alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR .

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-50946 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus PEDRO RUIZ-BECERRIL, Defendant-Appellant.

Consolidated with No. 01-50957

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus PEDRO RUIZ-BECERRIL, also known as Pedro Rodriguez-Lopez, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. EP-98-CR-950-ALL-IL

-------------------- April 11, 2002 Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *No. 01-50946 c/w No. 01-50957

-2-

R. 47.5.4. Pedro Ruiz-Becerril appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United States after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Ruiz-Becerril complains that his sentence was improperly enhanced pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) based on his prior deportation following an aggravated felony conviction. Ruiz-Becerril argues that the sentencing provision violates the Due Process Clause because it permitted the sentencing judge to find, under a preponderance of the evidence standard, a fact which increased the statutory maximum sentence to which he otherwise would have been exposed. Ruiz-Becerril thus contends that his sentence is invalid and argues that it should not exceed the two-year maximum term of imprisonment prescribed in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).
In Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of separate offenses. The Court further held that the sentencing provisions do not violate the Due Process Clause. Id. at 239-47. Ruiz-Becerril acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres , but asserts that the decision has been cast into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). He seeks to preserve his argument for further review. Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres

. See Apprendi , 530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit , 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied , 531 U.S. 1202 (2001). This courtNo. 01-50946 c/w No. 01-50957

-3- must follow Almendarez-Torres “unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule it.” Dabeit , 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks that the judgment of the district court be affirmed and that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED. AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                         369,164
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               834,635
<PP&E>                                      29,066,197
<DEPRECIATION>                             (10,534,395)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              19,735,601
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          575,528
<BONDS>                                     19,363,466
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                    (203,393)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                19,735,601
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,188,486
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  498,494
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               230,680
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             391,025
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 68,287
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             68,287
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    68,287
<EPS-BASIC>                                     2.54
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.54


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM AVONDALE
INDUSTRIES, INC.'S QUARTERLY REPORT FILED ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED
SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                          58,211
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  108,236
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     28,971
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               212,606
<PP&E>                                         282,833
<DEPRECIATION>                               (139,155)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 369,727
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           98,254
<BONDS>                                         48,682
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        15,963
<OTHER-SE>                                     179,749
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   369,727
<SALES>                                        561,049
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               561,049
<CGS>                                          496,167
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  496,167
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,927
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 36,687
<INCOME-TAX>                                    13,800
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             22,887
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    22,887
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.64
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.63
        

</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 32.2****CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**     In connection with the annual report of Natural Health Trends Corp. (the “Company”) on Form10-K for the period ended December 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissionon the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Timothy S. Davidson, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:     1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and     2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.     Date: March 28, 2007 /s/ Timothy S. Davidson         Timothy S. Davidson    Chief Financial Officer
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.1
                                                                    ------------

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS
                       ----------------------------------

     We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Forms S-8 (Nos. 33-74160, 33-81114, 33-81126, 33-80385, 33-80387,
33-80395, and 333-65196) and Form S-3 (No. 333-58765) of Vesta Insurance Group,
Inc. and subsidiaries of our report dated February 28, 2002 relating to the
financial statements and financial statement schedules, which appears in this
Form 10-K.


PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Birmingham, Alabama
March 28, 2002
#### Marilyn BROOMER, Kristin Kopf, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. HUNTINGTON UNION FREE SCHOOL DISTRICT, Carmen Casper, John Finello, Joseph Giani, James Polansky, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 13-4305-cv.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

May 19, 2014.

Steven A. Morelli, The Law Offices of Steven A. Morelli, P.C., Garden City, NY, for Appellants.

Steven C. Stern (Melissa L. Holtzer, on the brief), Sokoloff Stern LLP, Carle Place, NY, for Appellees.

Present: JOHN M. WALKER, JR., ROSEMARY S. POOLER, and RICHARD C. WESLEY, Circuit Judges.

SUMMARY ORDER

UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the judgment is AFFIRMED.

Marilyn Broomer and Kristin Kopf (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) appeal from the October 11, 2013 judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Hurley, /.), granting Defendants-Appellees’ motion to dismiss.

On appeal, Plaintiffs argue that the district court erred in dismissing their procedural due process claim.1 Specifically, they contend that Defendants-Appellees violated their procedural due process rights by failing to provide evidentiary hearings prior to excessing Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs ground this claim on New York Education Law Section 2510(1), which some courts have suggested may require a predeprivation hearing when a tenured teacher’s position is abolished and a similar position is concurrently created. *See, e.g., DeSimone v. Bd. of Educ., S. Huntington Union Free Sch. Dist.,*612 F.Supp. 1568,1570-71 (E.D.N.Y.1985).

