAGES 23 AND 24 OF THE
COMPANY'S FORM 10-K FOR THE YEAR, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-01-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-03-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-01-1997
<CASH>                                             765
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,957
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     69,934
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                78,333
<PP&E>                                          49,965
<DEPRECIATION>                                  24,857
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 112,104
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           33,670
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                      33,572
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   112,104
<SALES>                                        209,778
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               209,778
<CGS>                                          150,625
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  150,625
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                82,271
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,846
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (24,456)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    (2,488)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (21,968)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (21,968)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (2.58)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (2.58)
        

</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Renee Lopez, Appellant.

[666 NYS2d 450]

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Plug, J.), rendered June 15, 1995, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution *(see, People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620, 621), we find that it was legally sufficient to disprove the defendant’s claim that he was acting as an agent of the undercover agent in the narcotics transaction *(see, People v Alvarez,*235 AD2d 484; *People v Leybovich,*201 AD2d 670; *People v Overton,*168 AD2d 575). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence *(see,*CPL 470.15 [5]). Altman, J. P., Friedmann, Krausman and McGinity, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 206 (Thursday, October 26, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 49646]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-23243]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4336-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2017-0001]


Puerto Rico; Amendment No. 5 to Notice of a Major Disaster 
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (FEMA-4336-DR), dated September 10, 
2017, and related determinations.

DATES: The change occurred on October 10, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and 
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., 
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency 
(FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the 
Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Michael F. 
Byrne, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer 
for this disaster.
    This action terminates the appointment of Alejandro DeLaCampa as 
Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) 
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community 
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment 
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, 
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In 
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially 
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for 
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster 
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036, 
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared 
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Brock Long,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2017-23243 Filed 10-25-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Floyd Raymond LOOKER, a/k/a Ray, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 10-7377.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: March 14, 2011.

Decided: April 8, 2011.

Floyd Raymond Looker, Appellant Pro Se. David Earl Godwin, Shawn Angus Morgan, Assistant United States Attorneys, Clarksburg, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Floyd Raymond Looker, Jr. seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying *265his motion to amend his previously denied 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2010) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). A certifícate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When 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. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Looker has not made the requisite showing. A district court may only grant a post-judgment motion to amend if the court has vacated the underlying judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e) or 60(b). *Laber v. Harvey,*438 F.3d 404, 427-28 (4th Cir.2006) (en banc). Here, the district court did not vacate the underlying judgment, a judgment that this court declined to overrule on appeal. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.

*DISMISSED.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
HEALTHEON/WEBMD'S QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE
30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                         645,218
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  129,789
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               812,166
<PP&E>                                         114,284
<DEPRECIATION>                                  31,497
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,158,938
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          161,251
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            22
<OTHER-SE>                                   6,241,186
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,158,938
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               166,955
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  137,559
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,006,058
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (26,893)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (949,769)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (949,769)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (949,769)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (5.11)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (5.11)


</TABLE>
Exhibit 99.1

INVESTOR
CONTACT:
Judy Davies, VP, Investor Relations
+1 408-864-7549
judy.davies@verigy.com

Verigy
Adds Steven W. Berglund to Board of Directors

CUPERTINO, Calif.Dec. 19, 2007Verigy (NASDAQ: VRGY), a premier semiconductor test company, today
announced that Steven W. Berglund, President and CEO of Trimble Navigation, has been appointed to its Board of Directors. Mr. Berglund will commence his service on January 1, 2008.

"As
Verigy enters the next phase of the company's evolution, we are adding additional strength to our already dynamic board, to guide the company forward," said Keith Barnes, Verigy
chairman, chief executive officer, and president. "Steve's broad experience and operations expertise will make him a valued addition to our board."

"Verigy
is at a very pivotal point in the company's growth," said Berglund. "I am glad to be working with Keith and the rest of the board to help steer this remarkable organization."

