alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### George J. Cooke Company, Defendant in Error, v. Peter Fitman et al., Plaintiffs in Error.

Gen. No. 15,222.

Municipal *Court—when judgment not disturbed.*If substantial justice has been done by a judgment of the Municipal Court, it will not be disturbed on review.

Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Adblor J. Petit, Judge, presiding.

Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1909.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed February 3, 1911.

John C. King, Simon T. Sutton and James D. Power, for plaintiffs in error.

No appearance by defendant in error.

Mr. Justice Baldwin

delivered the opinion of the court.

This writ of error brings before us for review a judgment rendered by the Municipal Court in favor of the defendant in error for $125, for the alleged conversion of certain saloon fixtures.

It appears that plaintiffs in error were „ conducting a saloon in Chicago, and, desiring to take beer from the defendant in error, they induced it to purchase for $125, from another brewing company, whose beer they had theretofore been selling, the fixtures in question, which were on the saloon premises. After continuing in this business relation for about six months, plaintiffs in error ceased buying beer from the Cooke Company, and the other brewing company resumed supplying the saloon, the ownership of which had passed into other hands. After unsuccessfully attempting to get plaintiffs in error to turn over to it the fixtures, the Cooke Company sued for their value.

The case was tried by a jury, and, while the evi*556dence is not entirely clear, we think it appears that substantial justice has been done, and we do not see that the action of the court below was erroneous.

*Affirmed.*
### Ordovician graptolites of the Basin Ranges in California, Nevada, Utah, and Idaho

By: Reuben James RossWilliam B. N. Berry

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/b1134

#### Links

- More information:  **National Geologic Map Database Index Page**                            (html)
-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (17232 pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plates:                               - **1**                            (565 pdf)                        
  - **1**                            (717 pdf)                        
  - **2**                            (756 pdf)                        
  - **Plate 14**                            (290 pdf) 
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
III 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 354 

Designating September 2019 as ‘‘National Brain Aneurysm Awareness 

Month’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 26, 2019 

Mr. MARKEY (for himself and Mrs. HYDE-SMITH) submitted the following 

resolution; which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Designating September 2019 as ‘‘National Brain Aneurysm 

Awareness Month’’. 

Whereas saccular, fusiform, and dissecting aneurysms are 

bulging, weakened areas in the wall of an artery in the 

brain; 

Whereas an estimated 1 out of every 50 individuals in the 

United States has a brain aneurysm; 

Whereas brain aneurysms are most likely to occur in individuals between the ages of 35 and 60; 

Whereas there are typically no warning signs before the occurrence of a brain aneurysm; 

Whereas brain aneurysms are more likely to occur in women 

than in men by a 3 to 2 ratio; 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 354 ATS 

Whereas young and middle-aged African Americans have a 

higher risk of brain aneurysm rupture compared to young 

and middle-aged Caucasians in the United States; 

Whereas the combined lost wages of survivors of a brain aneurysm rupture and their caretakers for 1 year is an estimated $149,936,118; 

Whereas various risk factors can contribute to the formation 

of a brain aneurysm, including smoking, hypertension, 

and a family history of brain aneurysms; 

Whereas an unruptured brain aneurysm can lead to double 

vision, vision loss, loss of sensation, weakness, loss of balance, incoordination, and speech problems; 

Whereas a brain aneurysm is often discovered when it ruptures and causes a subarachnoid hemorrhage; 

Whereas a subarachnoid hemorrhage can lead to brain damage, hydrocephalus, stroke, and death; 

Whereas, each year, more than 30,000 individuals in the 

United States suffer from ruptured brain aneurysms, approximately 50 percent of whom die as a result; 

Whereas, annually, between 3,000 and 4,500 individuals in 

the United States with ruptured brain aneurysms die before reaching the hospital; 

Whereas a number of advancements have been made in recent years regarding the detection of brain aneurysms, 

including the computerized tomography scan, the magnetic resonance imaging test, and the cerebral arteriogram; 

Whereas early detection of brain aneurysms can save lives; 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•SRES 354 ATS 

Whereas, as of 2019, various research studies are being conducted in the United States in order to better understand, prevent, and treat brain aneurysms; 

Whereas the Brain Aneurysm Foundation, a nonprofit organization, remains a globally recognized leader for brain 

aneurysm awareness, education, support, advocacy, and 

research funding; and 

Whereas the month of September is an appropriate month to 

designate as ‘‘National Brain Aneurysm Awareness 

Month’’: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) designates September 2019 as ‘‘National 

3 Brain Aneurysm Awareness Month’’; and 

4 (2) continues to support research to prevent, 

5 detect, and treat brain aneurysms. 

Æ 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
#### § 244.8 Appearance.

The applicant may be required to appear in person before an immigration officer. The applicant may be required to present documentary evidence to establish his or her eligibility. The applicant may have a representative as defined in § 292.1 of this chapter present during any examination. Such representative shall not directly participate in the examination; however, such representative may consult with and provide advice to the applicant. The record of examination shall consist of the application, documents relating to the application, and the decision of the director.

[56 FR 619, Jan. 7, 1991, as amended at 56 FR 23497, May 22, 1991. Redesignated at 62 FR 10367, 10382, Mar. 6, 1997, as amended at 63 FR 63596, Nov. 16, 1998]
§ 244.15 Travel abroad. ( a ) After the grant of Temporary Protected Status, the alien must remain continuously physically present in the United States under the provisions of section 244(c)(3)(B) of the Act. The grant of Temporary Protected Status shall not constitute permission to travel abroad. Permission to travel may be granted by the director pursuant to the Service's advance parole provisions. There is no appeal from a denial of advance parole.
( b ) Failure to obtain advance parole prior to the alien's departure from the United States may result in the withdrawal of Temporary Protected Status and/or the institution or recalendering of deportation or exclusion proceedings against the alien.
[56 FR 619, Jan. 7, 1991, as amended at 56 FR 23498, May 22, 1991. Redesignated at 62 FR 10367, 10382, Mar. 6, 1997, as amended at 63 FR 63597, Nov. 16, 1998; 64 FR 4782, Feb. 1, 1999]
# L_2009040EN.01S00301.xml

| 11.2.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 40/s3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 40/s3

---

NOTE TO THE READER

The institutions have decided no longer to quote in their texts the last amendment to cited acts.

Unless otherwise indicated, references to acts in the texts published here are to the version of those acts currently in force.

---
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-50876

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

SANTOS VICTORINO MEMBRENO,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 2:14-CR-69

Before DAVIS, CLEMENT, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Santos Victorino Membreno pleaded guilty to illegal reentry after 

deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 and was sentenced to 30 months of 

imprisonment and three years of supervised release. He argues that the 

sentence imposed by the district court was substantively unreasonable and 

greater than necessary. He further argues that the sentence constituted an 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 9, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 14-50876 Document: 00512999686 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/09/2015
No. 14-50876

abuse of discretion because it improperly double-counted previous convictions 

and unreasonably inflated his criminal history score.

Noting that the record reveals no objection to the sentence or to the 

alleged double-counting, Membreno concedes that the plain error standard of 

review applies. He is correct that his arguments are subject to plain error 

review. See Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 134-35 (2009); United 

States v. Peltier, 505 F.3d 389, 391-92 (5th Cir. 2007).

The argument that his guidelines range was greater than necessary to 

meet 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)’s goals as a result of giving too much weight to or

“double counting” his criminal history is unavailing. The Guidelines provide 

for consideration of a prior conviction for both criminal history and the

U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2 enhancement. See § 2L1.2, comment. (n.6). As Membreno 

concedes, we have rejected the argument that such double-counting necessarily 

renders a sentence unreasonable. See United States v. Duarte, 569 F.3d 528, 

529-31 (5th Cir. 2009).

Membreno suggests that the district court should have considered as a 

mitigating element the fact that illegal reentry is essentially a non-violent 

offense and that an extended term of imprisonment is disproportionate to the 

relative seriousness of the offense. We have also rejected the argument that 

illegal reentry is treated too harshly under § 2L1.2. See United States v. 

Aguirre-Villa, 460 F.3d 681, 683 (5th Cir. 2006).

Membreno’s arguments do not show a clear error of judgment on the 

district court’s part in balancing the § 3553(a) factors; instead, they constitute 

a mere disagreement with the weighing of those factors. See United States v. 

Cooks, 589 F.3d 173, 186 (5th Cir. 2009). He has not demonstrated that the 

district court plainly erred in the imposition of his sentence. See Peltier, 505 

F.3d at 391-92. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

2

 Case: 14-50876 Document: 00512999686 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/09/2015
TRIDEX CORPORATION
                 EXHIBIT 21.1 SUBSIDIARIES OF TRIDEX CORPORATION

                                     Jurisdiction of                  Percentage
Name                                 Incorporation        Owner       Owned
----                                 -------------        -----       -----

Allu Realty Trust *                     Massachusetts     Tridex         100%

Cash Bases Incorporated*                Delaware          Tridex         100%

Cash Bases GB, Ltd.                     United Kingdom    Tridex         100%

  Cash Bases (Deutschland) GmbH         Germany           Cash Bases     100%

  Cash Bases Iberica, S.A.              Spain             Cash Bases     80%

TransAct Technologies Incorporated      Delaware          Tridex         80.3%

  Magnetec Corporation                  Connecticut       TransAct       100%

  Ithaca Peripherals Limited            United Kingdom    Magnetec       100%

RIL Corporation*                        Connecticut       Tridex         100%

Ultimate Technology Corporation         New York          Tridex         100%

*Inactive
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. ss.1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, James F. Gordon, Chief Executive Officer of BlastGard International, Inc., certify that:



1.

I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2007, of BlastGard International, Inc.;



2.

Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;



3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4.

The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:



(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;



(b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



(c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and



5.

The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



(a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and



(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.



May 15, 2007

/s/ James F. Gordon

James F. Gordon, Chief Executive Officer
Amendment No. 2 to Second Amended and Restated 1999 Equity Incentive Plan



 Exhibit 10.17 
 AMENDMENT NO. 2 
 TO 
 HOLOGIC, INC. 
 SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED 1999 EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN 

 The following amendment to the Hologic, Inc. (the “Corporation”) Second Amended and Restated 1999 Equity Incentive Plan (the
“Plan”), upon recommendation of the Compensation Committee, was approved by the Board of Directors of the Corporation on October 19, 2007, and is being made without shareholder approval as such approval is not necessary to comply with
any applicable requirement of the laws of the jurisdiction of incorporation of the Corporation, any applicable tax requirement, any applicable rules or regulation of the Securities and Exchange Commission, including Rule 16(b)-3 (or any successor
rule thereunder), or the rules and regulations of The Nasdaq Stock Market or any other exchange or stock market over which the Corporation’s securities are listed: 
 1. Section 12(i) “Amendment of Award” is hereby amended by adding the following sentence at the end of such Section: 
 “Notwithstanding the foregoing, except as provided in Section 5(b), without the prior approval of the holders of a majority of the then outstanding shares of the Company’s Common Stock, neither the
Company nor the Board will take any action to amend or modify any Award to lower the award, exercise or conversion price applicable to such Award or otherwise cancel an outstanding Award for the purpose of repricing, replacing or regranting such
Award previously granted for cash or other consideration.” 
 2. Except as amended hereby, the Second Amended and Restated 1999 Equity
Incentive Plan shall remain in full force and effect in accordance with its original terms. 
 Amendments effective as of October 19, 2007
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 (a) OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, Karen Blasing, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2004, of NuanceCommunications, Inc.; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report,as amended, 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 theperiod covered by this report; 

 

3. Based on my knowledge, thefinancial statements, and other financial information included in this report, as amended, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presentedin this report. 

 

4. The registrant’s other certifyingofficer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 

 

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, orcaused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

 

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the endof the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 

 

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscalquarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internalcontrol over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

 

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

 

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significantrole in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

 

Date: November 8, 2004
December 15, 2015

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

KELVIN GOLD, Appellant

NO. 14-15-00123-CV V.

HELIX ENERGY SOLUTIONS GROUP, INC., Appellee

________________________________

This cause, an appeal from the judgment in favor of appellee, Helix Energy 

Solutions Group, Inc., signed, January 8, 2015, was heard on the transcript of the 

record. We have inspected the record and find error in the judgment. We therefore 

order the judgment of the court below REVERSED and REMAND the cause for 

proceedings in accordance with the court's opinion.

We further order that all costs incurred by reason of this appeal be paid by 

appellee, Helix Energy Solutions Group, Inc..

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
#### In the Matter of Louis Lichtenberg, an Attorney.

Charges against an attorney by the Association of the Bar of the City of New York.

Per Curiam:

The respondent was charged together with one Nathan Kopf with professional misconduct by the United States district attorney, which charges were brought on before the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, which appointed a special master to take the testimony and report. The charges related to the respondent’s misconduct in- certain bankruptcy proceedings before the United States District Court, which upon that report has convicted the respondent and ordered him suspended from practice for one year. The Association of the *887Bar of the City of New York has brought the matter to this court upon the testimony and report of the special master. The respondent has submitted an answer. We think the charges are sufficiently serious to require an investigation. If the respondent is willing to submit the charges to this court upon the testimony taken by the special master and his find ings, they can be so submitted and the court will determine what, if any, discipline should be imposed. If, however, the respondent wishes to have another investigation of the charges, the matter will be referred to an official referee. Present — Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Clarke and Scott, JJ.