alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, e xcept under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and col lateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judg ments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and condi tions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

## F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### JUN 10 1997 

### PATRICK FISHER Clerk 

### UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

ROY HENNEGEN, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v. DUANE TAYLOR, Defendant-Appellee. No. 96-1547 (D.C. No. 96-Z-1602) (Colorado)



### ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

Before SEYMOUR , Chief Judge, PORFILIO and MURPHY , Circuit Judges.

After examining the briefs and appellate record, th is panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materiallyassist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The c ause is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.-2-

Plaintiff Roy Hennegen filed a lawsuit in state court against Duane Taylor, the branch manager for Alternative Resources Corpor ation, claiming that Mr. Taylor underpaid Mr. Hennegen in the amount of $21, 994.45 for work performed by Mr. Hennegen. Mr. Taylor removed the case to fe deral court on the grounds that Mr. Hennegen was actually complaining about fe deral and state taxes since the amount withheld from his salary constituted fed eral and state income taxes and social security required to be withheld by fede ral and state law. Mr. Hennegen appeals the district court’s grant of Mr. Taylor’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and for Sanctions. We affirm. Mr. Hennegen contends on appeal that he is not a fe deral government employee as required by the definition of “employee ” in the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C. § 3401(c). Unfortunately for him, all employees, not just employees of the federal government, are required t o submit to federal tax withholding. See United States v. Latham , 754 F.2d 747, 750 (7th Cir. 1985) (contention that “under 26 U.S.C. § 3401(c) the cat egory of ‘employee’ does not include privately employed wage earners is a prepos terous reading of the statute.”). We agree with the district court, subs tantially for the reasons stated in its Order of Dismissal that “[t]his lawsuit is simp ly a disturbing effort to undermine our nation’s tax system.” Rec., vol I, t ab 21 at 2. Consequently, we
AFFIRM the judgment of the district court, including the award of sanctions.-3-

Mr. Taylor requests that we grant sanctions on appe al on the grounds this appeal is frivolous and vexatious. We grant the mo tion and award Mr. Taylor double costs and attorney’s fees as a sanction. Se eLonsdale v United States , 919 F.2d 1440, 1448 (10th Cir. 1990). We REMAND to the district court for a determination of the amount of reasonable attorney’ s fees expended by Mr. Taylor for defending this appeal.
ENTERED FOR THE COURT Stephanie K. Seymour Chief Judge
### SUBCHAPTER III—GROWTH DECISION AID
Exhibit 23.2


   
                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS



MTR Gaming Group, Inc.
  (formerly Winners Entertainment, Inc.)
    


We consent to the use of our report  included herein and to the reference to our
firm under the heading "Experts" in the Prospectus.


   
                                                              /s/CORBIN & WERTZ
                                                              Corbin & Wertz


Irvine, California
 November 12, 1996
| Transaction valuation | Amount of filing fee |
|-----------------------|----------------------|
| $81,484.00 *          | $9.33 **             |

----

----

|    Date:  January 9,  2012 | B+H Ocean Carriers Ltd.  By   /s/ Michael S. HudnerMichael S. Hudner        Chairman of the Board, President andChief Executive Officer  |
|---------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                          |                                                                                                                                                                                                           |

----
DISMISS; and Opinion Filed June 28, 2016.

S

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-16-00717-CR

No. 05-16-00718-CR

EX PARTE SENRICK WILKERSON

Original Proceedings Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 3

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. F10-01183 & F10-1184

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Lang-Miers, Evans, and Brown

Opinion by Justice Brown

The Court has before it Senrick Wilkerson’s June 20, 2016 petition for out of time 

appeals. The appropriate vehicle for seeking an out-of-time appeal is by writ of habeas corpus 

from the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals filed under article 11.07 of the code of criminal 

procedure. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07 (West 2015); see also Portley v. State, 

89 S.W.3d 188, 189 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2002, no pet); Ashorn v. State, 77 S.W.3d 405, 409 

(Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2002, pet. ref’d). This Court has no jurisdiction to grant out-oftime appeals.