Even were we to conclude that Plaintiffs were terminated and that a pretermination hearing is required when a tenured teacher’s position is abolished and a similar post is concurrently created — two issues we do not reach — Plaintiffs fail to plausibly plead that the newly created positions in this case were similar to their old positions.

We have also analyzed Plaintiffs’ due process claim under the framework set forth in *Mathews v. Eldridge,*424 U.S. 319, 96 S.Ct. 893, 47 L.Ed.2d 18 (1976). Weighing all of the *Mathews*factors in the balance, Plaintiffs have not plausibly alleged a procedural due process violation.

*92We have considered Plaintiffs’ remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. For the reasons stated above, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

1

. Plaintiffs do not challenge the dismissal of their claims alleging violations of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and various state and local laws.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          NOV-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-31-1998
<CASH>                                         119,479
<SECURITIES>                                 4,045,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                  486,715
<ALLOWANCES>                                    57,832
<INVENTORY>                                    291,962
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,441,739
<PP&E>                                         208,926
<DEPRECIATION>                                  83,274
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,602,592
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,674,961
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  3,000,008
<COMMON>                                         2,996
<OTHER-SE>                                     879,071
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,602,592
<SALES>                                      1,028,209
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,028,209
<CGS>                                          554,316
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,407,639
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 7,828
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              12,280
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,723,618)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (724,281)
<DISCONTINUED>                             (1,940,140)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              (802,323)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,723,618)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.58)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.58)
        

</TABLE>
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 01-40407

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

TRINIDAD JULIAN GAMEZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. L-99-CR-441-1

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

February 21, 2002

Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Trinidad

Julian Gamez on appeal has moved for leave to withdraw and has

filed a brief as required by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738

(1967). Although Gamez was notified of his right to respond to

his counsel’s motion, Gamez has not filed a response. 

Our independent review of counsel’s brief and the record

discloses no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, the 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.
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 245

To amend title 10, United States Code, to authorize the detail of personnel

of the Department of Defense to assist the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the United States Customs Service perform border

patrol-related activities.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 5, 1993

Mr. MCCANDLESS introduced the following bill; which was referred jointly to

the Committees on Armed Services and the Judiciary

A BILL

To amend title 10, United States Code, to authorize the

detail of personnel of the Department of Defense to

assist the Immigration and Naturalization Service and

the United States Customs Service perform border

patrol-related activities.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 245 IH

1 SECTION 1. ASSIGNMENT OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

2 PERSONNEL TO ASSIST IMMIGRATION AND

3 NATURALIZATION SERVICE AND CUSTOMS

4 SERVICE.

5 (a) ASSIGNMENT AUTHORITY OF SECRETARY OF DE6 FENSE.—Chapter 18 of title 10, United States Code, is

7 amended by adding at the end the following new section:

8 ‘‘§ 381. Assignment of personnel to assist border con9 trol activities

10 ‘‘(a) ASSIGNMENT AUTHORIZED.—During each fiscal

11 year, the Secretary of Defense may assign not more than

12 12,000 civilian officers and employees of the Department

13 of Defense and members of the armed forces to temporary

14 duty with—

15 ‘‘(1) the Immigration and Naturalization Serv16 ice to assist the Service in interdicting terrorists,

17 drug traffickers, and illegal aliens attempting to

18 enter the United States; and

19 ‘‘(2) the United States Customs Service to as20 sist the Service in inspecting cargo, vehicles, and air21 craft at points of entry into the United States.

22 ‘‘(b) REQUEST FOR ASSIGNMENT.—The assignment

23 of a civilian officer or employee of the Department of De24 fense or of a member of the armed forces under subsection

25 (a) may only occur—
3

•HR 245 IH

1 ‘‘(1) at the request of the Attorney General, in

2 the case of an assignment to the Immigration and

3 Naturalization Service; and

4 ‘‘(2) at the request of the Secretary of the

5 Treasury, in the case of an assignment to the Unit6 ed States Customs Service.’’.

7 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections

8 at the beginning of such chapter is amended by adding

9 at the end the following new item:

‘‘381. Assignment of personnel to assist border control activities.’’.

10 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—Section 381 of title 10, Unit11 ed States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall take ef12 fect on October 1, 1993.

Æ
V

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2266

For the relief of Orlando Wayne Naraysingh.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 25, 1993

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

on the Judiciary

A BILL

For the relief of Orlando Wayne Naraysingh.

