alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

IMRAN AHMED MIR,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 14-10010

D.C. No. 2:12-cr-00141-JAM

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

John A. Mendez, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted October 14, 2015** 

Before: SILVERMAN, BERZON, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.

Imran Ahmed Mir appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges

the 108-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for

distribution of cocaine, methamphetamine, and heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. 

§ 841(a)(1). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

FILED

OCT 21 2015

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Mir contends that the district court erred by determining that sentencing

entrapment is not a legal basis for an objection to a presentence report. The record

belies Mir’s contention that the court made this determination. Moreover, contrary

to Mir’s contention, the district court met its procedural obligations when it

considered and rejected Mir’s objections to the presentence report. See Fed. R.

Crim. P. 32(i)(3)(B).

AFFIRMED.

2 14-10010
EXHITIT 12.1
Ratio of Earnings to Fixed ChargesContinuing Operations

The Company's consolidated ratios of earnings to fixed chargescontinuing operations for each of the periods indicated are set forth below:

|                                                                           
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|Income from continuing operations before income taxes                      
|                                                                           
|Combined fixed charges:                                                    
|                                                                           
|                                                                           
|                                                                           
|                                                                           
|                                                                           
|                                                                           
|                                                                           
|Total combined fixed charges                                               
|                                                                           
|Total combined fixed charges (excluding interest expense on deposits)      
|                                                                           
|Earnings before income taxes and fixed charges                             
|                                                                           
|Ratio of earnings to fixed charges (including interest expense on deposits)
|                                                                           
|Ratio of earnings to fixed charges (excluding interest expense on deposits)
|                                                                           

---
<TABLE>
                CAPITAL RE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
      Exhibit 11 Statement Re: Computation of Per Share Earnings
                             (Unaudited)
            (Dollars in thousands except per share amounts)



                              Three Months Ended    Nine Months Ended
                                 September 30,        September 30,
                              ------------------    ----------------
                              1996       1995       1996        1995
                              ------------------    ----------------

<S>                           <C>        <C>        <C>         <C>
Earnings per common share
(Primary and Fully Diluted)
Average shares outstanding
during the period             15,798     14,784     15,589    14,784


Net Income                    13,956     11,353     40,007    33,694
Earnings per common share      $0.88      $0.77      $2.57     $2.28
                              ======     ======     ======    ======


Notes:  The per share data for 1996 and 1995 does not include the net
effect of dilutive stock options, since the dilution from the earnings
per share amount is less than 3%.
</TABLE>
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 210

To prohibit candidates for Congress from accepting multicandidate political

committee contributions.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 5, 1993

Mr. JACOBS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on House Administration

A BILL

To prohibit candidates for Congress from accepting

multicandidate political committee contributions.

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

3 SECTION. 1. ACCEPTANCE OF MULTICANDIDATE POLITI4 CAL COMMITTEE CONTRIBUTIONS BY CAN5 DIDATES FOR CONGRESS AS UNLAWFUL.

6 Title III of the Federal Election Campaign Act of

7 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431 et seq.) is amended by adding at the

8 end the following new section:
2

•HR 210 IH

1 ‘‘ACCEPTANCE OF MULTICANDIDATE POLITICAL COMMIT2 TEE CONTRIBUTIONS BY CANDIDATES FOR CON3 GRESS AS UNLAWFUL

4 ‘‘SEC. 324. It shall be unlawful for any candidate for

5 the office of Senator or Representative in, or Delegate or

6 Resident Commissioner to, the Congress to accept con7 tributions from multicandidate political committees.’’.

Æ
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

OEP Holdings, LLC, MVT Services, LLC, 

and Mesilla Valley Transportation 

Solutions, LLC,

 

 Appellants,

v.

Javier Rodriguez,

 Appellee.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-18-00226-CV

Appeal from the

327th District Court

of El Paso County, Texas 

(TC# 2017-DCV-3020)

O R D E R

Pending before the Court is Appellant’s motion for emergency stay pending resolution of 

this interlocutory appeal. The motion to stay is GRANTED. Accordingly, the trial court is ordered

to stay all proceedings in cause number 2017-DCV-30204119, styled Javier Rodriguez v. OEP 

Holdings, LLC, MVT Services, LLC, and Mesilla Valley Transportation Solutions, LLC, pending 

resolution of this appeal or further order of this Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 2

nd day of January, 2019.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez and Palafox, JJ.
Exhibit 10.3


AMENDMENT

TO THE

UNOVA, INC. SUPPLEMENTAL EXECUTIVE RETIREMENT PLAN


The UNOVA, Inc.
Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan (the “Plan”) is hereby amended in the
following manner, in accordance with Section 11.1 of the Plan, and
effective as of June 30, 2006, except where another date is provided
herein.


1.                                       Section 2.34
is hereby amended by adding the following new definition with all subsequent
sections in Article II renumbered accordingly:


Section 2.34                                “Rule of 70
Employee” shall have the same meaning as under Section 3.35 of the
Intermec Pension Plan, except that, for purposes of the Supplemental Plan, such
individual must also be an Active Participant on June 30, 2006.