Because we lack jurisdiction, we dismiss these appeals.

Do Not Publish

TEX. R. APP. P. 47

160717F.U05

/Ada Brown/

ADA BROWN

JUSTICE
–2–

Court of Appeals

S

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

EX PARTE SENRICK WILKERSON

No. 05-16-00717-CR

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court 

No. 3, Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F10-01183.

Opinion delivered by Justice Brown, Justices 

Lang-Miers and Evans participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS this appeal for want of 

jurisdiction. 

Judgment entered this 28th day of June, 2016.
–3–

Court of Appeals

S

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

EX PARTE SENRICK WILKERSON

No. 05-16-00718-CR

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court 

No. 3, Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F10-01184.

Opinion delivered by Justice Brown, Justices 

Lang-Miers and Evans participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS this appeal for want of 

jurisdiction. 

Judgment entered this 28th day of June, 2016.
#### Town of Newington *v.*Connecticut State Board of Labor Relations

*Irving B. Shurberg,*for the appellant (plaintiff).

No appearance for the appellee (defendant).

Argued April 2

decided April 2, 1974

The defendant’s motion to dismiss the appeal from the Court of Common Pleas in Hartford County is denied.
#### § 3.34 [Reserved]
# C_2007129EN.01000101.xml

| 9.6.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 129/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.6.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 129/1

---

(2007/C 129/01)

Last publication of the Court of Justice in the Official Journal of the European Union

Official Journal of the European Union

OJ C 117, 26.5.2007

OJ C 117, 26.5.2007

Past publications

OJ C 96, 28.4.2007

OJ C 95, 28.4.2007

OJ C 82, 14.4.2007

OJ C 69, 24.3.2007

OJ C 56, 10.3.2007

OJ C 42, 24.2.2007

These texts are available on:

| | EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu |
| --- | --- |

EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu

---
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Bryant Hall, Appellant.

[823 NYS2d 694]

Application by the appellant for a writ of error coram nobis to vacate, on the ground of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, a decision and order of this Court dated May 24, 2004 *(People v Hall,*7 AD3d 812 [2004]), affirming a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County, rendered May 24, 2002.

Ordered that the application is denied.

The appellant has failed to establish that he was denied the effective assistance of appellate counsel *(see Jones v Barnes,*463 US 745 [1983]; *People v Stultz,*2 NY3d 277 [2004]). Florio, J.R, Adams, Crane and Goldstein, JJ., concur.
### §241. Evidence

When any request for information, made by the Secretary or other authorized officer or employee of the Department of Commerce or bureau or agency thereof, is made by registered or certified mail or telegram, the return receipt therefor or other written receipt thereof shall be prima facie evidence of an official request in any prosecution under such section.

(Aug. 31, 1954, ch. 1158, 68 Stat. 1025; Pub. L. 85–207, §19, Aug. 28, 1957, 71 Stat. 484; Pub. L. 94–521, §15(b), Oct. 17, 1976, 90 Stat. 2465.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Based on title 13, U.S.C., 1952 ed., §§74, 84 (Aug. 7, 1916, ch. 274, §4, 39 Stat. 437; Apr. 2, 1924, ch. 80, §4, 43 Stat. 32; June 18, 1929, ch. 28, §21, 46 Stat. 26; June 14, 1938, ch. 358, 52 Stat. 678; July 25, 1947, ch. 331, 61 Stat. 457).

Section consolidates part of section 74 of title 13, U.S.C., 1952 ed., which section related to the collection of cotton statistics, with part of section 84 of such title, which section related to the collection of statistics on oilseeds, nuts and kernels, fats, oils and greases. For remainder of such sections 74 and 84, see Distribution Table.

Section 74 of title 13, U.S.C., 1952 ed., authorized the making of requests for information by registered mail, and provided that, if so made, the registry receipt should be "accepted as evidence of such demand". Section 84 thereof authorized the making of requests by registered mail, or "by telegraph", and provided that, if so made, the "return" receipt therefor should be "prima facie evidence of an official request". The authorizations contained in such sections have been carried into section 224 of this title, and the evidentiary provisions thereof have been carried into this section, and they apply to investigations other than those to which such sections 74 and 84 related. See Revision Note to section 224 of this title.

In this revised section, the language of section 84 of title 13, U.S.C., 1952 ed., was largely followed as probably being the more desirable, but "or other written receipt thereof" was inserted since there is no return receipt with respect to a telegram, and words "in any prosecution under such section" were inserted for the purpose of completeness.

Further, words "Secretary or other authorized officer or employee of the Department of Commerce or bureau or agency thereof" were substituted for references to the Director of the Census, to conform with 1950 Reorganization Plan No. 5, §§1, 2, eff. May 24, 1950, 15 F.R. 3174, 64 Stat. 1263. See Revision Note to section 4 of this title.

Changes were made in phraseology.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1976—Pub. L. 94–521 struck out "as authorized by section 224 of this title" after "telegram".

1957—Pub. L. 85–207 inserted "or certified" after "registered".

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 1976 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 94–521 effective Oct. 17, 1976, see section 17 of Pub. L. 94–521, set out as a note under section 1 of this title.
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 44 (Monday, March 7, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 12342]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-4915]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMISSION OF FINE ARTS


Notice of Meeting

    The next meeting of the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts is scheduled 
for 17 March 2011, at 10 a.m. in the Commission offices at the National 
Building Museum, Suite 312, Judiciary Square, 401 F Street, NW., 
Washington DC 20001-2728. Items of discussion may include buildings, 
parks and memorials.
    Draft agendas and additional information regarding the Commission 
are available on our Web site: http://www.cfa.gov. Inquiries regarding 
the agenda and requests to submit written or oral statements should be 
addressed to Thomas Luebke, Secretary, U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, at 
the above address; by e-mailing <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d2a1a6b3b4b492b1b4b3fcb5bda4"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="047770656262446762652a636b72">[email protected]</span></a>; or by calling 202-504-
2200. Individuals requiring sign language interpretation for the 
hearing impaired should contact the Secretary at least 10 days before 
the meeting date.

    Dated: February 28, 2011 in Washington, DC.
Thomas Luebke,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-4915 Filed 3-4-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6330-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
# C_2010260EN.01001302.xml

| 25.9.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 260/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.9.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 260/13

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Supreme Court (Ireland) made on 6 August 2010 — J. McB. v L. E.

(Case C-400/10)

()

2010/C 260/17

Language of the case: English

Referring court

Referring court

Supreme Court, Ireland

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: J. McB.

Applicant:

Defendant: L. E.

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Does Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 (1) of 27th November 2003 on the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000 (2), whether interpreted pursuant to Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union or otherwise, preclude a Member State from requiring by its law that the father of a child who is not married to the mother shall have obtained an order of a court of competent jurisdiction granting him custody in order to qualify as having ‘custody rights’ which render the removal of that child from its country of habitual residence wrongful for the purposes of Article 2.11 of that Regulation?

1

th

2

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000

1

OJ L 338, p. 1

(2)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000 of 29 May 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and in matters of parental responsibility for children of both spouses

2

OJ L 160, p. 19

---
Exhibit15.2

 

Consent of Independent Registered PublicAccounting Firm

 

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders

 

BBVA Banco Francés S.A.

 

We consent to theincorporation by reference in the registration statement (No.333-219100) on Form F-3 of BBVA Banco Francés S.A.of our reports dated May 2, 2018, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of BBVA Banco Francés S.A. and itssubsidiaries (the Company) as of December 31, 2017, and the related consolidated income statement and statements of changesin shareholders’ equity and cash flows, for the year ended December 31, 2017, and the related notes (collectively, theconsolidated financial statements), and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as ofDecember 31, 2017, which reports appear in the December 31, 2017 annual report on Form 20-F of the Company.

 

Our report datedMay 2, 2018 on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2017, expresses our opinionthat the Company did not maintain effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2017 because of theeffect of material weaknesses on achievement of the objectives of the control criteria and contains an explanatory paragraphthat states such material weaknesses related to the preparation and review of the Company ́s disclosure under UnitedStates Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (US GAAP), as required by Item 18 of Form 20-F; as well as in the preparationand review of the consolidated statement of cash flows in accordance to the accounting rules established by ArgentineCentral Bank and US GAAP.

 

/s/ KPMG

 

Buenos Aires, Argentina

May 2, 2018
Stock Certificate



 Exhibit 4.1 
 

 
 NUMBER SII-04592 SHARES Synutra International, Inc. SYNUTRA INTERNATIONAL INC. SEAL FEB. 23
2004 DELAWARE INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE Authorized Common Stock: 250000,000 Shares Par Value $.0001 COMMON STOCK SEE REVERSE FOR CERTAIN DEFINMONS CUSIP 87164C 10 2 This Certifies that Is the registered holder of FULLY
PAID AND NON-ASSESSABLE SHARES OF THE COMMON STOCK, PAR VALUE $.0001, OF Synutra International, Inc. transferable on the books of the Corporation by the holder hereof in person or by duly authorized attorney upon surrender of this Certificate
properly endorsed. This Certificate is not valid until counter signed by the Transfer Agent and Registrar. Witness the facsimile seal of the Corporation and the facsimile signatures of its duly authorized officers. Dated: SEAL FEB.21 2004 SECRETARY
PRESIDENT TRANSFER AGENT AND REGISTRAR. By COMPUTERSHARE TRUST COMPANY, N.A. AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE 







 

 
 Synutra International, Inc. The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the
face of this certificate, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations: TEN COM — as tenants in common TEN ENT — as tenants by the entireties IT TEN — as joint tenants with
right of survivorship and not as tenants in common UNIF 01Ff MIN ACT— Custodian (Cust) Minor) under Uniform Gifts to Minors Act (State) UNIF TRF MIN ACT (cust) Custodian (until age under Uniform Transfer (Minor) to Minors Act (State) Additional
abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list. For Value received, hereby sell, assign and transfer unto PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE PLEASE PRINT OR TYPEWRITE NAME AND ADDRESS. INCLUDING POSTAL
L(PI. ODE. (IF ASSIGNEE Shares of the capital stock represented by the within Certificate, and do(es) hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint to transfer the said stock on the books of the within named Corporation with full power of substitution
in the premises. Dated NOTICE THE SIGNATURE(S) TO THIS ASSIGNMENT MUST CORRESPOND WITH THE NAME(S) AS WRITTEN UPON THE FACE OF THE CERTIFICATE (N EVERY PARTICULAR WITHOUT ALTERATION OR ENLARGEMENT OR ANY CHANGE WHATEVER. Signature(s) Guaranteed: By
THE SIGNATURE(S) MUST BE GUARANTEED BY AN ELIGIBLE GUARANTOR INSTITUTION (BANKS, STOCKBROKERS, SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS AND CREDIT UNIONS WITH MEMBERSHIP IN AN APPROVED SIGNATURE GUARANTEE MEDALLION PROGRAM), PURSUANT TO S.E.C. RULE l7Ad-15.
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation 

76-118 

November 8, 1976 

REFERENCE: 

 [*1] 4021(a)(2) Plans Covered. Tax Qualification by IRS Determination 

OPINION: 

 This is in response to your letter requesting a determination by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (the

"PBGC") as to whether the termination of the * * * the "Plan") is covered under Title IV of the Employee Retirement

Income Security Act of 1974 (the "Act"). 

