alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
‘i 

n;; h :: 

* 

. . 

z 

. . -. 

GG6 

: 

^ .’ 

: 

. . 

I .“... 

. OFFICE OFTHE ATTORNEY GENERALOF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

-cwuw -ouRa 

Eanorab1.e Lbrvln Xi. Drown, Jr. 

crizlinol Dlstrlot Attorney 

Fort \Yorth, Texas . 

Deer Sir8 

328(3.) provides a 

in suite for dolin107 now in ?oroo Pa3uad lLl civa1 oa303, 

or tho opinion thst the no 

supcraoded tho fom to bo uooa in 

olloction of dolinq.lmt taxco, 

ltatlon. ie apeoirically sot forth ’ 

(1) Soot.ion j, 

assi:;t US In this rmtter with an axa0 f0110:16I 

Upo!x reoolpt of your lottor the writer \szoto you 

"It is our u~domtnndin(: thnt tho poinl; you 

inquire about hao bow cnllod to tho uttontion of 

the SKp~Wo Court and that the court is no?t prey5ng ar. axiGcd rule to taka cm0 of this acming 
. ., . 

, Honorable LWvls I?. l&own,iJr., -pa&o 2 

lnoonslat3noyr Slth your pemkmibn, thOref@o, 

WC will mit the aotion by tim court which tra+uide~G 

stand will bs in the mar future boforo answifcpfq~ 

yam. roquostIn 

Fe novr oOl?~yf5ur sttcatim to Ruls ::o, 2 a0 azwnd0d 

by thb Suprme Court; tJse smo provldo3 a3 folloxo: 

nThoae &lo3 ohsU &kern tho procoduro in 

the justioa, county, distritit ncd~ nppa+to court3 

of tho rtato of Texas in all aotiom of a civil '. 

nature, with 3uch Oroaptions 33 my bo horoimftor 

Bt3hi . . :,:horo any ntatut3 In offoct,lxzodistaly 

. prior to %pttmbcr 1, l.$!,J., proscribed .a rulo 

or procoduro tn'lumcy, @mrdianOhip, OY 03tatos 

of docadontc, or any other probato Jroo3odingn In ~. 

tho oounty court diff3~5.r;~ fro3 the30 rulon, such 

statuts 3hOll ag;:ly. :~ii atatuton in tmmi iamediately prior to SaytcmbOr l., 1$&l, p"o3cribi.r~ 

~ulos ail prGcodw% in bond oi' reco~~izsnoe ~o~~oILu~Qs 

;Cn cririlual casas era hsreby Ooztlnuod In affect 03 

rules of yrocodura covorninL; such oa303, but whore 

auuh crtatuteo Jroscribod na rules of Jzoseduro In 

530t103 5, of Artlolg 732%3. amtiiino. a form of altotlon to bo used in t3;% mite. : 

ft 13 the o>fnion of this dopnrtzmt that Artiolo 

73~8-1’ ~3 still in force and effect UII~ aold attltuto hm not 

been ropsslod oz Ononded by the no? rulOo of praotioo end proQoduro in oivil notio:i3 pronulcated by tho :uypocle Court of this 

zt3to. 

Yours very truly
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Eden VALDEZ-ANGULO, a.k.a. Eden Valdez Angulo, a.k.a. Miguel Valdez-Angulo, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 13-10333.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 7, 2014*.

Decided April 11, 2014.

Dominique Juliet Park, Special Assistant U.S., USPX-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Carlton Gunn, Esquire, Kaye, McLane, Bednarski & Litt, LLP Pasadena, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: TASHIMA, GRABER, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Eden Valdez-Angulo appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 48-month sentence imposed following *502his guilty-plea conviction for reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Valdez-Angulo first contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable because the imposition of two criminal history points under U.S.S.G. § 4Al.l(d) turned solely on the “happenstance” of the timing of his discovery by immigration officials. Relying on *United States v. Amezcuar-Vasquez,*567 F.3d 1050 (9th Cir.2009), Valdez-Angulo also contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable in light of his limited roles in his prior convictions, one of which resulted in a 16-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(A)(vii).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Valdez-Angulo’s sentence. *See Gall v. United States,*552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). Unlike the sentence in *Amezcua-Vasquez,*Valdez-Angulo’s below-Guidelines sentence properly reflects the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Valdez-Angulo’s criminal and immigration history. *See id.*

Finally, Valdez-Angulo contends that *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*523 U.S. 224, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), has been undermined and that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) is unconstitutional. As Valdez-Angulo concedes, this argument is foreclosed. *See United States v. Almazan-Becerra,*482 F.3d 1085, 1091 (9th Cir.2007).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
<Page>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.2

                           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 Huntsman Polymers Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2002, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, J. Kimo
Esplin, 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 to my knowledge:

         (1)      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 the Company.


