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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-7486

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee,

v. THOMAS SWINNEY, Defendant – Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, Senior District Judge. (8:05-cr-00179-PJM-4; 8:07-cv-02144-PJM)

Submitted: February 12, 2009 Decided: March 6, 2009

Before TRAXLER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Thomas Swinney, Appellant Pro Se. David Ira Salem, Gina Simms, Assistant United States Attorneys, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Thomas Swinney seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 2000 & Supp. 2008) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district

court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000);

Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Swinney has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
**Exhibit 99.1**

 

Certificationof Periodic Report

 

I, John F. Clifford, Chairman and ChiefExecutive Officer of ProCyte Corporation (the “Company”), certify, pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

 

1.                    the QuarterlyReport on Form 10-Q for the Company for the quarterly period ended September30, 2002 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (12 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

 

2.                    the informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date:  November 14, 2002 | By:    |  /s/ John F. Clifford                 |
|-------------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------|
|                          |   |                                       |
|                          |   |  John F. Clifford,  Chairman and CEO, |
|                          |   |  ProCyte Corporation                  |

 

----
### IN THE UNI TED STAT ES COURT OFAPPEALS FOR THE FIF TH CIRCU IT

No. 11-40430 Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

v. ALVARO PARAMO, Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:10-CR-2073-1
Before JONES, Chief Judge, and HAYNES and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Alvaro Paramo pleaded guilty to attempting to smuggle goods from the United States a n d m a king false statements. The district court sentenced Paramo to 60 months of imprisonment and three years of supervised release. In hi s s ole issue for appeal, Paramo contends that there is a clerical error in the judgment of the offense of conviction that should be remanded for correction. The judgment states that Paramo was convicted of smuggling goods from the United States and making false statements. Attempt offenses are distinct U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f A p p ea l s

F i ft h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D April 6, 201 2 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Purs uant to 5 T H C IR
. R. 47.5 , the cour t has d ete rm inedt hat this op inion sho uld not * be publ ish ed and is not pr ece dent excep t unde r the lim ite d cir cum st ance s se t forth in 5 T H C IR
. R. 47.5 .4. Case: 11-40430 Document: 00511813963 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/06/2012No. 11-40430

from actual offenses, even where both offenses appear in the same statute. See United States v. Angeles-Mascote , 206 F.3d 529, 531 (5th Cir. 200 0). The case is remanded to the distri c t court for the limited purpose of correcting the o r iginal judgment to reflect that Paramo was convicted of

a ttempting to smuggle goods from the United States and making f a l s e st a t e m e nts. See F E D
. R. C R I M
. P. 36. The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED in all other respects.

2 Case: 11-40430 Document: 00511813963 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/06/2012
IV

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 57

Expressing the sense of Congress supporting the Government of India’s efforts

to hold free and fair elections in Jammu and Kashmir.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 5, 1995

Mr. BROWN of Ohio (for himself and Mr. STEARNS) submitted the following

concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on International Relations

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of Congress supporting the Government

of India’s efforts to hold free and fair elections in

Jammu and Kashmir.

Whereas the militant-inspired violence in the Kashmir Valley

has claimed more than 10,000 lives during the last 5

years;

Whereas terrorist acts committed by religious militants have

devastated Kashmir’s infrastructure through the destruction of such civilian facilities as schools, hospitals, roads,

bridges, and power stations;

Whereas more than 250,000 Kashmiri Pandits and almost

50,000 Muslims have fled their ancestral homes and have

been forced to become refugees within their own country

due to arson, violence, and death threats;
2

•HCON 57 IH

Whereas the Government of India has taken the following

tangible steps to revive the democratic political process in

Jammu and Kashmir—

(1) the government has released several prominent

military leaders, enabling them to participate in free and

fair elections;

(2) India’s Chief Elections Commissioner has revised

and simplified electoral registration procedures in Jammu

and Kashmir;

(3) the Government of India has established a National Human Rights Commission to investigate incidents

of human rights violations perpetrated by Indian security

forces;

(4) the Government of India is pursuing a policy of

greater transparency under which foreign journalists, diplomats, and parliamentary delegations have been permitted complete and unimpeded access to the state;

(5) the Indian security forces have exercised judicious restraint in coping with the Hazratbal crisis, following a month-long siege of the sacred mosque by militants;

and

(6) the Government of India welcomed a visit to

Jammu and Kashmir by the International Red Cross in

1994; and

Whereas Pakistan’s leaders continue to oppose elections in

Jammu and Kashmir: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That—

3 (1) Congress supports India’s efforts to hold

4 free and fair elections in Jammu and Kashmir and

5 that such elections are imperative to end the cycle
3

•HCON 57 IH

1 of violence that has plagued the Kashmir Valley for

2 more than 5 years;

3 (2) Congress urges all political parties to par4 ticipate in such elections and democratically elect

5 their representatives; and

6 (3) Congress urges the Government of Pakistan

7 to work together with the Government of India to

8 adopt a constructive and joint approach to resolve

9 the Kashmir problem, which should include the com10 mitment of the Government of Pakistan to support

11 free and fair elections.

