alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 17-14613

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 1:16-cr-00264-CG-B-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ELYRIC NATHANIEL SINGLETON, III,

Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Alabama

________________________

(April 4, 2018)

Before MARCUS, ROSENBAUM, and NEWSOM Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

The Government’s motion to dismiss this appeal pursuant to the appeal 

waiver in Appellant’s plea agreement is GRANTED. See United States v. Bushert, 

997 F.2d 1343, 1350–51 (11th Cir. 1993) (sentence appeal waiver will be enforced 

Case: 17-14613 Date Filed: 04/04/2018 Page: 1 of 2 
2

if it was made knowingly and voluntarily); United States v. Grinard-Henry, 399 

F.3d 1294, 1296 (11th Cir. 2005) (waiver of the right to appeal includes waiver of 

the right to appeal difficult or debatable legal issues or even blatant error).

Case: 17-14613 Date Filed: 04/04/2018 Page: 2 of 2
EXHIBIT
      21.1




SUBSIDIARIES
      OF GLOBALOPTIONS GROUP, INC.




The
      following is a list of all subsidiaries of GlobalOptions Group, Inc., the state
      or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization of each, and the names
      under which such subsidiaries do business.




|· | GlobalOptions,
              Inc., a Delaware corporation
|- | ---------------------------------------------------------



|· | The
              Bode Technology Group, Inc., a Delaware corporation (wholly-owned
              subsidiary of GlobalOptions, Inc.)
|- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|· | GlobalOptions
              Management, Inc. (50% owned by GlobalOptions,
              Inc.)
|- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exhibit 13.1

CERTIFICATION REQUIRED BY

RULE 13a-14(b) OR RULE 15d-14(b)

AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the Annual Report of SouFun Holdings Limited (the Company) on Form 20-F/A for the year ended December 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof (the Report), I, Richard Jiangong Dai, 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, 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: December 4, 2012



/s/ Richard Jiangong DaiName:

Richard Jiangong DaiTitle:

Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 10.10

[Letterhead
of Cellu Tissue Holdings, Inc.]

Steven
Ziessler
115 National Drive
Duluth, GA 30097

March 27,
2006

As
we have agreed, upon your execution of this letter, Cellu Tissue Holdings, Inc. (the "Company") shall pay to you a lump sum cash payment equal to one year's current base salary (the
"One-Time Bonus"). The Company shall withhold from the One-Time Bonus all taxes, FICA or other amounts required to be withheld pursuant to any applicable law.

This
One-Time Bonus shall be subject to forfeiture if your employment is terminated on or prior to March 27, 2007, for any reason, other than due to your death or disability (a "Termination
Event"). Within 30 days following a Termination Event that occurs on or prior to March 27, 2007, you shall repay the Company the One-Time Bonus. The Company shall be entitled to offset
any amounts owing to you from the Company in order to recoup the One-Time Bonus.

The
One-Time Bonus is a special incentive payment to you and will not be taken into account in computing the amount of any salary or compensation for purposes of determining any bonus, incentive,
pension, retirement, death or other benefit under any other bonus, incentive, pension, retirement, insurance or other employee benefit plan of the Company, unless such plan or agreement expressly
provides otherwise.

Sincerely,

Cellu Tissue
Holdings, Inc.

|By: |  | /s/RUSSELL C. TAYLOR |  |                  
|--- |  | -------------------- |  | -----------------
|    |  | Name:                |  | Russell C. Taylor
|    |  | Title:               |  | President/CEO    

By
signing below, please acknowledge that you agree with the terms and conditions of this letter:

|/s/STEVEN ZIESSLERSteven Ziessler |  | 
|--------------------------------- |  | 

---



QuickLinks
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0001022174
<NAME> CLASS A
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                      20,460,662
<SECURITIES>                                14,215,733
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            56,203,138
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              56,203,138
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          574,422
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  55,628,716
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                56,203,138
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,440,175
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             5,516,154
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,075,979)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,075,979)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,075,979)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      40.71
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    40.71