/s/ J. Kimo Esplin
------------------------------
J. Kimo Esplin
Chief Financial Officer
August 14, 2002
* 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. R. 47.5.4.

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-10633 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ALICE FAY TURNER, Also Known as Alice O’ Brian, Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas No. 3:05-CR-249-2 Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Alice Turner has moved towithdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Turner has not filed a response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR. R. 42.2. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D October 30, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 3-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             Dec-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                  Mar-31-1998
<CASH>                        10,484,783
<SECURITIES>                  000
<RECEIVABLES>                 690,387
<ALLOWANCES>                  356,682
<INVENTORY>                   000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>              12,228,761
<PP&E>                        39,275,000
<DEPRECIATION>                13,373,668
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                51,168,239
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>         671,141
<BONDS>                       31,025,000
<COMMON>                      000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>         000
<PREFERRED>                   000
<OTHER-SE>                    19,447,997
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>  51,168,239
<SALES>                       1,191,460
<TOTAL-REVENUES>              2,047,732
<CGS>                         000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                 433,212
<OTHER-EXPENSES>              606,490
<LOSS-PROVISION>              000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>            562,328
<INCOME-PRETAX>               437,332
<INCOME-TAX>                  000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>           000
<DISCONTINUED>                000
<EXTRAORDINARY>               000
<CHANGES>                     000
<NET-INCOME>                  437,332
<EPS-PRIMARY>                 6.16
<EPS-DILUTED>                 6.16
        

</TABLE>
Comparison of PT Scoring for Outliers: FSIS CUSUMs vs. Z Score 

Event * 

Total Number of 

CUSUM Outlier and Z 

Score Outlier 

Total Number of 

CUSUM Outlier with 

Warning Z Score (not 

outlier) 

Total Number of 

CUSUM Outlier with 

Acceptable Z Score 

(not outlier) 

Total Number of Z 

Score Outlier with 

Large CUSUM Score 

(not outlier) 

July 2013 3 1 1 

January 2014 3 1 4 

March 2014 3 2 2 

May 2014 5 3 

July 2014 8 2 

September 2014 3 2 3 

November 2014 5 2 1 

January 2015 1 1 2 

March 2015 2 1 

TOTALS 31 11 1 18 

* All events except July 2013 had two sample sets (17 events represented in this table). 

This evaluation showed that when CUSUM scoring indicated the presence of an outlier, the z scores either also indicated the outlier or 

returned a score warning that the result was close to becoming an outlier. Conversely, when the z scores indicated an outlier that 

CUSUM scoring did not, the result still sustained a relatively large ALP CUSUM score increase. One of the results that was an outlier 

among the CUSUMs was not an outlier among the z scores and there was no warning that the result was close to becoming an outlier. 

However, the z score was very close to the warning limit. Warning limits are z scores between -3 and -2, and also between 2 and 3. 

Results that incur a z score in the warning limit are not considered outliers, but are a signal to the laboratory that it may be 

experiencing the beginning of a problem and should be prepared to troubleshoot the analytical system.
* 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 . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________ No. 96-60631 Summary Calendar

__________________ SHASHANK DENGLE, Petitioner,
versus IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent.

- - - - - - - - - - - Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A27 897 852

- - - - - - - - - - - July 24, 1997 Before JONES, DeMOSS and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Shashank Dengle petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals decision affirming the denial of asylum and withholding of deportation. We have reviewed the record and the briefs and find that the Board’s decision is supported by substantial evidence. Carbajal-Gonzalez v. INS , 78 F.3d 194 (5th Cir. 1996). The petition for review is DENIED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<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>                                       1,132,148
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,394,021
<ALLOWANCES>                                   120,000
<INVENTORY>                                    123,028
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,856,020
<PP&E>                                      11,444,237
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,860,211
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              23,332,055
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        8,897,121
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           13,563
<PREFERRED>                                      3,258
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  25,736,060
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                23,332,055
<SALES>                                      3,885,699
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,885,699
<CGS>                                        1,956,533
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                6,751,287
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               819,504
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             719,477
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (4,404,569)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (4,404,569)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (4,404,569)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.30)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.07)


</TABLE>
|   | 1. | 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 the Company. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|              |   |                      |
|-------------------|--------|---------------------------|
|              |   |                      |   |
| Date: May 6, 2010 | By:    | /s/ James R. Wolford |   |
|              |   | James R. Wolford          |   |
|              |   | Chief Financial Officer   |   |
|              |   |                      |   |
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                        INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT



We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements numbered
333-43997 and 333-87013 on Form S-8 of Gart Sports Company of our report dated
March 7, 2001, with respect to the consolidated balance sheet of Gart Sports
Company and subsidiaries as of February 3, 2001 and the related consolidated
statements of operations, stockholders' equity and comprehensive income and of
cash flows for the 53 weeks ended February 3, 2001 included in this annual
report on Form 10-K of Gart Sports Company.