Æ
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > Job Vacancy Statistics

              																	United States. Congress. Joint Economic Committee. Subcommittee on Economic Statistics					 and 	Eighty-Ninth Congress, 1965-1967. 						*Job Vacancy Statistics : Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Economic Statistics of the Joint Economic Committee, Congress of the United States, Eighty-Ninth Congress, Second Session, May 17 and 18, 1966*,												Washington: 								U.S. Government Printing Office, 										May 17 and 18, 1966,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/876,			accessed on September 22, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
*58-/f

ELECTRONIC RECORD

CCA # 09-14-00179-CR

Elgia Jerode Griffin

STYLE: v. The State of Texas

TRIAL COURT:

TRIAL COURT #:

TRIAL COURT JUDGE: Judge Courtney Arkeen

DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED

03-18-15

128th District Court

A-090746-R

OFFENSE: Indecency with a Child

PUNISHMENT: 10 years

COUNTY: Orange

MOTION

FOR REHEARING IS:

DATE:

JUDGE:

DATE:

JUSTICE:

PUBLISH:

Chief Justice

Steve McKeithen PC NO S YES

NO

CLK RECORD:

RPT RECORD:

STATE BR:

APP BR:

08-29-14

07-10-14

02-05-15

11-24-14

DNP: YES

SUPPCLKRECORD:

SUPPRPTRECORD:

SUPP BR:

PROSE BR:

H5% -15

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

ELECTRONIC RECORD

PRO S£ Petition

FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IN CCA IS:

DATE: oQU&/j0tSr

JUDGE: fdh LoU^i^—

CCA IS:.

JUDGE:

MOTION FOR REHEARING IN

ON

:ca# PD-0458-15

Disposition:

DATE:

JUDGE:

SIGNED:

PUBLISH:

PC:

DNP:

MOTION FOR STAY OF MANDATE IS:

ON

JUDGE:
§ 1.985-4 Method of accounting. ( a ) *Adoption of election.* The adoption of, or the election to use, a functional currency shall be treated as a method of accounting. The functional currency shall be used for the year of adoption (or election) and for all subsequent taxable years unless permission to change is granted, or considered to be granted under § 1.985-2 or § 1.985-8, by the Commissioner.
( b ) *Condition for changing functional currencies.* Generally, permission to change functional currencies shall not be granted unless significant changes in the facts and circumstances of the QBU's economic environment occur. If the determination of the functional currency of the QBU for purposes of United States generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) is based on facts and circumstances substantially similar to those set forth in § 1.985-1(c)(2), then ordinarily the Commissioner will grant a taxpayer's request to change its functional currency (or the functional currency of its branch that is a QBU) to a new functional currency only if the taxpayer (or its QBU) also changes to the new functional currency for purposes of GAAP. However, permission to change will not necessarily be granted merely because the new functional currency will conform to the taxpayer's GAAP functional currency.
( c ) *Relationship to certain other sections of the Code.* Nothing in this section shall be construed to override the provisions of any other sections of the Code of regulations that require the use of consistent accounting methods. Such provisions must be independently satisfied separate and apart from the identification of a functional currency. For instance, while separate geographical divisions of a taxpayer's trade or business may have different functional currencies, such geographical divisions may nevertheless be required to consistently use other methods of accounting.
[T.D. 8263, 54 FR 38661, Sept. 20, 1989, as amended by T.D. 8776, 63 FR 40368, July 29, 1998; T.D. 8927, Jan. 11, 2001]
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Oscar ANGULO, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 01-55086.

D.C. Nos. CV-00-00908-WBE, CR-98-03518-WBE.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted June 6, 2002.*

Decided June 14, 2002.

*889Before HALL, SILVERMAN, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Appellant/Defendant Oscar Angulo (“Angulo”) appeals the denial of his motion filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence due to ineffective assistance of counsel. We granted a certificate of appealability with respect to the issue of “whether trial or appellate counsel rendered ineffective assistance for failing to file a timely notice or otherwise prosecute appellant’s direct appeal.”

Angulo knowingly and voluntarily waived appeal rights in his plea agreement and during his plea colloquy. *See United States v. Anglin,*215 F.3d 1064, 1067 (9th Cir.2000). Angulo’s waiver precludes any ineffective assistance of counsel claim based on failure to appeal. *See United States v. Martinez,*143 F.3d 1266, 1270 (9th Cir.1998).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
exv10w45



 




EXHIBIT 10.45




SUMMARY OF VESTING TERMS FOR 2007 GRANTS TO CHEN, VAN DER VORST, BEARD, NATHAN AND CAPELLI



The Stock Options, Time Vested Restricted Stock and Performance Based Restricted Stock referenced
in the February 23, 2007 letter to John Chen and the February 26, 2007 letters to each of Pieter
Van der Vorst, Marty Beard, Raj Nathan and Steve Capelli vest as follows:



Stock Options — Were granted with the closing price on the date of each letter agreement.
Options vest 1/8th of the total option amount six months after the date of grant and the
remaining shares vest 1/48th monthly such that the options will vest in full 4 years
from the date of grant



Time Vested Restricted Stock — Was granted with an exercise price equal to $0.00 and shall
vest on the date that is 3 years from the date of each officer’s letter agreement. Restricted
stock shall not vest and shall be subject to the Company’s repurchase right if prior to the vesting
date the grantee’s continuous status as an employee has terminated (as defined in the Company’s
Amended and Restated 2003 Stock Plan).



Performance Based Restricted Stock — Was granted with an exercise price equal to $0.00 per
share and shall be earned based on Sybase’s percentage achievement during calendar year 2007 of
certain Total Revenue, Return on Invested Capital and Cash Flow from Operations targets approved by
the Compensation Committee of the Sybase, Inc. Board of Directors. These restricted stock shares
shall not vest and shall be subject to the Company’s repurchase right if prior to the vesting date
that is 3 years from the date of grant the grantee’s continuous status as an employee has
terminated (as defined in the Company’s Amended and Restated 2003 Stock Plan). The targets are
weighted as follows in each grant: Total Revenue 60%, Return on Invested Capital 20% and Cash Flow
from Operations 20%. Each target has a vesting ceiling of 125%.
§ 1.666(c)-1A Pro rata portion of taxes deemed distributed. ( a ) If an accumulation distribution is deemed under § 1.666(a)-1A to be distributed on the last day of a preceding taxable year and the amount is less than the undistributed net income for such preceding taxable year, then an additional amount is also deemed distributed under section 661(a)(2). The additional amount is equal to the “taxes imposed on the trust attributable to the undistributed net income” (as defined in § 1.665(a)-1A(b)) for such preceding taxable year, multiplied by a fraction, the numerator of which is the amount of the accumulation distribution allocated to such preceding taxable year and the denominator of which is the undistributed net income for such preceding taxable year. See paragraph (b) of example 1 and paragraphs (c) and (f) of example 2 in § 1.666(c)-2A for illustrations of this paragraph.
( b ) For the purpose of paragraph (a) of this section, the undistributed net income of any preceding taxable year and the taxes imposed on the trust for such preceding taxable year attributable to such undistributed net income are computed after taking into account any accumulation distributions of any taxable years intervening between such preceding taxable year and the taxable year. See paragraph (d) of § 1.666(a)-1A and paragraph (c) of example 1 and paragraphs (e) and (h) of example 2 in § 1.666(c)-2A.
[T.D. 7204, 37 FR 17145, Aug. 25, 1972]
First Amendment to The Peachtree Bank 1998 Stock Option Plan



 Exhibit 10.43A 
 FIRST AMENDMENT TO 
 THE PEACHTREE BANK 
 1998 STOCK OPTION PLAN 
 THIS FIRST AMENDMENT is made as of July 15, 1999,
by The Peachtree Bank, a bank organized under the laws of the State of Georgia (hereinafter called the “Bank”). 
 WITNESSETH:

 WHEREAS, PB Financial Services Corporation (the “Company”) and the Bank entered into a Plan of Reorganization (the
“Reorganization”), effective as of July 15, 1999, pursuant to which the Bank became a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company. 
 WHEREAS, the Bank maintains The Peachtree Bank 1998 Stock Option Plan (the “Plan”). 
 WHEREAS, pursuant to the
Reorganization, the Board of Directors of the Company is authorized to take any action necessary to facilitate the Reorganization. 
 WHEREAS, the Company and the Bank entered into an Agreement (the “Agreement”), effective as of July 15, 1999, pursuant to which the Company agreed that the Bank may obligate the Company to issue shares of the Company’s
common stock pursuant to the exercise of any options issued pursuant to the Plan. 
 WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Bank desires to
amend the Plan to reflect the Reorganization and the terms of the Agreement. 
 NOW, THEREFORE, effective as of July 15, 1999, the Bank
does hereby amend the Plan as follows: 
 1. By deleting the existing Paragraph 2(N) and replacing it with the following new Paragraph 2(N):

 “N. Shares – The shares of common stock of the Company, $5.00 par value, subject to adjustment and substitution as
provided in Paragraph 5 of the Plan.” 
 2. By adding the following new Paragraph 2(P) to the Plan: 
 “P. Company – PB Financial Services Corporation, a bank holding company organized under the laws of the State of Georgia.”

