alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 02-1892

___________ Maria Rosa Paz, * * Petitioner, * * v. * Petition for Review of * an Order of the Immigration Immigration and Naturalization * and Naturalization Service. Service; John Ashcroft, Attorney * [UNPUBLISHED] General, * * Respondents. *

___________ Submitted: March 4, 2003 Filed: March 10, 2003

___________ Before BOWMAN, WOLLMAN, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Guatemalan citizen Maria Paz petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), which affirmed an Immigration Judge’s (IJ’s) denial of her application for asylum and withholding of removal. Paz argues that the IJ erred in concluding she had not been persecuted on account of her political opinion, that State Department reports suggest conditions in Guatemala have not changed, that she showed a well-founded fear of future persecution, and that she was denied due process because the attorneys who represented her before the IJ and the BIA were-2- ineffective and have since been suspended and disbarred. After careful review, we deny the petition. We agree with the BIA that Paz did not show past persecution, a well-founded fear of future persecution, or a basis for withholding of removal, as there was no evidence that when guerrilla forces solicited food and attempted to recruit her in 1994, they did so on account of her political opinion or affiliation or any other characteristic that provides a basis for asylum. See INS v. Elias-Zacarias , 502 U.S. 478, 482-83 (1992); Lopez-Zeron v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, INS , 8 F.3d 636, 638 (8th Cir. 1993) (per curiam). We also conclude that, although respondent was not required to show improved country conditions because Paz did not establish past persecution, see Kratchmarov v. Heston , 172 F.3d 551, 553 (8th Cir. 1999), it did so by introducing evidence that since Paz arrived in the United States, Guatemala’s civil war has ended, and the guerrillas have disbanded and renounced violence, and are participating in the political process, see Regalado-Garcia v. INS , 305 F.3d 784, 788 (8th Cir. 2002). The evidence Paz cites of general conditions does not support her claim of a well-founded fear of persecution, b ecause there is no indication that she would be targeted for mistreatment in the future on account of her political opinion or any other protected characteristic. Cf. Bradvica v. INS , 128 F.3d 1009, 1013 (7th Cir. 1997) (evidence of generalized conditions of strife did not support asylum claim because it did not show applicant would be singled out for persecution). Finally, we conclude that Paz’s due process claim is not reviewable because she has not exhausted her administrative remedies. SeeValadez-Salas v. INS , 721 F.2d 251, 252 (8th Cir. 1983) (per curiam). The petition is denied.-3- A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
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.                  

###### Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

Thomas J. Trabaucco, Director,

Office of External Affairs, (202) 942-1640.

      ( print page 9339)    
Dated: February 2, 2001.

Elizabeth S. Woodruff,

Secretary to the Board, Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board.

[FR Doc. 01-3233  Filed 2-2-01; 4:56 pm]

BILLING CODE 6760-01-M
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1728 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1728

   To revive the suspension of duty on 1,5-naphthalene diisocyanate.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 20, 1993

  Mr. Coyne introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To revive the suspension of duty on 1,5-naphthalene diisocyanate.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF EXISTING SUSPENSION OF DUTY.

    Heading 9902.30.07 (relating to 1,5-naphthalene diisocyanate) of 
the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by 
striking out ``12/31/92'' and inserting ``12/31/95''.

SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    (a) In General.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies with 
respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, 
on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
    (b) Retroactive Application to Termination of Previous 
Suspension.--Notwithstanding section 514 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 
U.S.C. 1514) or any other provision of law, upon proper request filed 
with the appropriate customs officer before the 90th day after the date 
of the enactment of this Act, any entry, or withdrawal from warehouse 
for consumption, of any good described in heading 9902.30.07 of the 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States that was made--
            (1) after December 31, 1992; and
            (2) before the 15th day after the date of the enactment of 
        this Act;
shall be liquidated or reliquidated as though such entry or withdrawal 
occurred on the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.