Deloitte & Touche LLP


Denver, Colorado
April 12, 2001
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                          60,556
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   65,005
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,049
<INVENTORY>                                     28,157
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               153,792
<PP&E>                                         404,841
<DEPRECIATION>                                  67,948
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 746,098
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           74,071
<BONDS>                                        584,837
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            5,500
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           100
<OTHER-SE>                                      34,024
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   746,098
<SALES>                                        304,620
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               304,620
<CGS>                                          230,220
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  230,220
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                40,837
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              37,778
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,023)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       423
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,446)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,446)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.24)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.24)
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 5 (Monday, January 8, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 1311]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-456]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration


Washington University School of Medicine; Notice of Decision on 
Application for Duty-Free Entry of Scientific Instrument

    This decision is made pursuant to section 6(c) of the Educational, 
Scientific, and Cultural Materials Importation Act of 1966 (Pub. Law 
89-651, 80 Stat. 897; 15 CFR part 301). Related records can be viewed 
between 8:30 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. in Room 4211, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 14th and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC.
    Docket Number: 00-037. Applicant: Washington University School of 
Medicine, St. Louis, MO 63110. Instrument: Flash Lamp System with 
Accessories. Manufacturer: Rapp OptoElectronic, Germany. Intended Use: 
See notice at 65 FR 70549, November 24, 2000.
    Comments: None received. Decision: Approved. No instrument of 
equivalent scientific value to the foreign instrument, for such 
purposes as it is intended to be used, is being manufactured in the 
United States. Reasons: The foreign instrument provides special filters 
for applications using caged Ca<SUP>2+</SUP> compounds with an energy 
density of 400 mJ/cm<SUP>2</SUP> in the UV. The National Institutes of 
Health advises in its memorandum of December 5, 2000 that (1) this 
capability is pertinent to the applicant's intended purpose and (2) it 
knows of no domestic instrument or apparatus of equivalent scientific 
value to the foreign instrument for the applicant's intended use.
    We know of no other instrument or apparatus of equivalent 
scientific value to the foreign instrument which is being manufactured 
in the United States.

Gerald A. Zerdy,
Program Manager, Statutory Import Programs Staff.
[FR Doc. 01-456 Filed 1-5-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
EXHIBIT 32.1








CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


(SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)








In connection with the Quarterly Report of PICO Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, John R. Hart, President and Chief Executive 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 (“Section 906”), that to the best of my knowledge:





(1) The Report fully complies with requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and





(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.











Date:  May 7, 2010





/s/ John R. Hart


John R. Hart


President and Chief Executive Officer
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 the Interior

###### Bureau of Land Management

          - [CO-700-01-1220-AL-1784]

# AGENCY:

Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

# ACTION:

Notice; Southwest Resource Advisory Council meeting.

# SUMMARY:

Notice is hereby given that the Southwest Resource Advisory Council (Southwest RAC) will meet in April, 2001 in Durango, Colorado.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held on Thursday, April 12, 2001.

# ADDRESSES:

For additional information, contact Roger Alexander, Bureau of Land Management, 2465 South Townsend Avenue, Montrose, Colorado 81401; phone 970.240.5335; e-mail roger_alexander@co.blm.gov.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The April 12, 2001 meeting will be held at the San Juan Public Lands Center, Sonoran Rooms A & B, 15 Burnett Court in Durango, Colorado. The meeting will begin at 9 a.m. and end no later than 4:30 p.m. The agenda will include a presentation on BLM's oil and gas program responsibilities and RAC business items for 2001. General public comment is scheduled for 9:15 a.m.

                    Summary minutes for Council meetings are maintained at BLM's Western Slope Center office in Montrose and on the internet at                     *http://www.co.blm.gov/​swrac/​swrac.htm*                     and are available for public inspection and reproduction within thirty (30) days following each meeting.                

Dated: February 9, 2001.

Roger Alexander,

Public Affairs Specialist.

[FR Doc. 01-4316 Filed 2-21-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-JB-P
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2410 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2410

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a certificate of 
   documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the 
 coastwise trade of the United States for each of the vessels MARINER 
                          and NORTHERN LIGHT.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 14, 1993

 Mr. Machtley introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
               Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a certificate of 
   documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the 
 coastwise trade of the United States for each of the vessels MARINER 
                          and NORTHERN LIGHT.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That notwithstanding 
section 27 of the Merchant Marine Act, 1920 (46 App. U.S.C. 883) and 
section 12106, 12107, or 12108 of title 46, United States Code, the 
Secretary of Transportation may issue a certificate of documentation 
with appropriate endorsement for employment in the coastwise trade of 
the United States for each of--
            (1) the vessel MARINER (official number 285452); and
            (2) the vessel NORTHERN LIGHT (official number 237510).

                                 <all>
```
#### MYLAN INC., et al., petitioners, v. DAIICHI SANKYO COMPANY, LTD., et al.

No. 10-770.

March 21, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied.