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

No. 09-20846

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Dec. 22, 2010.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Molly Estelle Odom, Esq., Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before WIENER, PRADO, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jose Israel Sarmiento has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Sarmiento has not filed a response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. 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.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.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 of America, Appellee, v. Mary Elizabeth McDANIEL, Appellant.

No. 10-1538.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: Dec. 13, 2010.

Filed: Dec. 27, 2010.

Bruce Gillan, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Lincoln, NE, for Appellee.

Donald Lee Schense, Bellevue, NE, for Appellant.

Mary Elizabeth McDaniel, York, NE, pro se.

Before LOKEN, ARNOLD, and BYE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Mary McDaniel appeals her conviction by a jury for conspiracy to distribute fifty grams or more of crack cocaine in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2 and 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(b)(1) and 846. The district court1 sentenced McDaniel to 151 months’ imprisonment. On appeal, McDaniel contends the evidence at trial was insufficient to *94sustain her conviction and the district court erred by denying her motion for acquittal. We affirm.

We review the sufficiency of the evidence de novo, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the jury’s verdict. *United States v. Zierke,*618 F.3d 755, 760 (8th Cir.2010). “When considering a challenge to a conspiracy conviction based upon sufficiency of the evidence, we will affirm if the record, viewed most favorably to the government, contains substantial evidence supporting the jury’s verdict, which means evidence sufficient to prove the elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” *United States v. Bowie,*618 F.3d 802, 812 (8th Cir.2010) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). To establish a conspiracy under 21 U.S.C. § 846, the government must prove (1) there was a conspiracy; (2) the defendant knew of the conspiracy; and (3) the defendant intentionally became part of the conspiracy. *Id.*

McDaniel confines her argument to attacking the credibility of the government’s witnesses at trial, many of whom had received or were attempting to receive cooperation agreements with reduced sentences. “It is axiomatic that we do not pass upon the credibility of witnesses or the weight to be given their testimony.” *United States v. Clay,*618 F.3d 946, 950 (8th Cir.2010) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Rather, “[w]e have repeatedly upheld jury verdicts based solely on the testimony of co-conspirators and cooperating witnesses, noting that it is within the province of the jury to make credibility assessments and resolve conflicting testimony.” *United States v. Coleman,*525 F.3d 665, 666 (8th Cir.2008). Multiple cooperating witnesses established McDaniel was a member of a conspiracy to distribute crack cocaine. Viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, this testimony, was sufficient to establish McDaniel conspired to distribute crack cocaine. *See United States v. Wilder,*597 F.3d 936, 943 (8th Cir.2010) (“If [the government’s witness’s] testimony was believed, it was sufficient to establish that [the defendant] knowingly and intentionally distributed a controlled substance.”).

Accordingly, we affirm McDaniel’s conviction.

1

. The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 243 (Tuesday, December 18, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65190-65191]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-31068]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commision

[Docket No. ES02-16-000]


Inland Power and Light Company; Notice of Filing

December 11, 2001.
    Take notice that on November 28, 2001, Inland Power and Light 
Company (Inland) filed an application for authorization to issue 
securities pursuant to Section 204 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), 16 
U.S.C. 824c, and part 34 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's 
(Commission) Regulations, 18 CFR part 34. Inlands' filing is available 
for public inspection at its offices in Spokane, Washington.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest such filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's rules of practice

[[Page 65191]]

and procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). All such motions and 
protests should be filed on or before December 21, 2001. Protests will 
be considered by the Commission to determine the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection. This filing may also be viewed on 
the web at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``RIMS'' link, select 
``Docket#'' and follow the instructions (call 202-208-2222 for 
assistance). Comments, protests and interventions may be filed 
electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's web site 
under the ``e-Filing'' link.

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-31068 Filed 12-17-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 248 (Thursday, December 27, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 66936]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-31792]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree Pursuant to the Comprehensive 
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C. 9601 
et seq.

    In accordance with Departmental policy, 28 CFR 50.7, notice is 
hereby given that a third proposed consent decree in United States v. 
Viacom, Inc. and Schindler Elevator Corporation, Civil Action No. 1:01-
CV-123, was lodged on November 1, 2001, with the United States District 
Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania.
    The proposed Consent Decree concerns the Westinghouse Elevator 
Plant Superfund Site (``Site''), which is located on approximately 90 
acres, and has its southern boundary adjacent to part of the Gettysburg 
Battlefield National Park. The Site is located about 1.5 miles north of 
downtown Gettysburg in Cumberland Township, Adams County, Pennsylvania. 
Pursuant to the proposed consent decree and section 107(a) of the 
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act 
(``CERCLA''), 42 U.S.C. 9607(a), the defendants will pay the United 
States for unreimbursed past costs at the Site, in the amount of 
$569,000 plus certain interest in connection with the Site.
    The Department of Justice will receive, for a period of thirty (30) 
days from the date of this publication, comments relating to the 
proposed consent decree. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant 
Attorney General for the Environment and Natural Resources Division, 
Department of Justice, Washington, DC 20530, and should refer to United 
States v. Viacom, Inc. and Schindler Elevator Corporation, DOJ Ref. 
#90-11-3-1004/1.
    The proposed consent decree may be examined at the office of the 
United States Attorney, 228 Walnut Street, Suite 220, Harrisburg, 
Pennsylvania 17108 and the Region 3 Office of the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029. A 
copy of the proposed consent decree may also be obtained by mail from 
the Consent Decree Library, U.S. Department of Justice, P.O. Box 7611, 
Washington, DC 20044-7611. (202) 624-0892. In requesting a copy please 
refer to the referenced case and enclose a check (25 cents per page 
reproduction costs) in the amount of $5.25 for the consent decree (21 
pages), payable to the Consent Decree Library.

Robert Brook,
Assistant Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and 
Natural Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 01-31792 Filed 12-26-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-01-M
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.                  

###### Department of Agriculture

###### Forest Service

# AGENCY:

Modoc Resource Advisory Committee, Alturas, California, USDA Forest Service.

# ACTION:

Notice of meetings. 

# SUMMARY:

Pursuant to the authorities in the Federal Advisory Committees Act (Pub. L. 92-463) and under the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 (Pub. L. 106-393) the Modoc National Forest's Modoc Resource Advisory Committee will meet Saturday, January 12, 2002 and Saturday, February 9, 2002 in Alturas, California for business meetings. The meetings are open to the public.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The business meeting January 12 begins at 9:30 am, at the Modoc National Forest Office, Conference Room, 800 West 12th St., Alturas. Agenda topics will include approval of 11/17/01 minutes, reports from subcommittees are review and selection of projects that will improve the maintenance of existing infrastructure, implement stewardship objectives that enhance forest ecosystems, and restore and improve health and water quality. Opportunity for public discussion will be accepted following each proposal but limited to a set time. Time will also be set aside for public comments at the close of the meeting. The business meeting February 9, begins at 9:30 a.m, at the Modoc National Forest Office, Conference Room, 800 West 12th Street, Alturas. Agenda topics will include approval of the 12/1/01 minutes, reports from subcommittees and selection of projects on the Modoc National Forest that meet the intent of Pub. L. 106-393. Time will be set aside for public comments at the close of the meeting.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

 Dan Chisholm, Forest Supervisor and Designated Federal Officer, at (530) 233-8700; or Public Affairs Officer Nancy Gardner at (530) 233-8713.

Dan Chisholm,

Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 01-31108 Filed 12-17-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 248 (Thursday, December 27, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 66933]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-31790]



[[Page 66933]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree Under the Comprehensive 
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (``CERCLA'')