                                 <all>
```
In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

______________________________

No. 06-11-00208-CR

______________________________

BRIAN CHADWICK MARTIN, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

 

On Appeal from the 8th Judicial District Court

Hopkins County, Texas

Trial Court No. 1122184

 

Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Moseley
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Brian Chadwick Martin has filed a notice of appeal. We have now received the 

certification of Martin’s right of appeal as required by TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2. That certification 

states that Martin waived his right of appeal.

Unless a certification, showing that a defendant has the right of appeal, is in the record, we 

must dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d). Because the trial court’s certification 

affirmatively shows that Martin has waived his right of appeal, and because the record before us

does not reflect that the certification is incorrect, see Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 615 (Tex. 

Crim. App. 2005), we must dismiss the appeal.

Martin has also filed a motion to dismiss his appeal. The motion is signed by Martin and 

by his counsel in compliance with Rule 42.2(a) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 42.2(a). As authorized by Rule 42.2, we grant the motion. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 42.2.

We dismiss the appeal.

Bailey C. Moseley

Justice

Date Submitted: January 4, 2012

Date Decided: January 5, 2012

Do Not Publish
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM BALANCE
SHEET AT SEPTEMBER 30, 1996 AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME FOR THE
NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                           4,470
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   17,038
<ALLOWANCES>                                       443
<INVENTORY>                                     11,023
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                34,285
<PP&E>                                           3,006
<DEPRECIATION>                                     823
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  42,856
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           21,587
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      20,263
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    42,856
<SALES>                                         76,714
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                76,714
<CGS>                                           56,926
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   56,926
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                12,161
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   243
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  91
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  7,851
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,836
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              5,015
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,015
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.90<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.85<F1>
<FN>
<F1>THE FIGURES PRESENTED ABOVE HAVE BEEN PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SFAS NO. 128
AND BASIC AND DILUTED EPS HAVE BEEN ENTERED IN PLACE OF PRIMARY AND FULLY
DILUTED, RESPECTIVELY.
</FN>


</TABLE>
2014- 0364.

#### State ex rel. Kell v. Mattingly.

In Mandamus and Prohibition. On motions to dismiss. Motions granted. Cause dismissed.

O’Connor, C.J., and Pfeifer, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, Kennedy, French, and O’Neill, JJ., concur.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Elizabeth Margaret CHILDS, also known as Elizabeth Childs, also known as Christina Margaret Childs, also known as Elizabeth Kaufman, also known as Stephanie White, also known as Christine Elizabeth Finn, also known as Christine Childs Finn, also known as Elizabeth Margaret Kaufman, also known as Christine Finn, also known as Beth Childs, also known as Margaret Chiles, also known as Liz Chiles, also known as Nicole Childs, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 13-30679

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

May 7, 2014.

Camille Ann Domingue, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Howard Cobb Parker, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Lafayette, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Cristie Gautreaux Gibbens, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Lafayette, LA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DENNIS, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Elizabeth Margaret Childs pleaded guilty to bank fraud and was sentenced to 24 months of imprisonment and 60 months of supervised release. Childs pleaded true to violating numerous conditions of her supervised release and now appeals the 36-month prison sentence she received after her supervised release was revoked.

First, Childs argues that the district court gave inadequate reasons for its sentence. Because Childs objected only generally to the reasonableness of her sentence, review of the procedural reasonableness of her sentence is for plain error. *See United States v. Kippers,*685 F.3d 491, 497 (5th Cir.2012) (citing *United States v. Whitelaw,*580 F.3d 256, 259 (5th Cir.2009) (explaining that plain error review applies on appeal where defendant failed to raise any of the specific claims of procedural error before the district court)). Given that the district court was presented with and considered many reasons for a sentence outside the guidelines policy statement range and these reasons addressed the applicable 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, Childs fails to show that under plain error review her sentence was not procedurally reasonable. *See Puckett v. United States,*556 U.S. 129, 135, 129 S.Ct. 1423, 173 L.Ed.2d 266 (2009); *Kippers,*685 F.3d at 497-99.

To the extent Childs argues that the district court erred in failing to give her notice of its intent to upwardly depart from the guidelines policy statement range, such notice is not required in revocation proceedings. *See United States v. Santirosa,*94 Fed.Appx. 231, 231-32 (5th Cir.2004); Fed.R.Crim.P. 32.1.

*243Finally, to the extent Childs suggests that her 86-month sentence is substantively unreasonable, she has not shown that the district court abused its discretion given that she had absconded for years and committed additional crimes during that period. *See Kippers,*685 F.3d at 500-01.

AFFIRMED.

*

 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.
IIA

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 168

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 29 (legislative day, JUNE 22), 1993

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and

Public Works

AN ACT

To designate the Federal building to be constructed between

Gay and Market Streets and Cumberland and Church

Avenues in Knoxville, Tennessee, as the ‘‘Howard H.