Mr. Berglund
joined Trimble Navigation as President and CEO in March 1999, and has diverse industry experience, including engineering, manufacturing, finance, and global
operations. Prior to joining Trimble, he was president of Spectra Precision, a unit of Spectra-Physics AB, and a pioneer in the development of laser systems. He spent 14 years at Spectra, in
several senior leadership positions. In the early 1980s, Berglund spent a number of years at Varian Associates in Palo Alto, Calif., where he held roles in planning and manufacturing. He began his
career as a process engineer at Eastman Kodak in Rochester, N.Y. He attended the University of Oslo and the University of Minnesota, where he received a BS in chemical engineering in 1974. He later
received his MBA from the University of Rochester in 1977.

About Verigy

Verigy designs, develops, manufactures, sells and services advanced test systems and solutions for the memory and system-on-chip segments
of the semiconductor industry. Verigy's scalable platform systems are used by leading semiconductor companies worldwide in design validation, characterization, and high volume manufacturing test.
Formerly part of Agilent Technologies, the company began doing business as Verigy on June 1, 2006, and completed its initial public offering on June 13, 2006. Information about Verigy
can be found at www.verigy.com.

#
# #

---



QuickLinks
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 203 (Monday, October 23, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48976-48977]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-22857]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Rural Utilities Service


Announcement of Grant Application Deadlines and Funding Levels 
for the Assistance to High Energy Cost Rural Communities Grant Program

AGENCY: Rural Utilities Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of Solicitation of Applications (NOSA); correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Rural Utilities Service (RUS), an agency of the United 
States Department of Agriculture (USDA) published a document in the 
Federal Register on October 12, 2017 announcing the availability of up 
to $10 million in fiscal year 2017 (FY17) and application deadlines for 
competitive grants to assist communities with extremely high energy 
costs. The current version of one of the required forms to be included 
with the Application was not correctly identified.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robin Meigel, USDA--Rural Utilities 
Service, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Stop 1568, Washington, DC 20250-
1568, telephone (202) 720-9452 or email to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#1f6d707d767131727a76787a735f687b7c316a6c7b7e31787069"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d9abb6bbb0b7f7b4bcb0bebcb599aebdbaf7acaabdb8f7beb6af">[email protected]</span></a>.

Correction

    In the Federal Register of October 12, 2017, in FR Doc. 2017-22042, 
on page 47453, in ``TABLE 2--REQUIRED CONTENT AND FORM OF APPLICATION 
PACKAGE, PART D. Additional Required Forms and Certifications,'' the 
form identified as Rural Utilities Service `Certification Regarding 
Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibility Matter--Primary Covered 
Transactions'' is incorrect. The correct form title should read as 
follows: ``Form AD 1047 'Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, 
and Other Responsibility Matters--Primary Covered Transactions'.''
    Also, in the same FR Doc. 2017-22042, on page 47457, in the first 
column, under the heading ``d. Application Part D--Additional Required 
Forms and Certifications,'' fourth bullet from the top, the reference 
to the Rural Utilities Service ``Certification Regarding Debarment, 
Suspension and Other Responsibility Matter--Primary Covered 
Transactions'' is incorrect. The correct form title should read as 
follows: Form AD 1047 ``Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension 
and Other Responsibility Matters--Primary Covered Transactions.''


[[Page 48977]]


    Dated: October 16, 2017.
Christopher A. McLean,
Acting Administrator, Rural Utilities Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-22857 Filed 10-20-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


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

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                        Section 906 Certification by the
               Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer

         Each of Thomas J. Mazzarisi, Chief Executive Officer, and Stephen J.
Schoepfer, Chief Financial Officer, of JAG Media Holdings, Inc., a Nevada
corporation (the "Company") hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as
added by ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

         (1) The Company's periodic report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended
January 31, 2006 ("Form 10-QSB") fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

         (2) The information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the
Company.

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER                         CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

/s/ Thomas J. Mazzarisi                         /s/ Stephen J. Schoepfer
--------------------------                      ---------------------------
Name: Thomas J. Mazzarisi                       Name: Stephen J. Schoepfer

Date: March 22, 2006