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

3 SECTION 1. IMMEDIATE RELATIVE STATUS FOR ORLANDO

4 WAYNE NARAYSINGH.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Orlando Wayne Naraysingh shall

6 be classified as a child under section 101(b)(1)(E) of the

7 Immigration and Nationality Act for purposes of approval

8 of a relative visa petition filed under section 204 of such

9 Act by his adoptive parent and the filing of an application

10 for an immigrant visa or adjustment of status.

11 (b) ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS.—If Orlando Wayne

12 Naraysingh enters the United States before the filing
2

•HR 2266 IH

1 deadline specified in subsection (c), he shall be considered

2 to have entered and remained lawfully and shall, if other3 wise eligible, be eligible for adjustment of status under

4 section 245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act as of

5 the date of the enactment of this Act.

6 (c) DEADLINE FOR APPLICATION AND PAYMENT OF

7 FEES.—Subsections (a) and (b) shall apply only if the pe8 tition and the application for issuance of an immigrant

9 visa or the application for adjustment of status are filed

10 with appropriate fees within 2 years after the date of the

11 enactment of this Act.

12 (d) REDUCTION OF IMMIGRANT VISA NUMBER.—

13 Upon the granting of an immigrant visa or permanent res14 idence to Orlando Wayne Naraysingh, the Secretary of

15 State shall instruct the proper officer to reduce by 1, for

16 the current or next following fiscal year, the worldwide

17 level of family-sponsored immigrants under section

18 201(c)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.

19 (e) DENIAL OF PREFERENTIAL IMMIGRATION

20 TREATMENT FOR CERTAIN RELATIVES.—The natural

21 parents, brothers, and sisters of Orlando Wayne

22 Naraysingh shall not, by virtue of such relationship, be

23 accorded any right, privilege, or status under the Immi24 gration and Nationality Act.

Æ
----

----

| (Mark      One) |                                                                                              |
|-----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|  x         |  QUARTERLY      REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF      1934 |

| o | TRANSITION REPORT      UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE EXCHANGEACT |
|---|---------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | Safe      Technologies International, Inc.                             |   |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | (Exact name of small      business issuer as specified in its charter) |   |

|   | Delaware                                    |   | 22-2824492               |   |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------|--------|--------------------------|--------|
|   | (State or other      jurisdiction of   |   | (IRS    Employer         |   |
|   | incorporation or      organization)    |   | Identification      No.) |   |

|   | 1200      N Federal Highway, Suite 200, Boca Raton, FL 33432 |   |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | (Address of      principal executive offices)                |   |

|   |                                                                                       |   |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | (866)      297-5070                                                                        |   |
|   | (Issuer's telephone      number)                                                           |   |
|   |  _________________________________(Former      address, if changed since last report) |   |
|   |                                                                                       |   |

----

|                               | Safe      Technologies International, Inc. (Registrant) |                                |
|------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------|
|                               |                                                         |                                |   |
| Date:      November 23, 2009  | By:                                                          | /s/Christopher      L. Kolb         |   |
|                               |                                                         | Christopher      L. Kolb, President |   |
|                               |                                                         |                                |   |
|                               |                                                         |                                |   |

----
<PAGE>   1

                       IRVINE APARTMENT COMMUNITIES, INC.
                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

                                  Exhibit 23.1

We consent to the use of our report dated February 1, 1999 with respect to the 
consolidated financial statements and related financial statement schedule of 
Irvine Apartment Communities, Inc., included in this Annual Report on Form 
10-K/A of Irvine Apartment Communities, Inc.

We also consent to the incorporation by reference of our report dated February
1, 1999 with respect to the consolidated financial statements and related
financial statement schedule of Irvine Apartment Communities, Inc., in the
Registration Statement (Form S-8) pertaining to the Irvine Apartment
Communities, Inc. 1993 Stock Option Plan for Directors, in the Registration
Statement (Form S-8) pertaining to the Irvine Apartment Communities, Inc. 1993
Long-Term Stock Incentive Plan, in the Registration Statement (Form S-8)
pertaining to the Irvine Apartment Communities, Inc. 1996 Long-Term Stock
Incentive Plan, in the Registration Statement (Form S-3) pertaining to the
Irvine Apartment Communities, Inc. Dividend Reinvestment and Additional Cash
Investment Plan, and in the Registration Statement (Form S-3) of Irvine
Apartment Communities, Inc. pertaining to the registration of $350,000,000 of
Debt Securities, Preferred Stock, Common Stock and Warrants.


   
/s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP
    

Newport Beach, California
April 30, 1999