</TABLE>
§ 55.6 Complying with this part. ( a ) *Process.* The process to comply with this part is as follows: ( 1 ) HUD or the responsible entity shall determine whether compliance with this part is required. Refer to § 55.12 for a list of activities that do not require further compliance with this part beyond the provisions of paragraph (c) of this section.
( 2 ) HUD or the responsible entity shall refer to § 55.8 to determine whether the proposed action is eligible for HUD assistance or if it must be rejected as proposed.
( 3 ) If the project requires compliance under this part and is not prohibited by § 55.8, HUD or the responsible entity shall refer to § 55.13 to determine whether the 8-step decision making process in § 55.20 is required.
( 4 ) HUD or the responsible entity shall refer to § 55.10 to determine whether the 8-step decision making process in § 55.20 for wetland protection is required or whether best practices to minimize potential indirect impacts to wetlands should be pursued.
( 5 ) HUD or the responsible entity shall determine whether an exception in § 55.14 applies that would allow them to complete an abbreviated decision-making process under § 55.20.
( 6 ) Where the decision-making process is required, HUD or the responsible entity shall follow the decision-making process described in § 55.20, eliminating any steps as permitted under § 55.14.
( b ) *Decision making.* HUD or the responsible entity shall determine whether to approve the action as proposed, approve the action with modifications or at an alternative site, or reject the proposed action, based on its analysis of the proposed risks and impacts. HUD or the responsible entity has discretion to reject any project where it determines that the level of flood hazard is incompatible with the proposed use of the site or that the extent of impacts to wetlands or to the beneficial function of floodplains is not acceptable, regardless of whether it would otherwise be acceptable under this part.
( c ) *Other requirements.* Refer to §§ 55.4 and 55.5 to determine whether the proposed action may require notifications and/or flood insurance. Actions that do not require full compliance under this part may still trigger notification and flood insurance requirements.
( d ) *Documentation.* HUD or the responsible entity shall require that all of the analysis required under this part, including applicable exceptions and all required steps described in § 55.20, be documented in the environmental review record.
[89 FR 30905, Apr. 23, 2024]
Order entered April 8 , 2014

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**
No. 05
- 13
- 01738
- CV LEONARD R. THOMAS, Appellant
V. DALLAS COUNTY, ET AL ., Appellee s On Appeal from the 192nd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial C ourt Cause No. TX
- 12
- 31766 

### O RDER
T he reporter’s record in this case has not been filed. By letter dated February 28, 2014, we informed appellant the Court Reporter notified us that the reporter’s record had not been filed because appellant had not (1) r equested the record; or (2) paid for or made arrangements to pay for the record. We directed appellant to provide the Court with written verification that he had requested the record and had paid for or made arrangements to pay for the record, or had been found entitled to proceed without payment of costs. We cautioned appellant that failure to provide the required documentation within ten days might result in the appeal being ordered submitted without the reporter’s record. To date, appellant has not pr ovided the required documentation or otherwise corresponded with the Court regarding the status of the reporter’srecord. Therefore, we ORDER this appeal submitted without a reporter’s record. Appellant’s brief is due THIRTY DAYS from the date of this or der.

/s/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE
From: <Hambrick.Amy@epamail.epa.gov>

To: Amber Allen <Amber.Allen@erg.com>

Date: 12/20/2012 10:00 AM Subject: 3 of 4- FOR THE CISWI RECONSIDERATION DOCKET

MEMO TO CISWI RECONSIDERATION DOCKET:

This attachment documents correspondence between Wa ste Management and

EPA on 11/16/2011.

Amy Hambrick Fuels and Incineration Group US EPA / OAQPS / Sector Policies and Programs Divis ion

Phone: 919-541-0964



### (See attached file: WM letter 8-5-11.pdf) (See attached file: Landfill_Gas_Is_Not_Solid_Waste doc.) (See attached file: Boiler Emissions EnvAnalysis-092611-LMO P forWM.XLSX) (See attached file: CH2MHill Boiler MACT Economic Evalua tion_110911_FINAL.DOCX) (See attached file: CH2MHILL Fuel Specification Review. docx) (See attached file: NHSM Rule Implications for LFGTE Jul y 8 mtg.docx) (See attached file: Recommendations for OMB.DOCX)
#### Herbert S. Fuerstenberg, appellee, v. American Alliance Insurance Company, appellant.