    Consistent with Departmental policy, 28 CFR 50.7 and 38 FR 19029, 
notice is hereby given that on November 13, 2001, a proposed Consent 
Decree in United States v. Frederick Gendron, et al., Civil Action No. 
01-422-JD, was lodged with the United States District Court for the 
District of New Hampshire. The proposed Consent Decree will resolve the 
United States' claim under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, 42 U.S.C. 9607, as amended 
(``CERCLA''), on behalf of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
(``EPA'') against the defendant relating to the Gendron Junkyard Site 
located at 11-13 Hobbs Road in Pelham, New Hampshire (the ``Site''). 
The Complaint alleges that the defendants are liable under Section 107 
of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9607, for recovery of response costs incurred at 
or in connection with the release or threatened release of hazardous 
substances at the Site.
    The Consent Decree requires the Settling Defendants to pay to the 
U.S. EPA Hazardous Substance Superfund $650,000 in reimbursement of 
past response costs, and includes a covenant not to use by the United 
States.
    The Department of Justice will receive for a period of thirty (30) 
days from the date of this publication comments relating to the 
proposed consent decree. Any comments should be addressed to the 
Assistant Attorney General of the Environmental and Natural Resource 
Division, Department of Justice, P.O. Box 7611, Ben Franklin Station, 
Washington, DC 20044-7611, and should refer to United States v. 
Frederick Gendron, et al., Civil Action No. 01-422-JD, Ref. 90-11-3-
07116.
    The proposed Consent Decree may be examined at the Office of the 
United States Attorney, District of New Hamsphire, U.S. Department of 
Justice, 55 Pleasant Street, Room 352, Concord, New Hamsphire, 03301-
3904, and at U.S. EPA New England (Region 1), One Congress Street, 
Suite 1100, Boston, Massachusetts, 02114-2023. A copy of the proposed 
consent decree may be obtained by mail from the Consent Decree Library, 
P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044-7611. In requesting a copy, please 
enclose a check (there is a 25 cent per page reproduction cost) in the 
amount of $6.00 payable to the Consent Decree Library.

Ronald Gluck,
Assistant Section Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment 
and Natural Resources Division, U.S. Department of Justice.
[FR Doc. 01-31790 Filed 12-26-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-15-M
Exhibit 35.1

                                                          [LOGO] IndymacBank(SM)


                       REG AB 1123 Statement of Compliance

I am an authorized officer for IndyMac Bank, F.S.B, the servicer for the
transaction listed below and I certify:

a)    A review of IndyMac Bank's activities during the reporting period and of
      its performance under the applicable servicing agreement has been made
      under my supervision.

b)    To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, except as set forth
      below IndyMac Bank has fulfilled all of its obligations under the
      agreement in all material respects throughout the reporting period.

c)    None


                                By: /s/ Robert M. Abramian
                                    ----------------------
                                    Robert M. Abramian
                                    First Vice President
                                    Home Loan Servicing
                                    Investor Reporting
                                    Indymac Bank


                                By: /s/ Barbara Perez
                                    ----------------------
                                    Barbara Perez
                                    Senior Vice President
                                    Indymac Bank



Prepared for:   Deutsche Bank

Date:           February 28, 2007

Ref:            665 - INDX 2006-AR4



                                                             www.indymacbank.com


             460 Sierra Madre Villa Ave., Pasadena, CA 91107   Tel: 626.535.5555
Motor Carrier Safety Progress Report

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

(as of December 31, 2004)

SAFETY OUTCOMES 2002 2003 2004 

● Large Truck Fatalities 4,939 4,986 * 

● Large Truck Fatality Rate (per 100 million truck vehicle miles traveled) 2.3 2.3 * 

● Intercity Bus Fatalities 54 36 * 

● Large Truck Injuries 130,000 122,000 * 

● Large Truck Injury Rate (per 100 million truck vehicle miles traveled) 60.5 56.6 * 

Sources: NHTSA (fatalities and injuries), FHWA (vehicle miles traveled). *Data not available.

DATA QUALITY 2003 2004

ACCURACY

● Percentage of FMCSA reported crashes matched to a carrier 86% 87% 

● Percentage of FMCSA reported inspections matched to a carrier 96% 97% 

TIMELINESS

● Average time to upload a crash to FMCSA 137 days 86 days 

● Average time to upload an inspection to FMCSA 29 days 16 days 

COMPLETENESS

● Percentage of fatal crashes reported to FMCSA 92% *

*Data not available. 

PROGRAM OUTPUTS FY 2003 Total FY 2004 Total FY 2005 

(Oct-Dec 2004) 

INCREASING ENFORCEMENT

● Number of Federal Compliance Reviews 9,013 7,603 1,811 

● Number of State Compliance Reviews 3,723 3,741 893 

● Number of enforcement cases initiated 5,753 5,192 1,227 

 - Unsat/Unfit out-of-service orders 316 415 130 

● Roadside inspections, trucks 2,989,483 2,940,505 665,920 

● Roadside inspections, buses 42,367 42,623 9,326 

● States participating in PRISM 25 37 37

INCREASING SAFETY AND SECURITY AWARENESS

● New Entrant Safety Audits: 