2.                                       Article 3
is hereby amended by adding the following new section to the end thereof:


Section 3.3                                      Supplemental Plan
Closed to New Participants  Notwithstanding
the above, any key employee who, on or after July 1, 2006,  commences employment with, is re-hired by the
Company shall not be eligible to participate in the Supplemental Plan.


3.             Article IV is hereby amended by adding the
following new Section 4.7.


Section 4.7             Benefit Freeze for Employees
other than Rule of 70 Employees.


Notwithstanding the above, effective July 1,
2006, no further benefits shall accrue under Article IV, V, or VI of the
Plan with regard to any key employee who is not a Rule of 70 Employee.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
INTERMEC, Inc., by its duly authorized representative, has caused this
Amendment to be executed in its name and on its behalf on this 29th day
of June, 2006.


 


	
  

  	
  INTERMEC, INC.

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  

  	
  By

  	
  /s/ Larry D. Brady

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Larry D. Brady

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  President and Chief Executive Officer
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 22, 2005

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 04-30973

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

TERRANCE HOWARD,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 2:03-CR-280-2-B

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

Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Terrance

Howard on appeal has filed a motion for leave to withdraw and a

brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). 

Howard has filed a response.

Because neither Howard nor his attorney filed any pleading

evincing an intent to appeal within the period prescribed in FED.

R. APP. P. 4(b)(4), the district court was without authority to

extend the time for filing an appeal. See United States v.

Awalt, 728 F.2d 704, 705 (5th Cir. 1984). Therefore, we lack
No. 04-30973

-2-

jurisdiction to consider Howard’s appeal. See id. Accordingly,

the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused

from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED

for lack of jurisdiction.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 34 (Tuesday, February 20, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 10817]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-4138]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD08-01-001]


Drawbridge Operating Regulation; Arroyo Colorado, TX

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District has issued a 
temporary deviation from the regulation in 33 CFR 117.951 governing the 
operation of the FM 106, vertical lift span bridge across Arroyo 
Colorado, mile 22.2 at Rio Hondo, Texas. This deviation allows the 
Texas Department of Transportation to close the bridge to navigation 
from 7 a.m. on February 20, 2001 through 7 p.m. on February 25, 2001 
for maintenance.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 7 a.m. on Tuesday, February 20, 
2001 to 7 p.m. on Sunday, February 25, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Unless otherwise indicated, documents referred to in this 
notice are available for inspection or copying at the office of the 
Eighth Coast Guard District, Bridge Administration Branch, Commander 
(obc), 501 Magazine Street, New Orleans, Louisiana, 70130-3396. The 
Bridge Administration Branch maintains the public docket for this 
temporary deviation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Phil Johnson, Bridge Administration 
Branch, telephone (504) 589-2965.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FM 106 vertical lift span bridge across 
Arroyo Colorado, mile 22.2, at Rio Hondo, Cameron County, Texas, has a 
vertical clearance of 27 feet above high water in the closed-to-
navigation position and 73 feet above high water in the open-to-
navigation position. Navigation on the waterway consists primarily of 
tugs with tows transporting concrete, petroleum products and 
fertilizer. Presently, the draw of the bridge opens on signal if at 
least 12 hours notice is given. The Texas Department of Transportation 
requested a temporary deviation from the normal operation of the 
drawbridge in order to accommodate the maintenance work, which involves 
replacing the drive motors and upgrading the operating system computer. 
This maintenance is necessary for the continued operation of the 
bridge.
    This deviation allows the lift span of the FM 106 drawbridge across 
Arroyo Colorado, mile 22.2 at Rio Hondo, Texas to remain closed to 
navigation from 7 a.m. on February 20, 2001 until 7 p.m. on February 
25, 2001.

    Dated: February 7, 2001.
Paul J. Pluta,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 01-4138 Filed 2-16-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P
#### Donovan PHIPPS, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Mike EVANS, et al., Respondents—Appellees.

No. 09-15790.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Nov. 1, 2010.*

Filed Dec. 9, 2010.

*212Barbara Michel, I, Esquire, Barbara Michel, Attorney at Law, Berkeley, CA, for Petitioner-Appellant.

Donovan Phipps, Soledad, CA, pro se.

Justain Riley, Office of the California Attorney General, Sacramento, CA, for Respondents-Appellees.

Before: HALL and THOMAS, Circuit Judges, and LASNIK, Chief District Judge.**

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

**

 The Honorable Robert S. Lasnik, Chief United States District Judge for the Western District of Washington, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM ***

Donovan Phipps, an inmate in the California prison system, appeals from a final order of the United States District Court denying his petition for writ of habeas corpus. Phipps contends that his trial counsel was ineffective in a number of ways and seeks an evidentiary hearing at which he hopes to question counsel regarding his litigation choices to “flesh out” his claims.