Gen. No. 28,219.

Suit on automobile insurance policy. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Joseph W. Schulman, Judge, presiding. Heard in the second division of this court for the first district at the October term, 1922.

Reversed and remanded.

Opinion filed May 31, 1923.

Bates, Hicks & Folonie, for appellant. Shulman, Shulman & Abrams, for appellee.

Mr. Justice Fitch

delivered the opinion of the court.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CASE NO. C09-01149 MMC (EMC) 

MARK E. MILLER (S.B. # 130200) markmiller@omm.com 

ANNE E. HUFFSMITH (S.B. # 236438) ahuffsmith@omm.com 

SARA E. JERUSS (S.B. # 258716) sjeruss@omm.com 

O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP 

Two Embarcadero Center, 28th Floor 

San Francisco, California 94111-3823 

Telephone: 415.984.8700 

Facsimile: 415.984.8701 

Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaimant 

ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC. 

David N. Kuhn (State Bar #73389) 

Attorney-at-Law

144 Hagar Avenue 

Piedmont, CA 94611 

Telephone: (510) 653-4983 

E-mail: dnkuhn@pacbell.net 

Attorney for Plaintiff and Counterdefendant 

GREGORY BENDER 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

GREGORY BENDER, 

Plaintiff and Counterdefendant, 

v.

ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC., 

Defendant and Counterclaimant. 

Case No. C09-01149 MMC (EMC) 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER

WHEREAS a status conference is currently set for August 27, 2010 at 10:30 AM;

WHEREAS the parties have reached a tentative settlement agreement; 

WHEREAS the parties need additional time to finalize their settlement agreement and file 

the requisite documents with the Court; 

; ORDER VACATING

CLAIM CONSTRUCTION HEARING

Case 3:09-cv-01149-MMC Document 71 Filed 08/25/10 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER - 2 - CASE NO. C09-01149 MMC (EMC) 

THEREFORE, the parties hereby STIPULATE and AGREE that the status conference 

scheduled for August 27, 2010 shall be continued to September 24, 2010 at 10:30 am, or at such 

later date and time as is convenient for the Court, to allow the parties time to finalize their 

settlement agreement and file the requisite documents with the Court. 

Dated: August 25, 2010 

Respectfully submitted, 

By: /s/ Mark E. Miller 

Mark E. Miller 

O’Melveny & Myers LLP 

Counsel for Defendant

ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC. 

Dated: August 25, 2010 By: /s/ Mark E. Miller 

David N. Kuhn 

Attorney-at-Law

Counsel for Plaintiff GREGORY BENDER 

Pursuant to General Order No. 45 X(B), I hereby attest that concurrence in the filing of 

this document has been obtained from each of the above-listed signatories. 

Dated: August 25, 2010 

Respectfully submitted, 

By: /s/ Mark E. Miller

Mark E. Miller

O’Melveny & Myers LLP 

Counsel for Defendant

ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC. 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION IT IS SO ORDERED:

Dated: _________________________ _____________________________________ 

 The Honorable Maxine M. Chesney 

 United States District Judge

August 25, 2010

absent a timely filing and an additional showing as to good cause. In light of the above, the

September 20, 2010 claim construction hearing is hereby VACATED.

No further continuances will be granted

Case 3:09-cv-01149-MMC Document 71 Filed 08/25/10 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FAMOUS
DAVE'S OF AMERICA, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED APRIL 4, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH 10-QSB.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-02-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-04-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-04-1999
<CASH>                                       2,117,000
<SECURITIES>                                 1,549,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    924,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,599,000
<PP&E>                                      40,700,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,299,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              42,295,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,124,000
<BONDS>                                      5,414,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    42,809,000
<OTHER-SE>                                (10,052,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                42,295,000
<SALES>                                     10,388,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            10,388,000
<CGS>                                        3,546,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               10,700,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (4,000)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (316,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (316,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (316,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.04)
        

</TABLE>
August 7, 2014.