 - Total 7,198 25,275 7,238

 - Federal 4,112 10,001 2,770 

 - State 2,998 15,002 4,397 

 - Seminar 88 272 71 

● ITS-CVO: Number of Federal, State, 

and industry attendees at briefings 2,703 2,205 485 

● Web site visits to Analysis and 

Information (A&I) Online 935,865 1,417,701 455,573 

● HM Security Sensitivity Visits (SSVs) 1,836 1,873 433 

● Federal/State personnel training: 

 - For Compliance Reviews 93 93 80 

 - For roadside inspections 2,790 3,586 1,031 

 - For hazardous materials 1,906 2,611 362 

 - For in-service 199 1,332 253 

IMPROVING SAFETY INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY

● States participating in CVISN 

 (In Planning, Design, Deployment) 7, 6, 34 8, 3, 31 8, 2, 32 

● States that have completed 

 Core Capability Deployment 

4 9 9 

RULEMAKINGS (Oct-Dec 2004) 

● Rules of Practice; Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (October 20, 2004). 

● Hours-of-Service of Drivers; Supporting Documents; Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (November 3, 2004). 

● Brokers of Household Goods Transportation by Motor Vehicle; Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (December 22, 2004).
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3533 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3533

  To establish occupational series for Federal positions in software 
 development, software engineering, data science, and data management, 
                        and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 25, 2021

  Mr. Obernolte (for himself and Mr. Welch) introduced the following 
   bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To establish occupational series for Federal positions in software 
 development, software engineering, data science, and data management, 
                        and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. OCCUPATIONAL SERIES FOR DIGITAL CAREER FIELDS.

    Not later than 270 days after the date of the enactment of this 
Act, the Director of the Office of Personnel Management shall, pursuant 
to chapter 51 of title 5, United States Code, establish one or more 
occupational series covering Federal Government positions in the fields 
of software development, software engineering, data science, and data 
management.
                                 <all>
```
#### In re Disqualification of Wilson. State *v.*Harrison.

[Cite as *In re Disqualification of Wilson,*139 Ohio St.3d 1205, 2014-Ohio-2045.]

(No. 14-AP-021

Decided March 31, 2014.)

O’Connor, C.J.

{¶ 1} Defendant Kandale Harrison has filed an affidavit with the clerk of this court under R.C. 2701.03 seeking to disqualify Judge Roger B. Wilson, a retired judge sitting by assignment, from presiding over any further proceedings in case No. 13-04-0084, now pending for trial in the Court of Common Pleas of Logan County.

{¶ 2} Harrison claims that Judge Wilson is prejudiced against him and “has an interest in making sure [Harrison is] convicted” in the underlying case. Harrison, however, filed his affidavit with the clerk on March 24, 2014, the day before the scheduled trial. Under R.C. 2701.03(B), an affidavit of disqualification must *1206be filed “not less than seven calendar days before the day on which the next hearing in the proceeding is scheduled.” This statutory deadline may be set aside only “when compliance with the provision is impossible,” such as when the alleged bias or prejudice occurs fewer than seven days before the hearing date or the case is scheduled or assigned to a judge within seven days of the next hearing. *In re Disqualification of Leskovyansky,*88 Ohio St.3d 1210, 723 N.E.2d 1099 (1999). Harrison claims that he did not file his affidavit earlier because he had filed a grievance against the judge, which he thought had the same effect as an affidavit of disqualification. Harrison’s mistaken views about the affidavit-of-disqualification process do not excuse his late filing of the affidavit in this case.

{¶ 3} Accordingly, Harrison has not set forth a sufficient basis for setting aside the seven-day filing requirement in R.C. 2701.03, and his affidavit of disqualification is therefore dismissed as untimely.
EXHIBIT 31.4


RULE 13a-14(a) / 15d-14(a) Certification





I,
Richard S. DeRose, certify that:





1.
 I have reviewed
this Amendment No. 1 to the annual report on Form 10-K/A of
Information Analysis Incorporated;





2.
 Based on my
knowledge, this annual 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.





Date: April 30, 2019
By:
/s/ Richard S. DeRose
Richard
S. DeRose, Executive Vice
President,
Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer








A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 302
has been provided to Information Analysis Incorporated and will be
retained by Information Analysis Incorporated and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.