Baker, Jr. United States Courthouse’’.

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

4 The Federal building to be constructed between Gay

5 and Market Streets and Cumberland and Church Avenues

6 in Knoxville, Tennessee, shall be known and designated

7 as the ‘‘Howard H. Baker, Jr. United States Courthouse’’.
2

•HR 168 RFS

1 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

2 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

3 paper, or other record of the United States to the Federal

4 building referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be

5 a reference to the ‘‘Howard H. Baker, Jr. United States

6 Courthouse’’.

Passed the House of Representatives June 29 (legislative day, June 28), 1993.

Attest: DONNALD K. ANDERSON,

Clerk.
Exhibit 31.02



CERTIFICATIONS



I, R. Jeffrey Macartney, certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Environmental Power Corporation.
|-- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|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.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: April 29, 2005



|                                            
|--------------------------------------------
|                                            
|/s/ R. Jeffrey Macartney                    
|R. Jeffrey Macartney Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 23.1


            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





We have issued our report dated February 18, 2005, accompanying the consolidated
financial  statements of Cadus Corporation and subsidiary included in the Annual
Report of Cadus  Corporation  on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.
We hereby  consent  to the  incorporation  by  reference  of said  report in the
Registration  Statements of Cadus  Corporation on Forms S-8 (File No. 333-21871,
effective February 14, 1997, and File No. 333- 58151, effective June 30, 1998).



/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP

New York, New York
March 28, 2005
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 Labor

###### Office of Labor-Management Standards 

# AGENCY:

Office of Labor-Management Standards, Employment Standards Administration, Labor. 

# ACTION:

Notice; further deferral of enforcement action. 

# SUMMARY:

                        Consistent with the memorandum of January 20, 2001, from the Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff, entitled “Regulatory Review Plan,” published in the                         **Federal Register**                         on January 24, 2001 (66 FR 7702), this action temporarily delays for 60 days the date on which the Office of Labor-Management Standards will begin to enforce the interpretation set forth in a notice published in the                         **Federal Register**                         on January 11, 2001 (66 FR 2782). The temporary 60-day delay is necessary to give Department officials the opportunity for further review and consideration of this matter.                     

# DATES:

                        The interpretation of the “advice” exemption in Section 203(c) of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959, as amended, published in the                         **Federal Register**                         on January 11, 2001 was to have commenced on February 10, 2001. It shall instead commence on April 11, 2001.                     

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kay H. Oshel, Chief, Division of Interpretations and Standards, Office of Labor-Management Standards, Employment Standards Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., room N-5605, Washington, DC, (202) 693-1233 (this is not a toll free number). 

Signed at Washington, DC, this 6th day of February, 2001. 

Joe N. Kennedy, 

Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for Employment Standards. 

[FR Doc. 01-3476 Filed 2-8-01; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510-86-P
Exhibit
10.1


NEOPHARM,
INC.


Term
Sheet


for


Ronald
E. Pauli


 




	
  Position

  	
  Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer*
  and Secretary*

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Term

  	
  Employment at will.

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Base Salary

  	
  $240,000 per year (“Base Salary”)

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Sign-On Bonus

  	
  $50,000

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Annual Bonus

  	
  Eligibility for:

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
     •   

  	
  Target Bonus up to a maximum of 30% of Base Salary
  upon attaining agreed upon Milestones.

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
     •   

  	
  Overachievement Bonus (in lieu of Target Bonus) up
  to a maximum of 50% of Base Salary.

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Stock Options

  	
  Options to acquire 75,000 shares of common stock at
  the fair market value on the date of grant, with vesting in four equal
  installments on each of the first four anniversaries of the date of grant, or
  upon a change of control as defined in the 2006 Equity Incentive Plan (a
  “Change of Control”).

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Benefits

  	
     •   

  	
  4 weeks vacation 

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
     •   

  	
  $500/month car allowance 

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
     •   

  	
  Participation in 401(k) Plan 

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
     •   

  	
  Life and Health insurance under current Company
  policies 

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
     •   

  	
  Disability coverage on same basis as currently
  provided to Company’s senior officers 

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
     •   

  	
  All other standard benefits

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Severance Benefits

  	
  Upon termination of employment by the Company,
  without cause, at any time after the six (6) month anniversary of hire, or
  within twelve (12) months after a Change of Control, Base Salary will be
  continued for six (6) months.

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Restrictive Covenants

  	
  Employee agrees to execute the Company’s standard
  employee Confidentiality and Non-Compete Agreement.

  






 


Acknowledged and agreed to


This 4th day of August,
2006


/s/Ronald E. Pauli


Ronald E. Pauli


*Upon resignation of
current CFO and Secretary becoming effective
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Coca-Cola Enterprises Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2005 (the“Report”), I, William W. Douglas III, 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) to my knowledge, the Report fully complies with the requirements ofSection 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 thiswritten 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, hasbeen provided to Coca-Cola Enterprises Inc. and will be retained by Coca-Cola Enterprises Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.*