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

REGINA ROMERO, Appellant

NO. 14-14-00100-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

________________________________

This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. 

Having considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the 

judgment. The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED.

We further order appellant pay all costs expended in the appeal.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
Exhibit 99.2




Independent Accountant’s Report








Synthetic Fixed-Income Securities, Inc. (as Depositor)


One Wells Fargo Center


301 South College Street


Charlotte, NC 28288





U.S. Bank Trust National Association (as Trustee)


Corporate Trust Department


100 Wall Street


New York, NY 10005








Re:
STRATSTrust For Goldman Sachs Group Securities, Series 2004-8 (the “Trust”)




Ladies and Gentlemen:





We have examined assertions of Synthetic Fixed-Income Securities, Inc. (the “Depositor”) and U.S. Bank Trust National Association, (the “Trustee” and together with the Depositor, the “Management”) that the Depositor and the Trustee have complied, in all material respects, with the provisions of the Base Trust Agreement dated as of September 26, 2003, as supplemented by a series supplement dated as of June 29, 2004 (together, the “Trust Agreement”), in respect of the STRATS Trust For Goldman Sachs Group Securities, Series 2004-8(the “Trust”), during the period covered by the annual report on Form 10-K filed by the Depositor on behalf of the Trust for the year ended December 31, 2011 (the “Annual Report”).  Management is responsible for compliance with the Trust Agreement. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on Management’s assertions based on our examination.





Our examination was made in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Depositor’s and the Trustee’s compliance with the Trust Agreement and performing such other procedures as considered necessary in the circumstances.  We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.





In our opinion, the Depositor and the Trustee have complied, in all material respects, with the Trust Agreement during the period covered by the Annual Report and Management’s assertions with respect to such compliance are fairly stated, in all material respects, for the year ended December 31, 2011.








/s/ Aston Bell, CPA





New York, New York


March 16, 2012
EX-10.4


  Exhibit 10.4

  EXECUTIVE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT

  	This Executive Employment Agreement Amendment (the “Amendment”) is made as of November 7, 2022, by and among Precision BioSciences, Inc. (the “Company”) and the individual whose name appears on the signature page hereto (the “Executive”).  Except as set forth in this Amendment, capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Employment Agreement (as defined below).

  WITNESSETH

  	WHEREAS, the Executive previously entered into an executive employment agreement with the Company (the “Employment Agreement”); and

  	WHEREAS, the Executive and the Company each desire to amend the terms of the Employment Agreement as set forth in this Amendment.

  	NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Executive and the Company hereby agree to the following:

  1.Amendment to the Employment Agreement. The Employment Agreement is hereby amended by adding the following to the definition of “Good Reason” set forth in Section 4.4:


  “a material, adverse change in Executive’s title, authority, duties, or responsibilities (other than temporarily while the Executive is physically or mentally incapacitated or as required by applicable law), provided that this shall not apply following an acquisition of or merger by the Company if Executive is provided with similar title, responsibilities, duties and authority in a larger organization, but only with respect to the business of the Company and its subsidiaries;”

  2.No Other Amendment. Except as expressly set forth in this Amendment, the Employment Agreement shall remain unchanged and shall continue in full force and effect according to its terms.


  3.Entire Agreement. This Amendment, together with the Employment Agreement (to the extent not amended hereby), represents the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and shall supersede any and all previous contracts, arrangements or understandings between the parties.


  [signature page follows]

   

   

   

   

  |

  

   

  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company and the Employee have executed this Amendment as of the date first written above.

  PRECISION BIOSCIENCES, INC.

   

   

  By: /s/ Michael Amoroso

  Name: Michael Amoroso

  Title: Chief Executive Officer

   

   

  EXECUTIVE

   

   

  /s/ Dario Scimeca

  Dario Scimeca

   

   

   

   

   

  |