As I understand the pertinent facts, the * * * (the "Company") established the Plan in 1966 and received a letter of

qualification from the Internal Revenue Service. The information you provided indicated that although the Company

made contributions to the Plan each year (except 1970 and 1974) until the Plan's termination in * * * the Company's

annual contributions after 1969 were below the amount required to satisfy the Internal Revenue Code's minimum funding

standard. As a result, by November 1973, the unfunded past service cost of the Plan exceeded the initial unfunded past

service cost of the Plan. 

Based on the foregoing, you indicated that after November 1973, the Plan was not qualified under § 401 of the

Internal Revenue Code and that, therefore, the Plan's termination is not covered under Title IV of the Act. 

Section 4021(a) of the Act provides [*2] that a plan is covered by Title IV's termination insurance provisions if the

plan was in existence on September 2, 1974 and "has been determined by the Secretary of the Treasury to be a plan

described in § 401(a) of the Internal Revenue Code . . . ." In this regard, once a plan is determined to be qualified by

the Internal Revenue Service, it is considered to be so qualified for purposes of Title IV until that qualification is

specifically revoked. Based on the information you provided, it appears that the Internal Revenue Service did not revoke

the Plan's qualification prior to the Plan's termination. Accordingly, since the Plan was qualified for purposes of Title

IV on the date of its termination, the Plan is covered under Title IV and its termination is subject to Title IV's termination

procedures. 

Henry Rose 

General Counsel
### §4007. Effect on State law

#### (a) In general

Any law or regulation of any State in effect on September 1, 1989, which requires that funds deposited or received for deposit in an account at a depository institution chartered by such State be made available for withdrawal in a shorter period of time than the period of time provided in this chapter or in regulations prescribed by the Board under this chapter (as in effect on September 1, 1989) shall—

(1) supersede the provisions of this chapter and any regulations by the Board to the extent such provisions relate to the time by which funds deposited or received for deposit in an account shall be available for withdrawal; and

(2) apply to all federally insured depository institutions located within such State.

#### (b) Override of certain State laws

Except as provided in subsection (a), this chapter and regulations prescribed under this chapter shall supersede any provision of the law of any State, including the Uniform Commercial Code as in effect in such State, which is inconsistent with this chapter or such regulations.

(Pub. L. 100–86, title VI, §608, Aug. 10, 1987, 101 Stat. 647.)
USDA GUS TRAINING

LOAN AND PROPERTY INFORMATION PAGE
Training Objectives

To gain an understanding of how to complete the three sections of the Loan and 

Property Information tab in GUS:

• Loan and Property Information

• Other New Mortgage Loans on the Property You are Buying or Refinancing

• Gifts or grants you have been given or will receive with this loan
Loan and Property Information Section

Steps:

1. Fill out the Loan Amount

and Loan Purpose fields.

2. Confirm the Property

Address. (This was autopopulated from the 

Property Information 

section of the Eligibility 

tab.)

3. Select the Occupancy

check box.

4. Select Yes or No for 

Mixed-Use Property.

5. Choose the appropriate 

option from the 

Construction Type dropdown.
Other New Mortgage Loans on the Property You are Buying or Refinancing section

Steps:

1. Select Add Mortgage.

2. Complete Creditor Name.

3. Select the Lien Type.

4. Enter the Monthly Payment.

5. Enter the Loan Amount/Amount to 

be Drawn.

6. If there is an additional mortgage, the 

user can select Add Additional

Mortgage.

7. Confirm that the total amounts in the 

auto-calculated fields for Total

Monthly Payment and Total Loan 

Amount/Amount to be Drawn are 

accurate.
Gifts or Grants You Have Been Given or Will Receive for This Loan section 

Steps:

1. Select Add Gift or Grant.

2. Select Asset Type from the 

drop-down.

3. Select if the gift or grant has 

been Deposited or Not 

Deposited, if applicable.

4. Select the Source from the 

drop-down.

5. Enter the Cash or Market 

Value.

6. If there is an additional gift, 

select Add Additional Gift.
End Slide 

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.