 3. By replacing the word “Bank” with the word “Company” each time such word appears in Paragraph 5 (A-F) of the Plan.










 4. By adding the phrase “or the Company” immediately after the word “Bank” in
Paragraph 5(G) of the Plan. 
 5. By replacing the word “Company” with the word “Bank” each time such word appears in
Paragraph 6(A) of the Plan. 
 6. By deleting the phrase “by the Bank” from the second to last sentence of Paragraph 6(E) of the
Plan. 
 7. By replacing the word “Company” with the word “Bank” where such word appears in Paragraph 10 of the Plan.

 Except as specifically amended hereby, the remaining provisions of the Plan shall remain in full force and effect as prior to the adoption
of this First Amendment. 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Bank has caused this First Amendment to be executed as of the day and year first above
written. 
  

			
	THE PEACHTREE BANK
		
	By:	 	/s/ Monty G. Watson
	Title:	 	President and CEO


  

 2
----

COUNCIL DECISION

of 18 December 2006

appointing Italian, Maltese and Swedish members and alternate members of the Advisory Committee on Freedom of Movement for Workers

(2006/C 320/03)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of 15 October 1968 on freedom of movement for workers within the Community (1), and in particular Articles 26 and 27 thereof,

Having regard to the lists of candidates submitted to the Council by the Governments of the Member States,

Whereas:

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Sole Article

The following are hereby appointed members and alternate members of the Advisory Committee on Freedom of Movement for Workers for the term of office ending on 13 September 2008:

I.   GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVES

II.   WORKERS' REPRESENTATIVES

III.   EMPLOYERS' REPRESENTATIVES

Done at Brussels, 18 December 2006.

For the Council

The President

J.-E. ENESTAM

----

(1)OJ L 257, 18.10.1968, p. 2.

(2)OJ C 242, 7.10.2006, p. 1.

----
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

PREPARED INSURANCE COMPANY n/k/a LIGHTHOUSE PROPERTY 

INSURANCE CORPORATION,

Appellant,

v.

LIOR FRIEDMAN and SIVAN FRIEDMAN,

Appellees.

No. 4D21-3288

[August 4, 2022]

Appeal of a non-final order from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth 

Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Carlos A. Rodriguez, Judge; L.T. Case 

No. CACE19-018248.

Joshua S. Beck of Beck Law, P.A., Boca Raton, for appellant.

Scott J. Edwards of Scott J. Edwards, P.A., Boca Raton, and Vyacheslav 

Borshchukov of Vyacheslav Borshchukov, P.A., Ft. Lauderdale, for 

appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

KLINGENSMITH, C.J., CONNER and ARTAU, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
§ 1.170A-18 Contributions of clothing and household items. ( a ) *In general.* Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, no deduction is allowed under section 170(a) for a contribution of clothing or a household item (as described in paragraph (c) of this section) unless— ( 1 ) The item is in good used condition or better at the time of the contribution; and
( 2 ) The donor meets the substantiation requirements of § 1.170A-16.
( b ) *Certain contributions of clothing or household items with claimed value of more than $500.* The rule described in paragraph (a)(1) of this section does not apply to a contribution of a single item of clothing or a household item for which a deduction of more than $500 is claimed, if the donor submits with the return on which the deduction is claimed a qualified appraisal, as defined in § 1.170A-17(a)(1), of the property prepared by a qualified appraiser, as defined in § 1.170A-17(b)(1), and a completed Form 8283 (Section B), “Noncash Charitable Contributions,” as described in § 1.170A-16(d)(3).
( c ) *Definition of household items.* For purposes of section 170(f)(16) and this section, the term *household items* includes furniture, furnishings, electronics, appliances, linens, and other similar items. Food, paintings, antiques, and other objects of art, jewelry, gems, and collections are not household items.
( d ) *Effective/applicability date.* This section applies to contributions made after July 30, 2018. Taxpayers may rely on the rules of this section for contributions made after August 17, 2006.
[T.D. 9836, 83 FR 36427, July 30, 2018]
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 23-0098

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

LIVORIO LOERA,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including August 9, 2024, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 28 2024

06/28/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0098