Based on an independent but deferential review of the record *(Pirtle v. Morgan,*313 F.3d 1160, 1167 (9th Cir.2002)), it was not unreasonable for the state court to deny Phipps’ ineffective assistance of counsel claim. Phipps has not shown that (1) counsel’s performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness under prevailing professional norms and (2) “there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.” *Strickland v. Washington,*466 U.S. 668, 688, 694, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). “Our review of counsel’s performance for constitutional deficiency ‘must be highly deferential’ and should include every effort ‘to eliminate the distorting effects of hindsight!)]’ ” *Earp v. Omoski,*431 F.3d 1158, 1174 (9th Cir.2005) (alteration in original) (quoting *Strickland,*466 U.S. at 689, 104 S.Ct. 2052).

While a second-degree murder conviction arising out of a vehicular accident is not the norm, the outcome of a trial does not determine whether defense counsel was “effective” or “ineffective.” *See Strickland,*466 U.S. at 689, 104 S.Ct. 2052. The record shows that defense counsel conducted a reasonable investigation and pursued a trial strategy based on the evidence presented by the eyewitnesses and medical professionals. The fact that Phipps, with the benefit of hindsight, wishes that other tactics had been attempted and/or other witnesses had been called does not establish a colorable claim *213for habeas relief under *Strickland.*The district court therefore did not abuse its discretion in denying the habeas petition without conducting an evidentiary hearing. *See West v. Ryan,*608 F.3d 477, 490 (9th Cir.2010).

AFFIRMED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
#### Larry J. WINGET, et al., petitioners, v. JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., et al.

No. 08-956.

May 4, 2009.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> US
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-30-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-30-1995
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          10,933
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    9,031
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     36,706
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                62,194
<PP&E>                                         195,891
<DEPRECIATION>                                  48,810
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 282,878
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           56,891
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        28,932
<OTHER-SE>                                      16,436
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   282,878
<SALES>                                        729,856
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               729,856
<CGS>                                          550,434
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  687,078
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,400
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               9,639
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 32,239
<INCOME-TAX>                                    12,023
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             20,216
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    20,216
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.28
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.28
        

</TABLE>
Form 8810

Department of the Treasury 

Internal Revenue Service

Corporate Passive Activity Loss and Credit Limitations

▶ Attach to your tax return (personal service and closely held corporations only).

▶ Go to www.irs.gov/Form8810 for instructions and the latest information. 

OMB No. 1545-0123

2017

Name Employer identification number

Part I 2017 Passive Activity Loss

Caution: See the instructions and complete Worksheets 1 and 2 before completing Part I.

1a Current year income (from Worksheet 2, column (a)) . . 1a

b Current year deductions and losses (from Worksheet 2, 

column (b)) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1b ( )

c Prior year unallowed losses (from Worksheet 2, column (c)) 1c ( )

d Combine lines 1a, 1b, and 1c. If the result is net income or zero, see instructions . 1d

2 Closely held corporations enter net active income and see instructions. Personal 

service corporations enter -0- on this line . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 

3 Unallowed passive activity deductions and losses. Combine lines 1d and 2. If the

result is net income or zero, see the instructions for lines 1d and 3. Otherwise, go to

line 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 

4 Total deductions and losses allowed. Add the income, if any, on lines 1a and 2 and 

enter the result (see instructions) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 

Part II 2017 Passive Activity Credits

Caution: See the instructions and complete Worksheet 5 before completing Part II.

5a Current year credits (from Worksheet 5, column (a)) . . 5a

b Prior year unallowed credits (from Worksheet 5, column (b)) 5b

6 Add lines 5a and 5b . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 

7 Enter the tax attributable to net passive income and net active income. See instructions 7 

8 Unallowed passive activity credit. Subtract line 7 from line 6. If the result is zero or 

less, enter -0- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 

9 Allowed passive activity credit. Subtract line 8 from line 6. See instructions . . . 9 

Part III Election To Increase Basis of Credit Property

10 If the corporation disposed of its entire interest in a passive activity or former passive activity in a fully 

taxable transaction, and the corporation elects to increase the basis of credit property used in that activity 

by the unallowed credit that reduced the property’s basis, check this box. See instructions . . . . . ▶

11 Name of passive activity disposed of ▶

12 Description of the credit property for which the election is being made ▶

13 Amount of unallowed credit that reduced the property’s basis . . . . . . ▶ $

For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see separate instructions. Cat. No. 10356T Form 8810 (2017)
##### 



Exhibit 31.1 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 I, Michael J. Blumenfeld, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of
Collegiate Pacific Inc. certify that:  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB (the Report) of
Collegiate Pacific Inc. for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2004;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this Report does not contain any untrue statement
of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
Report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this Report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of
the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this Report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant
and have: (a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,
to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including
its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report
is being prepared; (b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this Report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of
the period covered by this Report based on such evaluation; (c) disclosed in this Report any change in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered
by this Report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial
reporting; and  5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,
to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): (a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and (b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting. Date: November 12, 2004 /s/ Michael J. BlumenfeldMichel J. Blumenfeld, Chief Executive Officer