alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. GUO WEI, also known as Guo Hai, also known as Hai Gou, also known as Guo Hei, also known as Huang Zhu, also known as Zhu Huang, also known as Ah Lung, also known as Guo Ah-Lung, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 10-40321

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Feb. 4, 2011.

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

Pascual Madrigal, Esq., Law Office of Pascual Madrigal, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before REAVLEY, BENAVIDES, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Guo Wei (Guo) appeals the 51-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry after deportation. He argues that the sentence, which is at the top of his advisory guidelines range, was unreasonable and resulted from the district court’s incorrect application of the Sentencing Guidelines and improper assessment of the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).

Guo has established no error in connection with the district court’s application of the Guidelines. Although the court did not expressly mention its consideration of the § 3553(a) sentencing factors, a mechanical recitation was unnecessary. *See United States v. Smith,*440 F.3d 704, 707 (5th Cir.2006). The court considered Guo’s apology and counsel’s arguments in mitigation, including Guo’s motive for returning to this country, the remoteness of his earlier conviction, his young age at the time of *811the conviction, and the absence of any subsequent criminal history until the instant, nonviolent illegal-reentry offense. Guo’s belief that these mitigating factors should have been balanced differently does not suffice to disturb the presumption of reasonableness that attaches to his within-guidelines sentence on appellate review. *See United States v. Gomez-Herrera,*528 F.3d 554, 565-66 (5th Cir.2008) (upholding the presumption of reasonableness of a within-guidelines sentence where the appellant argued that the Guidelines overstated the seriousness of his offense and that his motive for returning and cultural assimilation justified a sentence below the guidelines range).

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is 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 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

Nos. 98-4087/99-2057

___________

Margaret Holmes, *

 *

Appellee/Cross Appellant, * Appeals from the United States

* District Court for the

v. * Eastern District of Arkansas.

 *

Delta Memorial Hospital, * [UNPUBLISHED]

 *

Appellant/Cross Appellee. *

___________

 Submitted: August 3, 2000

 Filed: August 8, 2000

___________

Before McMILLIAN, LOKEN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

After thirty-four years of satisfactory service, Margaret Holmes, an AfricanAmerican, was terminated from her position as a certified nurse’s assistant at Delta

Memorial Hospital because she failed to clock out before leaving the hospital for ten

minutes during her lunch break for a legitimate reason. Two days prior to her

termination, Holmes had criticized two white nurses, one of whom was her immediate

supervisor, for their treatment of an African-American patient, and these two nurses

were influential in persuading Delta’s Chief Nursing Officer to terminate Holmes. 
1The HONORABLE JAMES MAXWELL MOODY, United States District

Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. 

-2-

Holmes filed this action against Delta, claiming it violated 42 U.S.C. § 1981 by

terminating her because of her race. Following a bench trial, the district court1 found

that Holmes had proved a prima facie case of race discrimination, that Delta’s stated

reason for the termination was pretextual, and that Delta had intentionally discriminated

against Holmes because of her race. The court awarded Holmes $15,000 in

compensatory damages and attorney’s fees of $5,750. 

Delta appeals the verdict for Holmes, and Holmes cross-appeals the fee award.

After careful review of the record, we conclude the evidence was more than sufficient

to support the district court’s ultimate finding of intentional discrimination. See Reeves

v. Sanderson Plumbing Prods., Inc., 120 S. Ct. 2097, 2108 (2000); Sanders v. Alliance

Home Health Care, Inc., 200 F.3d 1174, 1176 (8th Cir. 2000). As to the fee award, the

district court applied the familiar lodestar analysis, determining a reasonable hourly rate

and the number of hours reasonably expended for a case of this difficulty and

complexity. Although Holmes’s counsel requested a higher hourly rate and argued that

more hours were reasonably expended, we conclude the district court’s fee award was

not an abuse of its substantial discretion. See Thorne v. Welk Inv., Inc., 197 F.3d

1205, 1213 (8th Cir. 1999) (standard of review); Polacco v. Curators of Univ. of Mo.,

37 F.3d 366, 370 (8th Cir. 1994). Accordingly, we affirm.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Exhibit 32.1

EVERGREEN ENERGY INC.

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I,
Thomas H. Stoner, Jr., state and attest that:

/s/ THOMAS H. STONER, JR. Thomas H. Stoner, Jr.
Title:President & Chief Executive OfficerDate: April 30, 2010


A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Evergreen Energy Inc. and will be retained by Evergreen Energy Inc. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---



QuickLinks
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CURRENCY> 1.00

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999             DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999             SEP-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                   1.00                    1.00
<CASH>                                         181,205                 168,989
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  335,771                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0                       0
<PP&E>                                       1,929,435               2,560,521
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,457,487               2,675,380
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          661,761                   9,333
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                             0                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,795,726               2,666,047
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,457,487               2,675,380
<SALES>                                              0                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               117,999                   6,183
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                31,420                  27,088
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 86,579                (20,905)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             86,579                (20,905)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (86,579)                (20,905)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                       0


</TABLE>
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

         I, Allen Tepper, hereby certify to Psychiatric Solutions, Inc. that:

1.       I have reviewed the quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
         July 31, 2002 for Psychiatric Solutions, Inc (which for such quarter
         and as of July 31, 2002 was PMR Corporation only and did not include
         any combined operations of Psychiatric Solutions and PMR Corporation);

2.       Based on my knowledge, such quarterly 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 such quarterly report;

3.       Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
         information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all
         material respects the financial condition, results of operations and
         cash flows of the PMR Corporation as of, and for the periods presented
         in such quarterly report.

         I understand the Psychiatric Solutions is relying on this
representation in connection with its filing of the 10-Q for the quarter ended
July 31, 2002 for the operations of PMR Corporation prior to the completion of
the merger between Psychiatric Solutions and PMR.

Date: September 12, 2002

                                               /s/ Allen Tepper
                                               ---------------------------------
                                               Allen Tepper
                                               Former Chief Executive Officer of
                                               PMR Corporation
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 11


                         The Randers Group Incorporated
                                Exhibit 6(a)-11
          Statement Regarding Computation of Earnings (Loss) Per Share

Primary Earnings Per Share

        Net income (loss) per share is computed on the basis of the weighted
average number of common and dilutive common equivalent shares outstanding
during each period.  The number of shares used in computing net income (loss)
per share for each of the periods included herein are as follows:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                          Weighted Average
                      Weighted Average   Number of Dilutive
                      Number of Common    Common Equivalent
                     Shares Outstanding  Shares Outstanding        Total    
                     ------------------  ------------------   --------------
<S>                      <C>                    <C>             <C>
Six Months Ended

 June 30, 1997           14,115,682             ---             14,115,682
 June 30, 1996           14,115,682             ---             14,115,682

Three Months Ended

 June 30, 1997           14,115,682             ---             14,115,682
 June 30, 1996           14,115,682             ---             14,115,682
</TABLE>
Union Calendar No. 114

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2495

[Report No. 103–203]

A BILL

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey to

Hatchery.the State of Ohio the Senecaville National Fish

AUGUST 2, 1993

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the

State of the Union, and ordered to be printed
IB

Union Calendar No. 114

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2495

[Report No. 103–203]

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey to the State of Ohio

the Senecaville National Fish Hatchery.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 23, 1993

Mr. APPLEGATE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries

AUGUST 2, 1993

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union,

and ordered to be printed

A BILL

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey to the

State of Ohio the Senecaville National Fish Hatchery.

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

3 SECTION 1. CONVEYANCE OF SENECAVILLE NATIONAL

4 FISH HATCHERY.

5 (a) CONVEYANCE AUTHORIZED.—Notwithstanding

6 any other provision of law and within 180 days after the
2

•HR 2495 RH

1 date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the

2 Interior shall convey to the State of Ohio without reim3 bursement all right, title, and interest of the United States

4 in and to the property known as the Senecaville National

5 Fish Hatchery, located in Senecaville, Ohio, including—

6 (1) all easements and water rights relating to

7 that property, and

8 (2) all land, improvements, and related personal

9 property comprising that hatchery.

10 (b) USE OF PROPERTY.—All property and interests

11 conveyed under this section shall be used by the Ohio De12 partment of Natural Resources for the Ohio fishery re13 sources management program.

14 (c) REVERSIONARY INTEREST.—All right, title, and

15 interest in and to all property and interests conveyed

16 under this section shall revert to the United States on any

17 date on which any of the property or interests are used

18 other than for the Ohio fishery resources management

19 program.
#### Ramon L. FISHER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and State Employees Below, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 14-1109.

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.

June 27, 2014.

Ramon L. Fisher, Canon City, CO, pro se.

Before HARTZ, McKAY, and MATHESON, Circuit Judges.

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

SCOTT M. MATHESON, JR., Circuit Judge.

On January 16, 2014, the district court entered judgment dismissing Mr. Fisher’s amended complaint without prejudice. On March 14, 2014, the district court docketed what it called a “Misdirected Notice of Appeal” as to the January 16 judgment. The accompanying envelope indicates it was given to prison personnel for mailing on March 12, 2014. Mr. Fisher has not met his burden to show he submitted the envelope to prison officials before this date. *See*Fed. RApp. P. 4(c)(1); *Price v. Philpot,*420 F.3d 1158, 1165 (10th Cir.2005). Because notice of appeal was not filed within 30 days of judgment, Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), we do not have jurisdiction and therefore dismiss this appeal. We deny Mr. Fisher’s motion to proceed *informa pauperis.*

*

 After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination of this appeal. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 32.1.
946 A.2d 641

#### LA WEIGHT LOSS CENTERS, INC, Petitioner v. LEXINGTON INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

April 3, 2008.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 3rd day of April, 2008, the Application for Relief is DENIED.
Exhibit 10.19
 AMERISTAR CASINOS, INC.
NON-QUALIFIED STOCK OPTION AGREEMENT
 Name and Address of Optionee:Date of Grant:No. of Shares:Exercise Price:Vesting Schedule:
    
    shares onshares onshares onshares onshares onExpiration Date:




---



##### 



Grant of Option
  Term of Option
 -2-




---



##### 



Method of Exercise
     -3-




---



##### 



Tax Withholding
 -4-




---



##### 



Termination of Option
     -5-




---



##### 



Adjustments
 Change in Control; Corporate Transaction
 -6-




---



##### 



Provisions Regarding Transferability
 No Stockholder Rights
 Investment Representation
 Conditions to Issuance of Shares
 -7-




---



##### 



Optionee Subject to Section 16
 Acceptance of Agreement
 Plan Terms
  AMERISTAR CASINOS, INC.By: -8-
Exhibit 32.2

 

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 

I certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1. the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of LabOne, Inc. for the period ending September 30, 2003 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2. the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of LabOne, Inc.

 

LabOne, Inc.

Date:  November 13, 2003
By  /s/ *John W. McCarty*
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2559 Engrossed Amendment Senate (EAS)]

103d CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 2559

_______________________________________________________________________

                               AMENDMENTS
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

                  In the Senate of the United States,

                         March 24 (legislative day, February 22), 1994.
      Resolved, That the bill from the House of Representatives (H.R. 
2559) entitled ``An Act to designate the Federal building located at 
601 East 12th Street in Kansas City, Missouri, as the `Richard Bolling 
Federal Building' '' do pass with the following

                              AMENDMENTS:

            Page 2, after line 5, insert:

SEC. 3. DESIGNATION.

    The United States Courthouse located at Ninth and Locust Streets in 
Kansas City, Missouri, shall be known and designated as the ``Charles 
Evans Whittaker United States Courthouse''.

SEC. 4. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the courthouse referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Charles Evans Whittaker 
United States Courthouse''.
            Amend the title so as to read: An Act to designate the 
        Federal building located at 601 East 12th Street in Kansas 
        City, Missouri, as the ``Richard Bolling Federal Building and 
        the United States Courthouse located at Ninth and Locust 
        Streets, in Kansas City, Missouri, as the ``Charles Evans 
        Whittaker United States Courthouse''.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
```
**Exhibit 10.3****AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO STOCK OPTION AGREEMENT**     This Amendment No. 2 (this “Amendment”) dated as of November 18, 2002 to that certainStock Option Agreement (the “Stock Option Agreement”), dated as of January 18, 2001, and amendedas of October 14, 2002, by and between Natural Health Trends Corp., a Florida corporation the(“Company”), and Terry L. LaCore (the “Optionee”).**W****I****T****N****E****S****S****E****T****H :**     **WHEREAS,**the Company and Optionee are parties to the Stock Option Agreement, asamended, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A; and     **WHEREAS,**the parties to the Stock Option Agreement desire to amend the Stock OptionAgreement to amend the cashless exercise provision contained therein.     **NOW, THEREFORE,**in consideration of the premises and mutual covenants contained herein, thereceipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows:     1. Effective as of the date hereof, the Stock Option Agreement is hereby amended by deleting the following phrase contained in the first sentence of Section 4:               “the Optionee may, at its election”and in lieu thereof the following phrase shall be inserted:               “the Company may, at its election, permit the Optionee to”.     2. This Amendment shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas, without regard to principles of conflicts of law.     3. Except as otherwise specifically set forth herein, all of the terms and provisions of theStock Option Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.     **IN WITNESS WHEREOF,**the undersigned have executed this Amendment as of the day first abovewritten.      **NATURAL HEALTH TRENDS CORP.**
`[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2495 Engrossed in House (EH)]

103d CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 2495

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey to the State of Ohio 
                the Senecaville National Fish Hatchery.






103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2495

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT


 
To direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey to the State of Ohio 
                the Senecaville National Fish Hatchery.

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

SECTION 1. CONVEYANCE OF SENECAVILLE NATIONAL FISH HATCHERY.

    (a) Conveyance Authorized.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
law and within 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, 
the Secretary of the Interior shall convey to the State of Ohio without 
reimbursement all right, title, and interest of the United States in 
and to the property known as the Senecaville National Fish Hatchery, 
located in Senecaville, Ohio, including--
            (1) all easements and water rights relating to that 
        property, and
            (2) all land, improvements, and related personal property 
        comprising that hatchery.
    (b) Use of Property.--All property and interests conveyed under 
this section shall be used by the Ohio Department of Natural Resources 
for the Ohio fishery resources management program.
    (c) Reversionary Interest.--All right, title, and interest in and 
to all property and interests conveyed under this section shall revert 
to the United States on any date on which any of the property or 
interests are used other than for the Ohio fishery resources management 
program.

            Passed the House of Representatives August 2, 1993.

            Attest:






                                                                 Clerk.`